|
| This is a terrible piece of “journalism” by Richmond Progressive Alliance (RPA) flack Janis Hashe. First of all, it was replete with factual errors, many of which were corrected by Michael Derry (See Comments). Second, it totally relies for facts and commentary on park enthusiasts, including Jack Scheinman, Pam Stello, Elizabeth Echols, David Helvarg, Nancy Skinner and Robert Cheasty.
Despite all the optimistic gushing of park proponents who can’t stop patting themselves on the back for “saving Point Molate,” the deal with the East Bay Regional Parks District (EBRPD) is far from certain. The value of the property at $40 million after the City Council killed the entitlements is being questioned. The appraisal ordered by the EBRPD has never been made public, and the District may not be able to justify the sales price. In any event, the time of closing has not yet been set and will be at the earliest next year, if ever. Elizabeth Echols is quoted, “The next step is finalizing the acquisition,” she said. “This can only happen once the final lawsuit, brought by developer SunCal, is settled.”
Recent information suggests that the EBRPD has indefinitely delayed construction of the Bay Trail extension through Point Molate, although it has been designed, funded and approved. No one is talking about this setback from the optimistic report from January of 2024.
East Bay Regional Park District (EBRPD) has partnered with the City to build 2.5 miles of Bay Trail along the shoreline north from the Richmond San Rafael Bridge past Point Molate Beach Park to the Winehaven Historic District using over $6 million in grants secured by the City and the District. Construction bidding was delayed for several reasons, but is expected to take place by February, followed by construction during 2024. The trail will open up a scenic, historic stretch of San Francisco Bay shoreline where there is no public access other than at Point Molate Beach Park (2024_NewYear_TRAC_FINAL_reduced.pdf (pointrichmond.com)).
Remarkably, neither Hashe nor anyone else is addressing the issue of Winehaven. Parks are routinely as much about cultural resources as natural resources.
The EBRPD website states, “The lands managed by the East Bay Regional Park District have a rich history and diverse cultural background. Cultural resources include archaeological, historical, and scientifically valuable sites, areas, and objects. The District has a responsibility to preserve the legacy and the history of the peoples who occupied this land before the District was established and park properties acquired, as well as to preserve the history of the District itself.”
Recently, Winehaven was nominated to be selected by the National Trust for Historic Preservation as one of, “America’s 11 Most Endangered Historic Places of 2025.”
The 35 structures in the Winehaven Historic District totaling some 300,000 square feet are nearly 120 years old and have had almost no maintenance for the past 30 years, and they continue to deteriorate. Currently, the City of Richmond has legal responsibility for securing and maintaining Winehaven, but they are not doing it. This is now the subject of a lawsuit brought by the Winehaven Trust against the City of Richmond.
Prior to Prohibition, Winehaven was the largest winery in the world and the epicenter of the California Wine Industry, which now generates nearly $90 billion in economic activity. Winehaven was constructed only a year after the City of Richmond was chartered.
At the peak of the season, as many as 400 workers, mostly Italian immigrants, lived at Winehaven, and all of the California Wine Association's shipments to foreign, coastal and New York markets sailed from the Winehaven dock, as much as half a million gallons monthly, including 40 ships that sailed annually for New York alone.
The winery was shut down by Prohibition in 1919, and the company sold off its assets to avoid bankruptcy, but Winehaven had a second life in WWII when the Navy converted it into the main fuel depot for the Pacific Fleet, including the 747 ships built in Richmond at the world’s largest shipyard, now commemorated by Rosie the Riveter WWII Home Front National Historic park.
The fate of Winehaven is now in the hands of multiple public agencies, including the City of Richmond and the East Bay Regional Parks District. Its historic role in the California Wine Industry is of statewide importance, and Winehaven should be saved for the benefit of future generations.
The endgame for Winehaven, unfortunately, does not look good. The coalition of the Richmond Progressive Alliance (RPA), the Point Molate Alliance (PMA), the Sierra Club, John Gioia, East Bay Regional Parks District, Senator Nancy Skinner and other out pf towners loke Robert Cheasty, advocating for a regional park have never included a viable Winehaven rehabilitation and adaptive reuse in their plans, although they have typically paid lip service to its preservation – like it could just happen. In fact, those who have spoken out on the subject have expressed either disdain for Winehaven or admitted that it doesn’t fit into their park plans.
City Council member Doria Robinson recently wrote, comparing Winehaven to the fire-destroyed International Hotel:
Winehaven doesn’t have the same multilayer historical resonance, was only operating a few years and is removed from community members.
Jeff Kilbreth, acknowledged by the RPA and PMA as their go-to guru on Point Molate real estate economics recently told the Grandview Independent that Winehaven should be “bulldozed.”
Part of the problem of moving toward a resolution is an illusion that Winehaven can be turned into a successful development and cover renovation costs, said Jeff Kilbreth. “I honestly suspect that the best thing that could happen would be if we bulldozed Winehaven and made it all a park. Call me crazy, but I actually think that it’s so deteriorated and so expensive to make that place work as any kind of normal development,” Kilbreth said.
Janet Hashe, how about telling the whole story about Point Molate and Winehaven?What happens next with Point Molate
Saving an East Bay jewel in Richmond
ByJanis Hashe
Sep 17, 2024
WHAT’S THE POINT? Advocates are elated at the chance of advancing the mission to protect equitable access to parks and recreation. (Photo by Jack Scheinman)
News broke in July that the East Bay Regional Park District’s board had agreed unanimously to sign on to a letter of intent agreement between the City of Richmond, the Guidiville Rancheria of California and EBRPD, to acquire 80-plus acres of Point Molate.
This was a major step in closing the decades-long battle between environmentalists and developers over the future of the 422-acre, Bay-facing greenspace.
Yet some questions remained unanswered. What’s the plan for the rest of the acreage? How long will it take to resolve the last remaining lawsuit over the property? What are EBRPD’s timeline expectations for the new park?
Elizabeth Echols is EBRPD’s Ward 1 board member. The mood in the boardroom when the vote was taken was “elated, for this once-in-a-lifetime opportunity,” she said, particularly for the chance of advancing the mission to protect equitable access to parks and recreation.
As significant as the step was, it was still a step. “The next step is finalizing the acquisition,” she said. This can only happen once the final lawsuit, brought by developer SunCal, is settled. The rest of Point Molate’s acreage was turned over to the City of Richmond by the Navy in a series of transfers, including a 1996 agreement specifying 70% of it be left as open space. “The 81 acres we are acquiring is the section contemplated for development,” Echols said.
EBRPD plans to continue its long history of working with the city, as it is currently doing on a Bay Trail section through Point Molate, on developing a clean-up, maintenance and park facilities design, including community input, to encompass the remainder of the acreage.
Richmond city representatives declined to comment on the SunCal lawsuit, which is projected to settle in October. Attorney Robert Cheasty, executive director for Citizens for East Bay Parks, said, “SunCal [did not comply] with the requirements to complete the deal [it made with the city].” SunCal will not be a factor going forward, he said, “although there are steps that need to be completed.”
As for a timeline for park development, Echols said it’s too early to project one, since some of the remaining procedures can take considerable time. But, she added, EBRPD’s new equity officer, José G. González, will be involved in “robust conversations” with the city and county.
The coalition
None of this could have happened, agreed those interviewed, without a large and engaged coalition of people and organizations willing to continue their efforts for years.
Pam Stello first saw Point Molate in 2006 on a bike ride. “I knew nothing about Point Molate at the time and was confused about how an SF Bay shoreline property, one this beautiful, could be vacant,” she wrote in an email response. Other cyclists told her about the proposed plan for a mega-casino on the site. Naively, she thought it would never be approved.
But her eyes were opened when, after attending city council and county supervisor meetings, she realized those entities supported the casino. A small group of Richmond residents—Carol Fall, Charles Smith, Lech Naumovich, Judith Piper, Joan Garrett and Stello—formed Sustainable Point Molate, later called the Point Molate Alliance, in 2009.
“Point Molate would not have been saved without mostly invisible acts, from the hundreds of thousands of volunteer hours, letters, speeches and generous donations given by predominantly working people juggling work, families and their own personal struggles,” PMA co-chair Stello said. She also named then-Mayor Gayle McLaughlin and Conta Costa Supervisor John Gioia, alongside Citizens for East Shore Parks; the Rose Foundation; the California Native Plant Society/East Bay; the Sierra Club; the Sustainability, Parks, Recycling, and Wildlife Legal Defense Fund (SPRAWLDEF); the Richmond Progressive Alliance; and Blue Frontier.
Blue Frontier’s executive director, David Helvarg, is co-chair of the Point Molate Alliance. After moving to the area in 2007, he became aware of Point Molate when a self-described “wild grasses geek” took him there. He was shocked to discover five of the seven then-Richmond city councilmembers had voted to allow a casino to be built there.
He was beginning to work on his book, The Golden Shore – California’s Love Affair with the Sea. “I was taken with the Richmond waterfront. I started researching it as part of the story I wanted to tell,” Helvarg said. He discovered Point Molate’s long history—involving the Ohlone, the last whaling station, the Chinese shrimping camp, Winehaven and the Navy—and knew it needed protection. “If [Richmond] was a wealthy community, it would have been protected a generation ago,” he said.
He began to engage in community organizing and coalition building, citing, in addition to the organizations Stello called out, San Francisco Baykeeper, the Golden Gate Fishermen’s Association and affordable housing advocates. He also reached out to State Sen. Nancy Skinner. “She became a key player,” Helvarg said.
The legacy
All parties agreed that without the $36 million in state funding to purchase the 81 acres secured by Skinner, the park plan could not move forward. Skinner had visited Point Molate in the ’90s, and, as the area’s representative, became aware of the contention between pro-development and open-space advocates, she said in a phone interview.
Several political stars aligned to make the money available, Skinner said: Gov. Newsom’s 2020 executive order declaring the goal of conserving at least 30% of California’s land and coastal waters by 2030; the EPRPD’s regional master plan to connect Point Molate to other parcels as publicly available space; and the 2022 budget surplus. “I looked at what in my district needed [these funds],” she said. “The answer was affordable housing projects—and the acquisition of Point Molate.”
Asked if she considers this open-space victory a significant part of her legacy as she prepares to leave office, Skinner answered, “Yes! This is a gift for generations of iconic, historic, breathtaking bayfront land.” She also acknowledged that her contribution is part of efforts by other former legislators: Assemblymember Tom Bates, State Sen. Bill Lockyer and State Sen. Loni Hancock.
“Our constituents are dedicated to preservation and the climate-change fight,” she said.
The future
What will East Bay residents see at Point Molate in 10 years?
Citizens for East Bay Parks Executive Director Robert Cheasty cited Citizens for East Shore Parks’ goal of linking parks “from Crockett to San Jose,” with Point Molate forming one of the links.
“The Point Molate Alliance is applying for funding to train the next generation of Point Molate park advocates, trail guides, docents, park planners and leaders,” Stello said. Plans include an apprenticeship program for a cohort of 12-20 Richmond youth each summer, with the initial program covering Point Molate’s history—including Ohlone, Chinese, Spanish, naval, natural and geologic—rare upland and marine habitats, wildlife, conservation and restoration projects, climate change and sea-level rise impacts, and park planning.
The program would also include editorial writing and public speaking “to amplify their voices as park leaders,” Stello added.
“In 10 years,” she said, “I hope the youth leadership program is thriving and its graduates have leadership positions in park and urban planning, engineering, government, nonprofit and STEAM fields, and the park has met the goals of the community plan.”
She continued, “Per the community plan, I hope there are Pow Wow grounds, an American Indian Cultural Center, areas for sports, boating, hiking, biking, camping, and outstanding environmental education and outdoor recreation programs, thriving upland and marine habitats, and development of the Winehaven District to meet the needs of park visitors. The human and environmental health benefits of the park will be immeasurable and it will be an economic asset for Richmond.”
Editor’s note: This article has been updated to clarify an agreement specifying that 70% of Point Molate be left as open space.
Janis Hashe
11 COMMENTS
Was Tom Butt, former Mayor, consulted on this piece?
He’s been writing about it in his widely read email/bog
for years, often about the failures of Richmond leaders
to follow the laws and preserve the Winehaven district.
Reply
He shouldn’t be. His agenda of vanity and greed means selling out to shady developers like Suncal so he can get his name on things and profit his family business. His family are all tied up in trying to sell their services to developers and trying to build a local political dynasty. This led to shady developers suing the city he was supposed to represent.
His wild attacking of political rivals over this generates a lot of frivolous litigation that gets shot down in court, with judges calling it “linguistic froth”. You wouldn’t get anything honest from consulting him.
Reply
Former Richmond mayor Tom Butt’s support for both the casino plan and the SunCal development are widely known, and it was not necessary to include them in this piece.
Reply
There are a couple of errors in this article. First the former naval base is not 422 acres it was 415, and approximately 113 acres of that 415 acres is under water, and under the jurisdiction of the state lands commission. The entire land area above the waterline is roughly 300 acres. This statment “The rest of Point Molate’s acreage was turned over to the City of Richmond by the Navy in 2018, in an agreement specifying 70% of it be left as open space” is also not true. All of the land except for 51 acres was first deeded to the City in 2003. 51 acres of the land was not transferred because it was too contaminated to do so. The Guidiville Tribe and the Upstream team worked with the US Navy to secure $28.5 million in Navy funding along with an environmental insurance policy. Following securing the funding through an early transfer agreement, the remaining 51 acres of land was then transferred to the City in 2010. These contaminated areas are now cleaned up because of efforts made by the Guidiville Tribe and their team, but there is still a lot of clean up and remediation yet to do. Further, the requirement for 70% open space and 30% was the result of the Base Reuse Plan EIS and Record of Decision in 1996 to close the base. The 30% development was chosen for development so that the City could meet the congressional intent condition of the base closure to use the land for some regionally-significant economic development purpose.
Reply
Can’t you just take your money and go on to your next scam?
Reply
Mr. Derry, who is CEO of the Guidiville Rancheria of California, is correct in that I should have clarified the multiple transfers and transactions over a period of many years. That sentence has now been amended.
Reply
A park at Pt. Molate is a great idea, but how to keep crowds away? 580 westbound at the RSR bridge toll plaza is already terrible on weekends.
Plus, who’s going to maintain a new park? Miller-Knox park has splintery old benches and otherwise lacks TLC, would a new park suffer the same fate?
Reply
Did you read the article?
Reply
Where are we conjuring these crowds from? Miller Knox is just as accessible.
Reply
The more park area is available, the more spread out the visitors will be. EBRPD is familiar with managing large park areas. But if what you are asking about is the crowded toll plaza, perhaps the answer is in advocating for other modes of transit, including perhaps a shuttle service to the park, once it is up and ready to go.
Reply
Interviewee Pam Stello requested that Jeanne Kortz be added as another person who was a founding member of Citizens for a Sustainable Point Molate. |
Ormond Otvos 
Pat 
Janis Hashe 
Michael Derry 
Jack Scheinman 
Janis Hashe 
Louis Dolbeare 
Jack Scheinman 
Pat 
NSchiff 
Janis Hashe