Richmond's Point Molate

Over the years, Point Molate, on the Richmond shoreline, has been many things to many people: A place for the Navy to store bunker fuel. A community of Chinese shrimpers. The world's largest winery.

Today, Point Molate is quiet. There’s a handful of abandoned buildings, palm and oak trees, and a view clear across the bay to Mount Tamalpais.

Lech Naumovich is a conservation analyst for the California Native Plant Society. He says if you want to see an eagle or a hawk in the East Bay, this is the place to come.

“The landscape here is just phenomenal,” says Naumovich. “We consider this place to be the Marin Headlands of the East Bay.”

Point Molate has some of the best native coastal grasslands in the East Bay, Naumovich says. Plus rich eelgrass beds. And habitat for the western snowy plover, a federally-recognized threatened species.

He believes that this precious slice of coastline will be jeopardized if Richmond voters approve Measure U. That is, if voters say yes to a project that developer Jim Levine describes this way:

“We’re talking about building a $1 billion world class – I’m talking on the scale of Monaco, or Pebble Beach – a world class destination resort with hotels and a convention center.”

And, a casino. Levine's company, Upstream, has partnered with an Indian tribe, the Guidiville Band of Pomo Indians, based in Mendocino. If the project succeeds, most of Point Molate will become the Guideville's new, permanent Indian reservation.

As a result of a settlement reached between environmental groups and the Guidiville, the casino development, if approved, will include about 180 acres of open space. Levine says plans also include habitat restoration and green energy facilities. He believes the casino is the only way that Point Molate is ever going to get cleaned up.

“All the buildings are uninhabitable,” says Levine. “Most have lead and asbestos, and structural deficiencies. So to do anything at this site is going to cost 150 million dollars.”

Levine points to other former military bases in the Bay Area, like Alameda and Mare Island. “How many of those are developed now?” he asks. “None. It takes a huge amount of capital to make this work.”

Measure U is a non-binding advisory measure. So even if voters approve it, the project still will need approval from the Richmond City Council and also from the federal government. But a strong vote either way could send a powerful message.

37.9465908 -122.4219169

The Tassajara Valley is at the center of a hot debate in San Ramon. The valley is a sparsely developed strip of land just south of Mt. Diablo and is home to a handful of ranches and orchards.

In the East Bay city of San Ramon, voters are deciding a measure that would substantially expand their city limits. Measure W is one of several urban growth measures on Bay Area ballots this November.

San Ramon is largely home to rows of suburban houses. At the edge of town, those homes give way to open, grassy hills.

"This really is the edge of development," says Matt Vander Sluis of the Greenbelt Alliance, an environmental non-profit. "You’ve got the beautiful rolling hills of the Tassajara Valley and then more and more open space stretching out essentially until the Central Valley."

The Tassajara Valley is at the center of a hot debate in San Ramon. The valley is a sparsely developed strip of land just south of Mt. Diablo and is home to a handful of ranches and orchards.

"This is one of our most important wildlife corridors and it’s also just an important piece of the mosaic of protected lands across the Bay Area," says Vander Sluis

Measure W would put 1,600 acres of this valley in San Ramon city limits by expanding the urban growth boundary. More than 40 cities in the Bay Area use these boundaries, typically to control the growth of housing development.

Measure W would increase the size of the city of San Ramon by 19 percent. But city officials say they have no plans to develop that area.

"There is no secret plan to develop Tassajara Valley," says Eric Wallis, a member of the San Ramon Planning Commission. Wallis says the reason city planners are supporting Measure W is so the city can decide the future of Tassajara Valley. Right now, the valley belongs to Contra Costa County.

"We feel very strongly that this area should be within our urban growth boundary for planning purposes because we’ve had some negative experiences with having the county plan areas that wound up going into San Ramon," says Wallis.

Right now, Tassajara Valley is zoned for agricultural use. If a developer wants to build something bigger than 30 acres, today it would require the approval of Contra Costa County voters. Wallis says that isn’t local enough. "Bottom line is – who do you trust? Do you trust someone who lives in the same city and is responsive to you as a voter? Or do you trust someone who lives miles and miles away?"

If Measure W passes and a local commission approves the changes, the valley’s future would be decided by city officials, without going to city voters. That’s a concern for Measure W opponents.

"About 70 percent of the land here in the Tassajara Valley that would be affected by Measure W is owned by major developers and land speculators. The only reason to expand an urban growth boundary is to open up an area for development," says Matt Vander Sluis.

Voters in Petaluma, Santa Rosa and Cloverdale are also deciding urban growth measures in November.

37.77053 -121.88006

Proposition 7 is one of the green propositions – in more ways than one.

The amount of cash that's being spent on this so-called Big Solar initiative is prodigious. It is one of the most expensive measures on the ballot. On one side you have a little more than $5 million to pass the proposition, all from Peter Sperling, the son of the man who created the online college, The University of Phoenix. And on the other side, three utility companies have pitched in well over $27 million to defeat it.

Interestingly, the companies that stand to profit from this initiative – the many small companies that make up most of the solar and wind energy industry – are actually against the bill.

PG&E and Southern California Edison are the two biggest donors, chipping in more than $13 million apiece. To see a list of spenders, for and against proposition 7, click here.

For more on the debate, check out this discussion from KQED's Forum.

Listen to the Big Solar on the Ballot radio report online.

37.8721 -122.258

Credit: California High Speed Rail Authority

One of those outstanding questions is: Where will the train go?

In the Bay Area, that has been a huge issue. There are two proposed routes (check out an interactive map here) — one through the East Bay and the Altamont Corridor toward Sacramento, and the "preferred alternative," which runs down the Peninsula, through San Jose, Gilroy and the Pacheco Pass, and then loops back around to Sacramento.

Some rail advocates filed a lawsuit, pushing the state to do more study, particularly environmental study. The Pacheco Pass route cuts through some pristine landscape, and that worries environmentalists. And the Altamont route runs through some of the heaviest traffic corridors in the Bay Area, so a high speed train could relieve some of the East Bay's congestion. In addition, the Peninsula communities of Menlo Park and Atherton joined the lawsuit, because they're concerned about the potential of massive above-the-street construction there.

The Rail Authority says it's working with communities to answer their concerns. For instance, it's possible that some of the high speed rail stations could go below ground on the Peninsula — and that they hope to build BOTH routes eventually. Right now, they say, the Pacheco Pass route is preferred, but they point out that it's a long way till the tracks go down and the train starts running, and there will be a lot to work out over the next decade.

Listen to the Fast Trains radio report online.

37.7898 -122.398