• The Authority was established through an Act of the California Legislature in 1993.
• FORA’s role is to implement a plan for the former Fort Ord.
• The FORA Board has released several studies related to the land uses on the site.

• FORA released its Final Scoping Report (32M PDF) in October 2012.
• FORA released its Final Reassessment Report (2.9M PDF) in December 2012.
• The FORA Board denied the County General Plan’s Fort Ord Master Plan in a tie vote (6-6) on March 14, 2014. The County now must make the Plan consistent, send it on for a vote to the Board of Supervisors and then back to the FORA Board.

LandWatch engages in the public process in a variety of ways. For this project, here is a list of our engagement strategies.

• Letter: LandWatch Requests Halt to EIR Certification (108K PDF)
  LandWatch outlines in this letter a request to NOT certify the Habitat Conservation Plan Environmental Impact Report because FORA is not the lead agency and it can’t carry out the requirements of the HCP. (06.10.20)
• Letter: LandWatch Comments on the HCP (508K PDF)
  Again, LandWatch reiterates its concern for spending scarce resources on the Habitat Conservation Plan. Certification of the Plan costs significant money, the plan increases the risk of litigation, and FORA doesn’t have the bandwidth to complete this task with the looming sunset of the organization. (05.07.20)
• Testimony: LandWatch Speaks to Issues with FORA’s Habitat Plan (461K PDF)
  Executive Director, Michael DeLapa outlined various reasons FORA should stop its effort to complete the Habitat Conservation Plan—especially when the expenditure of $225,000 to certify the environmental documents doesn’t mean local cities and agencies will accept the document’s requirements. (02.21.20)
• Letter: LandWatch Comments on FORA Habitat Plan (84K PDF)
  LandWatch supports the approach outlined by the Habitat Working Group. Additional comments include: the need for baseline environmental review prior to EIR certification, if the plan changes and the EIR is certified, the environmental documents need to be re-opened for modification, and spending almost $300,000 for an EIR certification is wasteful. (02.10.20)
• Letter: LandWatch Adds Water Study as Attachment to Comments (11.5M PDF)
  In a follow up to FORA, LandWatch provided Exhibit 6 (WRIME, Deep Aquifer Investigative Study, May 2003) to Attachment 1 (John Farrow, letter to Kim Carvalho, Nov. 14, 2019) of the December 13, 2019 correspondence.  The comments address water supply and water supply impacts.  (12.14.19)
• Letter: LandWatch Comments on “No Action” Alternative (71K PDF)
  In its third letter, LandWatch relayed its concerns that FORA’s analysis comparing the costs of the proposed HCP to the “No Action” alternative is seriously flawed, and seeks reconciliation of the inconsistencies in the analyses. (12.14.19)
• Letter: LandWatch Outlines Water-Related Concerns (118K PDF)
  In its second letter, LandWatch relays how the HCP EIS/EIR fails to provide an adequate discussion of groundwater impacts associated with the HCP and the development that it enables. (12.13.19)
• Letter: LandWatch Contests the Need for an HCP (234K PDF)
  It its first letter, LandWatch wrote about how FORA has not demonstrated that the proposed HCP is needed for ESA/CESA compliance, or that it is the best alternative, or even a viable alternative. Additionally, FORA has not shown that the proposed HCP is financially feasible or that there is, or can be, a committed, enforceable, and adequate funding plan. (12.10.19)
• Letter: LandWatch Reiterates Unaddressed Concerns (54K PDF)
  Limited time precludes additional comments, so LandWatch reiterated what concerns remain unaddressed. This includes things like who defines “regional needs,” what portions of the Base Reuse Plan remain intact, and the connection between future funding and a “perpetual” FORA. (03.14.19)
• Testimony: LandWatch Testifies at FORA Meeting (121K PDF)
  LandWatch Executive Director Michael DeLapa relays key concerns about the proposed legislative package offered to the FORA Board.  In essence, the staff has a vested interest in the preservation of the agency and these proposed amendments fly in the face of the sunset of the organization in 2020 and goals for local control. (03.15.19)
• Letter: LandWatch Comments on FORA Legislation (147K PDF)
  LandWatch outlines its concerns with the proposed amendments for the draft legislation because they are inconsistent with the legislated mandate for FORA’s sunset.  Further, concerns were relayed about the limited availability of the amendments to the public prior to the vote. (03.11.19)
• Letter: LandWatch Submits Comments to Army on Groundwater (2.2M PDF)
  LandWatch outlines the need for a subsequent environmental review of before considering disposing of groundwater rights on the former Fort Ord. A 1993 agreement outlines terms related to groundwater limitations that must be considered before disposition of the rights. (02.26.19)
• Letter: LandWatch Comments on Transition Plan (90K PDF)
  LandWatch reiterates its concerns about the Transition Plan for FORA and the omissions made in the plan, such as acceptance of costs by member agencies, shortfalls on transportation projects and uncollected funds, and the need for environmental review of the Plan under CEQA. (10.28.18)
• Letter: LandWatch Letter on CEQA Requirements (516K PDF)
  In a follow up letter to the FORA Board, LandWatch reminds the Authority that the Transition Plan impacts water and traffic—among other things and must be evaluated in an Environmental Impact Report. (10.18.18)
• Letter: LandWatch Letter on CEQA Requirements (203K PDF)
  In a comment letter delivered to FORA, LandWatch argues that the California Environmental Quality Act requirements must be met in relation to the Transition Plan for the Authority. (10.17.18)
• Testimony: LandWatch Comments on the Proposed FORA Extension (464K PDF)
  LandWatch Executive Director Michael DeLapa provides concrete proof as to the reasons why extending FORA is a bad idea—none the least of which is it’s misuse of taxpayer funds. He reiterated the position that FORA needs to be dismantled, not extended. (09.25.18)
• Letter: LandWatch Submits Letter to Supervisors Over FORA (130K PDF)
  The LandWatch letter focuses on how FORA’s transition planning has failed to produce a plan or any apparent agreements among FORA’s member agencies. The letter provides a suggestion on how to unravel the agency, but acknowledges others exist. (08.14.18)
• Letter: LandWatch Poses Questions on Transition Plan (540K PDF)
  In this letter to the FORA Board, we ask four questions regarding the sunset of the Authority and next steps: Who manages future transactions? What lands need to be conveyed? What transition issues should have been anticipated? Is this process exempt (or not) from CEQA? (07.12.18)
• Letter: LandWatch Offers Questions on FORA Housing (562K PDF)
  LandWatch unravels the arguments in support of the Eastside Parkway by posing questions about affordable and workforce housing. The numbers simply don’t add up between the relationship of the Eastside Parkway and housing. LandWatch asks specific questions on affordable houses being built on the former Fort Ord and the 6,160-unit housing cap. (04.02.18)
• Letter: LandWatch Comments on FORA’s Eastside Parkway (310K PDF)
  LandWatch’s attorney John Farrow sent a letter detailing FORA’s failure to comply with its legal obligation to review alternatives and select the most effective option to mitigate regional transportation impacts before committing any funds to a particular project. (03.08.18)
• Interview: KSBW Broadcasts Interview with Michael DeLapa
  LandWatch Executive Director Michael DeLapa’s interview points out the Eastside Parkway is a relatively short “connector” road within Fort Ord — it doesn’t link the Monterey Peninsula and Salinas any more (or better) than the current system of roads. The traffic models produced by the Transportation Agency of Monterey County (TAMC) show the Parkway will not solve a regional problem. (03.08.18)
• Letter: LandWatch to FORA in opposition to the Eastside Parkway (59K PDF)
  LandWatch urges FORA to reject its staff’s confusing and conflicting Eastside Parkway goals and objectives and instead adopt LandWatch’s three clear and simple goals. (02.01.18)
• OpEd: FORA Has Failed (by Michael De Lapa)
  In 1994, California established the Fort Ord Reuse Authority with a vision that it would remove blight, create jobs, provide affordable housing, and foster economic recovery from the closure of the former Fort Ord military base. Twenty-four years later, despite overwhelming failure by virtually every measure, FORA persists. (01.25.18)
• Letter: LandWatch Offers Solutions and Opposition to Freeway (546K PDF)
  Addressing the overwhelming opposition to a new freeway across Fort Ord, LandWatch submitted revised goals for transportation improvements that meet identified needs. FORA is accepting comments on project goals and objectives until Friday, December 22. (12.19.17)
• Letter: Comments on FORA Conflict of Interest (501K PDF)
  LandWatch asks the FORA Board to examine how the extension of the transition plan directly benefits the existing FORA staff. We urged FORA to hire an outside, independent third party to develop the transition plans. (10.23.17)
• Letter: Comments on FORA Transition Plan (542K PDF)
  LandWatch asks the FORA Board to examine its original mission, weigh its accomplishments over the past 23 years, and determine, in consultation with local governments and Monterey County residents, whether it continues to serve the public good. (10.03.17)
• Letter: Comments on the BRAC for Fort Ord (36K PDF)
  LandWatch outlines it concerns on the on the restrictions that were lifted for the Parker Flats area, including the loss of value oak woodland habitat, overdraft of the Salinas Valley Groundwater Basin, and the land swap at East Garrison, which moved the planned residential units from Parker Flats to East Garrison. (08.21.17)
• Letter: Opposition to Plan Consistency (86K PDF)
  LandWatch writes to object to the proposed resolution finding the 2010 General Plan to be consistent with FORA’s Fort Ord Reuse Plan. FORA should decline to find the General Plan consistent and direct the County to make necessary revisions before resubmitting the General Plan for consistency review. (01.09.14)
• Letter: LandWatch Letter to the County Board of Supervisors on the FORA Plan Consistency (115K PDF)
  LandWatch writes to object to the proposed resolution finding the 2010 General Plan to be consistent with FORA’s Fort Ord Reuse Plan. The focus of LandWatch’s concern is the lack of clarity about the intensity and density of land use permitted in the Parker Flats and East Garrison areas. (08.26.13)
• Letter: Comments on the Draft Scoping Report (115K PDF)
  LandWatch provides comments on the Draft Scoping Report including on the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting, market studies, and specific findings on policies. (09.03.12)
• Letter: Comments on the Draft Scoping Report (412K PDF)
  LandWatch offers numerous recommendations to implement the Fort Ord Base Reuse Plan and focused ideas on economic conditions, population and employment forecasts, and the role of staff in implementation. (06.04.12)
• Letter: Comments on the Fort Ord Developer Fee Reduction Proposal (94K PDF)
  LandWatch reviewed the proposal and offers three recommendations on the Capital Improvement Program Review. (04.08.11)
• Letter: Comments on FORA Design Guidelines (94K PDF)
  This brief LandWatch letter urges the Authority to strengthen the Highway 1 Corridor Design Guidelines, by replacing the word “should” with the word “shall” where key design concepts are outlined, and to insure that a common an integrated approach, emphasizing viewshed protection, is made a condition of all developments that impact on the Highway 1 Corridor. ( 11.19.04)
• It’s Time To Contact FORA Board Members
  The Board of Directors of the Fort Ord Reuse Authority will vote on July 11th on a set of affordable housing policies that could have an incredibly positive impact, if adopted. Here’s how to contact FORA Board Members by phone, email, or regular mail. (07.06.03)
• Letter: Supporting Farr Affordable Housing Recommendations (197K PDF)
  LandWatch strongly urges your “yes” vote for the set of affordable housing recommendations submitted to you by Congress Member Sam Farr. (07.05.03)
• Farr Recommendations Would Mandate Affordable Housing on Fort Ord
  Currently, FORA makes no specific requirement that affordable housing be constructed on the Former Fort Ord. That’s left up to the local jurisdictions. Sam Farr’s recommendations would change all that! (07.05.03)
• Letter: Comments on the East Garrison Option (115K PDF)
  LandWatch outlines its concerns for the proposed Option Agreement. (02.03.03)
• LandWatch Authors Joint Letter on Fort Ord Housing
  Congress Member Sam Farr has proposed that at least 50% of the housing constructed at the former Fort Ord should be affordable to local working families, and should be capable of purchase or rental by persons with average and below average incomes. LandWatch applauds this effort, and has authored a “sign on” letter joined by many groups. (09.25.01)

• FORA Closes its Doors
  After 26 years the state’s last redevelopment agency has shut its doors. With the legislation governing its existence now calling for its end, FORA dismissed its staff and locked the doors on June 30th. (07.02.20)
• Letter: LAFCO Requests Actions by FORA (1.1M PDF)
  The Local Agency Formation Commission requested four items from the Fort Ord Reuse Authority Board. These included clarifying statements on the 2020 Transition Plan, removing statements in the plan regarding LAFCO’s role, clarifying information on water allocations post-dissolution, and completion of administrative items post-dissolution. (05.22.20)
• Letter: CNPS Pens Letter to FORA and Del Rey Oaks (2M PDF)
  The California Native Plant Society’s legal team writes about the Fort Ord Reuse Authority’s lack of response to the habitat protection requirements it agreed to for the South Boundary Road project. Per the letter, FORA must negotiate with CNPS to relocate the habitat preserve area further south. (05.21.20)
• Letter: LAFCO Comments on Dissolution Role (668K PDF)
  The Local Agency Formation Commission requested the FORA Board to move the Transition Report be pulled from the Consent Agenda to allow for public comments. Further, the Commission requested action be delayed on CIP projects until issues raised by the California Native Plant Society are resolved. (05.14.20)
• LAFCO Comments on FORA Plans (1.1M PDF)
  The Local Agency Formation Commission commented on the transition status report and requested the FORA board take public comments on specific agenda items. LAFCO reiterated that FORA had yet to resolve many concerns raised by stakeholders. (05.14.20)
• Conservation Plan Will Lead to Sprawl (Page 7A)
  LandWatch’s extensive concerns about the Fort Ord Reuse Authority’s Conservation Plan gains attention in this article. We continue to assert that only blighted areas should be developed, the remainder of the natural land should remain as natural land on the former Fort Ord. (03.06.20)
• LAFCO Recommends No Action on HCP (593K PDF)
  LAFCO staff recommends that FORA not act to finalize and certify the HCP EIR and, instead, consider alternative options such as transferring funds and/or resources to FORA member agencies to address habitat management responsibilities and Endangered Species Act compliance. (02.24.20)
• Goal To Fundraise for Building Demolition Fading
  A plan to fundraise to the tune of $55 million to demolish dilapidated and unsalvageable sites is fading because the Fort Ord Reuse Authority is months away from its sunset date. (01.02.20)
• Comment Period Open on Habitat Conservation Plan
  A public comment period for the Fort Ord Habitat Conservation runs through December 16th.  A Habitat Conservation Plan is being established so that impacts to endangered and threatened species can be appropriately mitigated. (11.01.19)
• LAFCO Plans Coming in Spring, Before Dissolution
  The required agreements between cities, FORA, and LAFCO will come forward in Spring 2020, mere months before the agency is set to dissolve. There are 18 implementing agreements likely coming forward. (10.28.19)
• Supervisors Consider a Bond to End FORA Blight
  County Supervisors authorize $25,000 to study a bond to end the blight on Ford Ord lands. Consultants will provide new details at the November 5th meeting. The cost of blight removal could be $2.4 million. (10.22.19)
• Concerns Expressed over Rushed FORA Bond
  Just as the Ford Ord Reuse Authority is set to dissolve in the middle of next year, it is rushing a bond proposal through aimed at removing blight from the former base.  At the moment, the Monterey County Board of Supervisors has hired a consultant to review the implications for the county of said bond. (10.09.19)
• FORA Bill Dies in Committee
  State Senator Bill Monning’s legislation proposing the end of the Fort Ord Reuse Authority with a two year extension.  Without this bill, FORA ends June 30, 2020. (09.04.19)
• Staff Jumping Ship as FORA Set to Close
  FORA’s Executive Officer will retire this December. He’s been at the helm of the organization since it began. Other top level staffers are also leaving prior to a decision on the fate of the organization. (07.25.19)
• Supervisors Want Changes to FORA Bill
  In a split vote, the Supervisors opted not to support State Senator Bill Monning’s bill to end FORA in two years.  Additional changes which feature the County’s priorities would need to be in the bill before the Supervisors supported it. (06.27.19)
• FORA Found OK in Road Project Analysis
  Keep Fort Ord Wild sued the Fort Ord Reuse Authority (FORA) for California Environmental Quality Act violations. The court found FORA did not violate the law and FORA states it will proceed with the road improvements to Gigling and South Boundary Road. (05.30.19)
• Monning’s Bill Moves Forward
  The California Senate, approved with a few amendments, the bill to extend FORA only until July 1, 2020. The bill now goes to the State Assembly for consideration. (05.28.19)
• Supervisors Back Bill, With Changes
  In a 4-1 vote, the Supervisors supported State Senator Monning’s FORA dissolution bill, but requested amendments, including asking for a six-year extension instead of the proposed two-year extension for dissolution—among other things. (05.08.19)
• Lands Cleared of Munitions to Transfer
  FORA expects that all 3,337 acres of lands cleared of munitions will transfer to specific jurisdictions, like Seaside, Del Rey Oaks, and Marina. The project has been under way since 2007. (05.07.19
• Supervisors to Weigh in on FORA Bill
  The Board of Supervisors will vote on the State Senator Monning bill to dissolve FORA by June 30, 2021 and reduce the size of the Authority’s board to five voting members—among other things. (05.06.19)
• Fort Ord Lands Ready for Reuse
  More than 3,000 acres have been cleared for re-use as munitions from the soil—after decades of military training—have been removed. Final clearance was given at the end of March. (05.02.19)
• Senator Monning Proposal Ends FORA
  Senator Monning is moving forward on a bill (SB 189) to have a “hard end date” for FORA, but allows a two-year extension on the 2020 sunset. SB 189 also makes sharp cuts to the existing powers for the Fort Ord Board. (04.02.19)
• FORA Finally In a Hurry to Dissolve
  Much of the original vision for the former Fort Ord has not been accomplished. The FORA board sent its legislative proposal to Senator Monning and while they agreed to dissolve, they didn’t agree on how to do it—the only real request from Monning was the agreement part. (03.21.19)
• Graph Shows Projections & Results for FORA (63K PDF)
  The Fort Ord Reuse Authority Economic Development graph shows the progress to date on projected and actual results for population, jobs, total and new homes, and commercial development. Each category’s actual results appear well below the projected level, and sometimes less than 30% of the goal. (03.06.19)
• KFOW Goes to Court on Road Project
  Keep Fort Ord Wild filed suit against FORA for its proposals on South Boundary and Gigling Roads. The lawsuit claims the Authority didn’t follow state laws in the project approval.  The decision by the court will occur soon. (02.13.19)
• Seaside City Council Considers Court Building on FORA Land
  The Seaside City Council is considering a feasibility study to determine if a “Seaside Civic Campus” should be built.  Included in the proposal would be a community facility, new city hall, and a new superior court building. (02.06.19)
• LAFCO Anticipates a Delay
  The Local Agency Formation Commission anticipates a six-month delay in advancing the Fort Ord Reuse Authority’s (FORA) Transition Plan.   The Transition Plan was required as the Authority sunsets, but it arrived only three days before the deadline. (01.25.19)
• Supervisors’ Voting Records Questioned
  When it comes to committee assignments, Chair John Phillips didn’t like the voting records for the two FORA members and attempted to remove them from their seats. The public outcry was enormous and Supervisor Jane Adams retained her seat. (01.15.19)
• Contentious Assignments for FORA
  The McWeekly reports “Contentious is not a big enough word to describe the discussion on committee assignments that unfolded Jan. 8 at the Monterey County Board of Supervisors meeting.” It resulted in Supervisor Adams staying on the FORA Board. (01.10.19)
• Supervisor Adams Retains Seat on FORA
  After a heated debate with a lot of public testimony on the matter, Supervisor Mary Adams retained her position on the Fort Ord Reuse Authority Board. The appointment was approved with a 4-1 (Supervisor Parker dissenting). (01.08.19)
• Supervisor Adams May Lose Key Position
  Under the proposed new assignments for the County Board of Supervisors, Chair Phillips ousts Supervisor Adams from her position on the FORA Board. This would be the first time in FORA’s history that the 5th district would not be represented on the Board. (01.04.19)
• FORA Approves Transition Plan at 11th Hour
  The Fort Ord Reuse Authority approved a transition plan, which would dissolve the agency. The first vote was not unanimous, so a second vote was required. The Plan can only encourage local jurisdictions to take action, but not require it. (12.19.18)
• Elections Change FORA Make Up
  At least three seats will be changing on the Fort Ord Reuse Authority (FORA) Board. All of this, just in time for the December 30th deadline to submit the FORA Transition Plan to the State. The Plan outlines the sunset of the organization including its assets and liabilities.
• LAFCO Expects Lengthy Delay
  Though the FORA Transition Plan was submitted in December—three days before the deadline—there are so many unanswered questions that the Local Agency Formation Commission will need extra time to process everything. A lot of work still remains to be done. (01.25.19)
• Contentious Assignments for FORA
  The MC Weekly reports “Contentious is not a big enough word to describe the discussion on committee assignments that unfolded Jan. 8 at the Monterey County Board of Supervisors meeting.” It resulted in Supervisor Adams staying on the FORA Board. (01.10.19)
• Supervisors Oppose Transition Plan
  Concerned about its obligations when the Authority sunsets the Board of Supervisors unanimously voted to opposed the revised transition plan—set for a vote next Friday. The Supervisors directed staff to participate in upcoming facilitated discussions. (11.08.18)
• FORA Moves Toward Sunset Date
  In June 2020, the Fort Ord Reuse Authority (FORA) is set to sunset, unless extended (again). FORA is scrambling to get a transition plan together to relinquish all of its assets to local cities, but all those cities need to agree.  The latest plan was presented October 29, but no vote was taken. (11-01-18)
• LWV Study on FORA Sunset (878K PDF)
  The League of Women Voters Monterey County (LWVMC) studied the reuse of Fort Ord in 1992 and updated its position in 2018 to address whether or not the Fort Ord Reuse Authority (FORA) should sunset in 2020. FORA’s performance during its 24 year history was assessed based on six governance criteria. The LWVMC believes that FORA should sunset at the statutory date in 2020 based on an evaluation of its past performance and the availability of alternatives to undertake FORA responsibilities. (10.18.18)
• LWV Study on Transferring FORA Responsibilities (88K PDF)
  While the Fort Ord Reuse Authority (FORA) was never intended to be a permanent agency and sunsetting of FORA is required by legislation, some in the community have advocated that it should continue until development by Fort Ord Base Reuse Plan (BRP) is completed or for up to 10 years. The League of Women Voters Monterey County studied ways to transfer FORA’s responsibilities to other agencies after it sunsets. (10.18.18)
• Cap Set on Housing in Settlement
  The number of units allowed to be served by the Marina Coast Water District has been capped in a legal settlement with the District, Keep Fort Ord Wild and LandWatch. Some 6,160 units can be built and the race will be on to get the unit approvals before the cap is reached. (10.11.18)
• Supervisors Ask FORA to Hire Transition Facilitator
  Amid massive criticism from the public, the Board of Supervisors unanimously voted to ask the Fort Ord Reuse Authority to hire a transition facilitator to work with local jurisdictions on negotiations for obligations and funding. (10.03.18)
• Board Splits Vote on Extension
  Monterey County Supervisors voted (3-2) to request a legislative extension for FORA because many of its objectives still haven’t been achieved and its transition plan can’t be completed by the end of the year. (09.26.18)
• FORA Extension May be a Decade Long
  Tuesday, the Supervisors are set to consider the possible extension of FORA for up to a decade. FORA states it has a lot of work left to do and a 10-year extension is needed.  Also considered is a timeline to decrease responsibilities for the agency. (09.24.18)
• Supervisors Lean Toward FORA Extension
  The Supervisors voted to request another extension for the Fort Ord Reuse Authority since there isn’t enough time to finish the transition plan by the end of the year. Senator Monning will consider the legislative extension. (09.10.18)
• Supervisors Weigh in on FORA’s Fate
  FORA is set to expire in 2020, but the Monterey County Board of Supervisors is poised to hear the transition plan and move forward with a workshop on the topic. Key to the discussion are assets and liabilities for the Authority. (09.10.18)
• FORA Begins EIR Process for Eastside Parkway
  The Fort Ord Reuse Authority (FORA) is preparing an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Eastside Parkway.  Comments on the Notice of Preparation of an EIR are due by September 25, 2018 to connector@fora.org.  FORA is also hosting a Scoping Meeting tonight, Thursday, September 6, 2018 from 6 – 8:30 PM at the Community Center at Soper Field (220 Coe Avenue, Seaside, CA)  (09.05.18)
• FORA Moves Forward on Eastside Parkway
  The Fort Ord Reuse Authority has already been sued once on the alignment for the proposed Eastside Parkway. Environmental groups were upset that the alignment would destroy some oak woodlands. After hiring a consultant, FORA’s new alignment now goes entirely through oak woodlands. (08.30.18)
• LAFCO Finds FORA Has No Transition Plan
  Created by the California Legislature the Fort Ord Reuse Authority (FORA) was authorized until 2014. But, through state legislation, FORA got six more years. FORA staff were tasked with creating a transition plan for the end of FORA—a plan that eliminates their jobs.  The Local Agency Formation Commission presented a scathing report of FORA and its lack of a plan. (08.28.18)
• FORA Sunset Date Approaches, Questions Remain
  The FORA Board reviewed a report focused on the transition plan, two and a half years in the making, during its recent meeting. The report resulted in 68 questions—many of which remain unanswered—and leave the big questions looming. For example, how does FORA dispose of its liabilities to local jurisdictions after it sunsets? Those are estimated to be around $195 million. (07.18.18)
• FORA Continues to Side Step Authorities
  The Fort Ord Reuse Authority (FORA) is legislated to sunset in 2020. So why did it pay a consultant to analyze a 2028 sunset date, even after “The board was reminded of the law on Jan. 12, when state Sen. Bill Monning, D-Carmel, delivered a lengthy smackdown of how the agency and its board have fumbled the transition process?” Senator Monning and Assemblymembers Stone and Caballero, please hold FORA accountable! (06.28.18)
• Experts Rank Parkway #6, FORA says #1
  Experts rank Eastside Parkway 6th, FORA Board ranks it 1st. Good luck making sense of that. “Those rankings were based on input from a subcommittee of planners and traffic experts from local cities, the county and CSU Monterey Bay, and notably, they put the controversial road project formerly known as Eastside Parkway – a proposed road that would cut through Fort Ord’s open space, and which has been FORA’s highest priority road project for eight years – as ranked sixth on a list of 19 projects.” (05.17.18)
• Squid Reveals Additional FORA Untruths
  Research by Squid reveals CSU Monterey Bay housing was included and counted in the FORA assessment of build affordable units.  Interestingly, the projects included are not affordable, not available to the public, and not related to FORA. This means FORA’s percentage of affordable units is only 39%. (04.12.18)
• FORA Gets Sued (Again)
  After demolishing buildings from the World War II era—at a cost around $4 million—a developer in Marina is suing the Fort Ord Reuse Authority for not paying these costs. The land was being cleared for big box stores and new housing. (04.12.18)
• Taxpayers Deserve to Know Rationale for Parkway
  Pacific Grove resident John Pearse wrote an Editorial on the Eastside Parkway, slapping FORA for providing no justification for the road to nowhere. Pearse questions if the Authority plans to resurrect the Monterey Downs project. (03.17.18)
• FORA Begins Advancing Eastside Parkway
  The Fort Ord Reuse Authority is moving its plans forward on the controversial Eastside Parkway by initiating its environmental review—required under the California Environmental Quality Act.  LandWatch is actively opposing the Parkway. (03.10.18)
• Eastside Parkway Moving Forward
  One of the key concerns for LandWatch on the Eastside Parkway is the lack of analysis conducted for the actual need of the roadway. Funds invested there could easily be spent on regional road improvements that make a very significant difference. (03.10.18)
• Science Denial Welcomed to Monterey County
  Royal Caulkins, former opinion page editor for The Monterey Herald, captured FORA’s political and intellectual dysfunction in Spin vs. fact on Monterey County’s Eastside Parkway a blistering Op-Ed in Voices of Monterey Bay. The Op-Ed calls out elected officials and CSUMB’s president for pressuring professionals at the Transportation Agency of Monterey County (TAMC) because the TAMC regional transportation model didn’t support their plans for the Eastside Parkway. This is further indication that the national trend against science and data has been warmly welcomed to Monterey Bay. (03.06.18)
• Allergy to Analysis on Eastside Parkway
  Some local officials appear allergic to such analysis, particularly if it involves Eastside Parkway, the controversial proposed road that would bisect oak woodlands in Fort Ord. The Transportation Agency for Monterey County’s Todd Muck presented to the Fort Ord Reuse Authority board on Feb. 9 showing the road would do next to nothing to alleviate traffic on Imjin Parkway or Highway 68. (03.01.18)
• Push for Development on Fort Ord
  Letters submitted by LandWatch and Keep Fort Ord Wild argue that the proposed annexation of Fort Ord lands into the Marina Coast Water District must undergo environmental review. The argument is that additional pumping will be required for additional houses to be constructed on Fort Ord. (03.01.18)
• FORA Approves Roadway Goals
  With an 8-5 vote the Fort Ord Reuse Authority voted to approve the staff recommended Eastside Parkway goals. (02.13.18)
• The Cost of Stroads
  This hits the mark, and is relevant to the wasteful Eastside Parkway that sucks public funds from street improvements. “When we build stroads, we’re sinking municipal finances into infrastructure that will suck wealth out of our towns. When we build streets, we’re investing in infrastructure that will create community wealth and value for generations to come.”  (02.07.18)
• Staff Report on FORA Goals for Eastside Parkway (129K PDF)
  The staff outlines various goals for the Eastside Parkway, including the parkway being a new road through the former Fort Ord, improving regional travel and providing travel options for those at CSU Monterey Bay. (01.28.18)
• FORA Vision Refocuses to 2020 Priorities
  Thank you, Senator Bill Monning, for reiterating what the law requires. LandWatch and others have been making this point for years: there must be a transition plan that delegates FORA’s responsibilities to local government. (01.18.18)
• FORA Eyes Eastside Parkway, Litigation Ensues
  Workshops are scheduled for December 6th by the FORA Board to consider the Eastside Parkway, which would cut through oak woodlands. Confusion as to the road’s purpose and why it is a priority for FORA still exist. (11.30.17)
• FORA Board Considers Forming JPA
  FORA will legislatively sunset in 2020, but the Board just voted to create a Joint Powers Authority (JPA) after that date to keep things moving. It is hard to say if things will actually move forward as Seaside and Marina may not be interested in joining. (11.20.17)
• More Questions Than Answers
  Ord may represent one of the biggest land use decisions yet to be made on the Central Coast.  The question remains how will it be repurposed?  Redevelopment didn’t happen on the base, leaving FORA at a crossroads. (11.16.17)
• Slick Video Points to Ambiguous Future
  “Among the reuse accomplishments stated in the video’s description are “creation and growth of CSU Monterey Bay, establishment of Fort Ord National Monument and Fort Ord Dunes State Park”—none of which have any direct connection with FORA.” And further, as LandWatch testified, the FORA staff face a conflict of interest in developing a transition plan when their salaries, pensions, and benefits are in the mix. That only 5 of 13 elected officials on the FORA Board seem to understand this is remarkable. (10.30.17)
• FORA Board Meets on Transition Plan
  The FORA Board is meeting to provide direction to staff on the transition plan details.  The original date of sunset was 2012, but that has been extended by the State Legislature.  Any transition plan needs to be reviewed by the Local Agency Formation Commission. (10.20.17)
• FORA’s Future in Limbo
  The FORA Board is set to vote on October 13th to make a plan for when the Authority sunsets in 2020.  Unfortunately there are no fiscal or legal analyses on the transition plan—making it hard for the Board and public to have all the information for an informed decision. (10.12.17)
• Group Sues Because No Environmental Review Occurred
  Keep Fort Ord Wild sued the Fort Ord Reuse Authority and County of Monterey because it approved the Eastside Parkway Project without any environmental review.  The courts ruled in the non-profits favor. (01.13.17)
• FORA’s Future Uncertain
  The Fort Ord Reuse Authority is set to expire June 30, 2020. The Authority is getting ready for a successor entity to take over. But tasks are ongoing. For example, the Army has a $100M contract to clean up munitions through 2037. The Authority is reviewing options, including another possible extension of the sunset date. The last one happened under State Senator Bill Monning’s leadership. Any suggestions from the community on the entity that should take over this role? (03.31.16)
• FORA Workshop on Clean Up Efforts
  The Fort Ord Reuse Authority provided an update on the Seaside and Parker Flats clean up process. As a reminder they are cleaning up ordinance on the land to make it safe for civilian use in the future. These lands had been used for weapons, troop training and firing ranges. (01.20.16)
• Preston Park Purchased by Marina
  The City of Marina fights it out with FORA over Preston Park. Before the fight could go to trial (the fight was over who owned it) the City took ownership by buying Preston Park for $35 million. This amount is half of the appraised value.  (09.17.15)
• Fort Ord Trails Plan
  About 1,200 people provided input on the Fort Ord Trails Plan and now the consultants will crunch the numbers. Some of the highlights include walkable streets, access to trails, urban-style streets with transit, and business fronts facing the street. Stay tuned as the consultants work with the input to come up with a plan. (02.12.15)
• FORA Report To Be Discussed at Sept. 14th Meeting
  The Fort Ord Reuse Authority (FORA) will meet Friday, September 14th to discuss the Draft Scoping Plan and comments submitted on the plan. In June of 2012, LandWatch submitted comments to the FORA Board advising them about important topics to analyze, review and include in the Draft Scoping Plan. Contained within the letter were comments requesting an analysis of the habitat conservation plan, Capital Improvement Project Program, removal of urban blight, and the impact of approved but unconstructed projects on the Monterey Peninsula among other things. (09.03.12)
• Attend Aug. 29th FORA Meeting to comment on Draft Scoping Report 
  Attend Aug. 29th FORA Meeting to comment on Draft Scoping Report. The Fort Ord Reuse Authority has until January 2013 to reassess the progress on the Fort Ord Base Reuse Plan adopted in 1997. The August 29th meeting is an opportunity for the FORA Board to receive comments from the public about the draft scoping report which is the precursor to the mandatory reassessment of the Fort Ord Base Reuse Plan. (08.26.12)
• Draft Scoping Plan Released by FORA
  The FORA Board released the Draft Scoping Plan on August 15, 2012 and allowed the public and agencies to review the Plan and provide comments, which were due in early September. LandWatch submitted comments on the Draft Plan that were in need of update or inclusion in the plan. Comments included a review of important policies affecting natural resources, requesting a schedule for completion of stormwater detention and we disagreed with the findings on the water availability and salt water intrusion, among other topics. (08.15.12)
• Around the County Series Video: The Reuse of Fort Ord and Cleanup Efforts
  The 2012 Around the County series focused on the reuse of the former Fort Ord military base. While LandWatch has worked on issues related to Fort Ord for some time, the topic became particularly relevant after the MST / Whispering Oaks project on the former fort was overturned on February 14th, 2012. These videos show the speakers from the second Around the County workshop on May 14, 2012. (07.11.12)
• Around the County Series Successful 
  LandWatch hosted three Around the County workshops to educate, inform and empower members, residents, and stakeholders about issues related to Fort Ord. The events were well attended and have received positive feedback. (07.11.12)
• FORA Bill Before Senate Committee
  A bill designed to extend the sunset date for the Fort Ord Reuse Authority to June 2025 is up for its third read in the Senate Government and Finance Committee. LandWatch has opposed the bill unless specific conditions are met. To date, only one of the five conditions has been incorporated into the bill language. (07.10.12)
• Around the County Series Video: The Reuse of Fort Ord and Meet the Community Groups Involved
  The 2012 Around the County series focused on the reuse of the former Fort Ord military base. While LandWatch has worked on issues related to Fort Ord for some time, the topic became particularly relevant after the MST / Whispering Oaks project on the former fort was overturned on February 14th, 2012. These videos show the speakers from the final Around the County workshop on June 11, 2012. (06.11.12)
• Calls Needed to Legislators Immediately
  AB 1614 proposes to extend the sunset date of the Fort Ord Reuse Authority to 2025. LandWatch offers conditional support. Contact decision makers by June 11th to voice your opinion about the extension of FORA. Download the Factsheet. (1.33M PDF) (06.06.12)
• FORA Workshops Provide Input Opportunity 
  The Fort Ord Reuse Authority has hired a consultant to host a series of workshops allowing community input on the reassessment of the Base Reuse Plan. LandWatch encourages you to get informed and participate at the workshops. (05.29.12)
• Around the County Series Video: The Reuse of Fort Ord FORA Background and Current Plan
  The 2012 Around the County series focused on the reuse of the former Fort Ord military base. While LandWatch has worked on issues related to Fort Ord for some time, the topic became particularly relevant after the MST / Whispering Oaks project on the former fort was overturned on February 14th, 2012. These videos show the speakers from the first Around the County workshop on April 9, 2012. (04.09.12)
• Around The County Series Begins on Fort Ord
  Looking specifically at the reuse of Fort Ord, LandWatch launches a three part series of meetings covering everything from the site’s background to clean up efforts, AB 1614 to Fort Ord’s future. We hope you’ll join us. (03.24.12)
• FORA Extension Proposed, LandWatch’s Support comes with Conditions
  AB 1614 proposes to extend the sunset date of the Fort Ord Reuse Authority to 2025. LandWatch offers conditional support. Contact decision makers by March 21st to encourage conditions are added to the legislation. (03.08.12)
• FORA Forum this Thursday, December 1st, Please Attend!
  FORA is set to sunset June 30, 2014. This forum, sponsored by the League of Women Voters, intends to explore the issues around the possible extension of FORA. (11.29.11)
• Fort Ord Demands A Different Approach
  Because the public owns the lands on the former Fort Ord, development proposals should be handled differently. LandWatch Executive Director Gary Patton makes the case in this article from the Monterey County Herald. (08.26.03)
• It’s Time To Contact FORA Board Members
  The Board of Directors of the Fort Ord Reuse Authority will vote on July 11th on a set of affordable housing policies that could have an incredibly positive impact, if adopted. You are urged to contact FORA Board Members by phone, email, or regular mail. (07.06.03)
• Farr Recommendations Would Mandate Affordable Housing on Fort Ord
  Currently, FORA makes no specific requirement that affordable housing be constructed on the Former Fort Ord. That’s left up to the local jurisdictions. Sam Farr’s recommendations would change all that. (07.05.03)
• Applications Are Open For Fort Ord “Community Advisory Group”
  The California State Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) is establishing a “Community Advisory Group” for Fort Ord, to monitor toxic cleanup issues on Fort Ord. Applications from interested persons are being received now, but they must be postmarked by May 30, 2003. (05.21.03)
• Town Hall Meetings on Affordable Housing
  The Fort Ord Reuse Authority will soon be holding two Town Hall Meetings, to focus on affordable housing opportunities at the former Fort Ord. (05.05.03)
• Affordable Housing Opportunities on Fort Ord
  Fort Ord provides an outstanding opportunity for Monterey County communities to build the kind of affordable housing that the community truly needs. The Fort Ord Reuse Authority (FORA) is expected to make some important decisions at its May 9, 2003 meeting. Read the Clark Group report that FORA will consider, as it takes action on affordable housing issues. (03.30.03)
• Option Agreement Gives Up Future Public Discretion Over Fort Ord (113K PDF)
  The Option Agreement approved by the Board of Supervisors on February 4, 2003, cedes broad authority to a private developer, with few guarantees for the public. A letter from LandWatch outlines the problems. (02.05.03)
• Water Agency & Army Agreement on Groundwater (2.5M PDF)
  In this 1993 agreement between the U.S. Army and the Monterey County Water Resources Agency it is agreed that all groundwater pumping in Fort Ord had to cease due to seawater intrusion and, thus, the right to pump up to 6,600 feet per year (AFY) of groundwater for Fort Ord was limited in time. (09.21.93)