Oakland – In this Insight Terminal Solutions Update, The City of Oakland, and especially the Oakland City Attorney, has come up with the idea that it didn’t know coal was part of the mix of commodities to be transported by the Oakland Bulk and Oversized Terminal. The claim Oakland City Attorney Barbara Parker and some Oakland City Councilmembers have made is that the City of Oakland didn’t know coal was part of it until 2015.
Well, this proposal memo, dated December 22, 2011, proves that’s not true. It’s written by Steve Nieman of the Tioga Group, and presents the consulting company’s take on writing a market study for the City of Oakland Community and Economic Development Agency and about the proposed Oakland Bulk and Oversized Terminal and determining its chances for economic success.
(Although the eventual document was more an evaluation of Phil Tagami that was insulting in the view of this vlogger. To Phil’s credit, and I write this as a friend of his since 1991, once again, he foiled the City of Oakland’s staffers (some, not all) many attempts to make it seem as if he can’t do something. For decades, the City of Oakland has had a history of favoring white, out-of-town developers over local minority developers. What Phillip Tagami won in the competition for the Oakland Army Base Redevelopment Project came after years of hard work.)
It proves that the City of Oakland was co-developer of Insight Terminal Solutions Oakland Bulk and Oversized Terminal, and has of late repeatedly reneged on its development agreement responsibilities with respect to Insight Terminal Solutions, and Phil Tagami, and California Capital Investment Group.
Any other media reports that refer to actions in 2018, and “black leaders” in this regard are completely wrong and are not to be believed. As Zennie62Media was hired by ITS for content development and content marketing around previously not seen court documents, Oakland News Now is the best source for information on the origins of the Oakland Bulk and Oversized Terminal.
Also, note that the Community and Economic Development Agency representative in contact with Nieman was Pat Cashman. He eventually hired the Tioga group to write the market study. The study specifically refers to the shipping opportunities provided by the coal industry. In other words, Oakland was a direct player in the formation of the plan for what is now the Insight Terminal Solutions Oakland Bulk and Oversized Terminal, where John Siegel is CEO of ITS.
Tioga Group Proposal To Oakland Community and Economic Development Agency Dated December 22, 2011
Proposal
Assistance for Oakland CEDA: Break-bulk Opportunity
(draft as of December 22, 2011)The Tioga Group, inc. (Tioga) is pleased to offer this draft proposal to the City of Oakland’s Community and Economic Development Agency (CEDA). Note that it is a draft For CEDA’S review and comment. In this way Tioga expects to be able to match is, proposed work plan and deliverable exact to what it is the will benefit CEDA the most.
BACKGROUND
CEDA has been offered the opportunity to conduct business at the Port of Oakland. The site is Wharf 7 as described in the current report from HDR‘ This wharf is believed to be suitable as a break—bulk Facility, and possibly at roll-on, roll-off facility. Until now the locations has been a break—bulk facility primarily for military, either break-bulk or large vehicles. However, in recent years because of the lack of a usable rail route and connection to the mainline at its prior Wood Street yard, the wharf has been used only for storage and ancillary activities primarily related to the construction of the new eastern half of the San Fi‘ancisco-Oakland Bay Bridge.
The present master plan for development of this area’has been designed by HDR. It calls for Wharf 7 to be retained. Hence, that raises the question: how best can the wharf be utilized? One option is to resurrect a break—bulk service. This has an attraction due to two factors.
First, the master plan For the revitalized site includes providing an active rail service via a dedicated siding served by the planned, new Oakland Gateway Rail Enterprise (OGRE) switching railroad, and thence connecting to the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR), but not to the BNSF Railway. The expectation is that this will attract shipments for prior or subsequent movement by rail.
The second is that the site will be surrounded by a new, large logistics complex The prospective tenants at the complex will have rail. access also, and in connection with their business may want rail service to a nearby break—bulk Facility for import and export cargos. The developer of that facility has referenced an “Oakland Bulk Oversized Terminal”. It needs to be determined if that reference is to the Wharf7 Facility; if it is not, it needs to be determined what the reference is to.
Oakland’s Community and Economic Development Agency (CEDA) has a number considerations entering into a commercial venture to provide such service for either intracoastal barge service 01′ international cargo ship service, The first is an assessment of the market for such a service. All other considerations follow; primary among them is the viability of the proposed, new rail switching service contemplated by OGRE.
OBJECTIVE
The objective to be achieved ’by the project proposed herein is an initial assessment of the market for the proposed setvice(s) that might be conducted at Wharf 7.
SCOPE
The scope of the project has three parts. The first is a review of the history of such cargos
moving to / from the West Coast of North America (WCNA); the second is an assessment of the
competitive aspects as posed by nearby, alternative port Facilities; the third is an explanation of attraction, if any, of the availability of inland rail service as compared to alternative ports.Depending on the outcome of this first project, it is easy to envision additional, key considerations. But, those are necessary to investigate only it the market and service prospects are attractive.
APPROACH and QUALIFICATIONS
Tioga has the benefit of creating a very recent (September 201l) review and forecast of most of the possible markets for the San Francisco Bay Area Bay Conservation and Development Commission (BCDC) as part 0.!” its update to its Seaport Plan. Also, Tioga has the benefit ofits past projects at a number of nearby ports with which a facility at the Port of Oakland would compete. Finally, Tioga can explain the economics and service considerations facing an importer/exportei’ interested in moving goods via inland rail or truck via the Port of Oakland.
Hence, Tioga’s approach is to provide CEDA a broad, but ‘not necessarily deep, assessment. The goal would be to look for opportunities and fatal flaws. This has the advantage of minimizing CEDA’s required expenditure for this study and sorting through the options for the next phase of a more complete investigation of options that survive this project.
Tioga’s topical expertise is freight transportation. It has completed project for a number of ports and Clients investigating port services, including the Ports of Oakland, Richmond, Redwood City, and Stockton. In the course of these assignments, it has had occasion to better understand the services and interests of the Ports of San Francisco, West Sacramento, Hueneme, and Humboldt Bay. It has completed a multitude of studies of marine terminal operations across the country, provided project reviews For the US Corp of Engineers, compared modal economics across alternate intermodal and ti’ansload routings, surveyed customers as to decision processes [701′ selecting ports and i‘outings, and served many economic development and municipal planning organizations particularly with assistance in understanding the nature of the patronage of freight transportation facilities in a specific. area (including all of California for both local and transiting cargos). ‘
WORK PLAN
Tioga envisions live tasks to accomplish this project,
Task 1 — Kick off meeting
Clarify work plan. Gain common acceptance of work plan. Obtain any appropriate materials that CEDA can access. Investigate other potential sources and/or contacts that are familiar with this subject
Task 2 — Review of cargo volumes and forecasts
Review existing cargo history and forecast as provided to BCDC. Look For history of activities over a break—bulk or 10-10 clock; not just commodity descriptions. Try to ascertain how certain potential target markets (e.g. military, oversized vehicles and equipment, project cargos, etc. are categorized.
Task 3 — Competitive assessment
Ask competitors (other ports) and Oakland based forwarders and about existence of break—bulk facilities and the nature of business being handled at such facilities. Might try to induce cooperation by offering to provide a synopsis of what is learned From ports that are identified as having such target cargos and bi‘eak—bulk activities either in ocean—going ships or barge and both international and domestic cargos.
Compare and discuss potential for l) diversion of existing cargo movements and 2) potential
cargos From new projects and Foreign Trade Zone operators.Task 4 — Discussion of modal economics for import/expert cargos
Explain the critical considerations that determine the likely routing decisions by beneficial cargo owners (BCOs). Try to determine if any of these determining factors provide an opportunity for this facility and why such would be of value to the ECG and/or its forwairclet/agent.
Task 5 — Draft and Final Report
Create a clratt of a final report. Submit it to CEDA for comments, and conduct a meeting with
CEDA to review the dta ft and comments. Based on reviews, createand submit a final report.DELIVERABLE
The deliverable is a report on opportunities that might use Wharf 7 at the Port of Oakland.
PROJECT MANAGEMENT
ScheduleTioga can start this project with one week’s notice. An elapsed time of 6—8 weeks is expected depending on timely cooperation from other ports. Tioga will provide a-weekly, Verbal update on project progress.
Staffing — Tioga
Steve Nieman, Principal, will be Tioga’s Project Manager, client liaison, and primary analyst.
Dan Smith, Principal, will also be an analyst primarily on the topics of market size, cargo
forecast, and an evaluation of selected competitive ports and services.Staffing — Client
CEDA’S key personnel will need to be available for a 2—3 hour Kickoff, to provide written
comments on a draft report, and for a 2—3 hour review of the draft reportFees and Expenses
Tioga’s requirements For pro Fessional Fees and expenses will not exceed $l5,000.
Invoice and TermsTioga will invoice monthly with payment in full expected within 30 clays oF the invoice date.
Expenses will be passed through at costCLOSING
Tioga looks Forward to assisting CEDA with its evaluation of this commercial opportunity
because it is unusual for a city to consider sponsoring, even operating, a Freight transportation facility such as Wharf 7, although to do so is rather common in some ports.CONCURRENCE
For: The Tioga Group, inc. For: City oanklancl, Community & Economic
Development AgencyBy: Stephen C. Nieman By:
Title: Principal Title:
Stay tuned.