body,date,page,text,path
Mayor'sEconomicDevelopmentAdvisoryPanel/EconomicRecoveryTaskForce,EconomicRecoveryTaskForce,1,"APPROVED MEETING MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING OF THE
MAYOR'S ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY PANEL
WEDNESDAY JULY 20, 2016
1. CALL TO ORDER:
6:13 p.m.
ROLL CALL:
Present:
Chubb, Elsesser, Grunt, Laguerre (arrived at 6:17),
Mik, Monteko, Winters.
Absent:
Panlasigui, Sorensen
2. MINUTES:
City of Alameda's Development Manager, Eric Fonstein, stated that this is the initial meeting
of the panel. There are no minutes of previous meetings.
3. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS--PUBLIC: None
4. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: None
5. NEW BUSINESS ITEMS:
5-A. Welcome and Introductions
Mayor Trish Herrera Spencer welcomed the Advisory Panel to its first meeting. Each Panel
member made introductions.
Erik Chubb, representing high-tech industries, works for Makani Power/Google X,
which builds a new kind of wind turbine. He formerly worked for Ford Motor
Company.
Adam Elsesser, CEO and President of Penumbra, a medical device company in
Harbor Bay, with approximately 1,400 employee.
Brock Grunt, Area Manager for McGuire and Hester, a civic engineering contractor.
McGuire and Hester are about to move into its recently built offices in Harbor Bay.
Jowel Laguerre, Chancellor at Peralta Community College District. He oversees
the entire district, which includes four community colleges. The District started a
new unit for workforce development to partner directly with businesses to ensure
that the colleges provide the right kind of support for career development.
David Mik, co-owner of Power Engineering, a contractor in the marine construction
industry, located at Alameda Point.
Remy Monteko, asset manager for Jamestown Properties, which owns the South
Shore Shopping Center. She has a background in urban planning and worked in
real estate economics consulting before joining Jamestown.
Lance Winters, owner of St. George Spirits, at Alameda Point, anchor for Spirits
Alley
Draft Meeting Minutes
Page 1 of 9
July 20, 2016",Mayor'sEconomicDevelopmentAdvisoryPanel/EconomicRecoveryTaskForce/2016-07-20.pdf
Mayor'sEconomicDevelopmentAdvisoryPanel/EconomicRecoveryTaskForce,EconomicRecoveryTaskForce,2,"5-B Overview of Economic Development Advisory Panel's Proposed Role and
Activities.
Economic Development Manager Lois Butler provided a brief overview. The purpose of
the Advisory Panel is to advise the City Council and staff on important economic
development issues and initiatives. The City may ask individual panel members to help
with specific, high-leve business attraction or retention activities related to his or her
industry sector. This may include such activities as talking with an important business
considering relocating to Alameda.
5-C
Review Rules and Procedures
Ms. Butler introduced the item. The staff report and attachment can be found at:
https://alameda.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=2781414&GUID=15CD7565-
C4B1-4F4F-85D9-31ADDEBA4138&Options=&Search=
Ms. Butler recommended proceeding with the rest of the agenda and after the Chair and
Vice Chair are elected, revisit the draft Rules and Procedures, consider any revisions, and
formally adopt the Rules and Procedures.
Panel member Laguerre asked for clarification of which sector he represents.
Ms. Butler said workforce development.
Panel member Monteko asked about the frequency of the meetings.
Ms. Butler said normally the Panel will meet at least once per year. However, this year
the City will be asking the Panel to have two or three additional meetings to assist with the
preparation of the citywide Economic Development Strategic Plan (EDSP).
5-D
City Attorney's Office to Provide Instructions on Compliance with the Brown
Act and the Sunshine Ordinance -
Senior Assistant City Attorney Farimah Brown gave a briefing on the Brown Act and the
Sunshine Ordinance.
Panel member Mik asked for clarification regarding the prohibition on emailing one another
about the business that they are doing.
Ms. Brown answered that outside of the public meeting, if a majority of the panel emails one
another, they are essentially conducting a meeting, which is prohibited by the Brown Act.
Panel member Grunt asked if this is prohibited even if the email gets forwarded from one
member to another.
Draft Meeting Minutes
Page 2 of 9
July 20, 2016",Mayor'sEconomicDevelopmentAdvisoryPanel/EconomicRecoveryTaskForce/2016-07-20.pdf
Mayor'sEconomicDevelopmentAdvisoryPanel/EconomicRecoveryTaskForce,EconomicRecoveryTaskForce,3,"Ms. Brown said yes, even if there was no intention for this to happen. The intention is
irrelevant. It is easy to lose control of the email.
Panel member Winters inquired if these prohibitions are also for looking for information from
other board members and not planning to discuss any ongoing strategy or issue before the
Panel.
Ms. Brown answer yes, this is a problem area.
Panel member Winters commented that this is going to be a slow process.
Ms. Brown agreed that it is slow, but the intent is for the public to be part of the process.
The greater benefit is public participation.
Panel member Elsesser brought up the subject of telephone conversations.
Ms. Brown stated that a quorum cannot be part of a conference call. Also, if one member
calls the next person and shares information from the previous call, this is a serial
conversation and is prohibited.
Panel member Elsesser asked even if the Panel member is just looking for information?
Ms. Brown said yes.
Mr. Fonstein asked if they can direct their information request to staff, who can email a
response to the entire Panel.
Ms. Brown answered that this may be the way to do it, or the item can be agendized for a
future meeting.
Panel member Elsesser raised the scenario of running into each other by chance, and
economic development issues come up during casual conversation.
Ms. Brown responded that small talk and social gatherings are okay. The problem is a
majority discussing City business, such as if five Panel members happen to be at Peet's and
discuss last night's meeting.
Panel member Elsesser asked for some clarification. He mentioned that the topic of this
panel is business. Having a conversation with another Panel member about his or her
specific business is fine. But if the conversation steers to what this Panel is doing, such as
what do you think about the strategic plan, that is a different topic.
Ms. Brown said yes, she meant City business.
Panel member Monteko asked if emails to City staff are sunshine-able.
Draft Meeting Minutes
Page 3 of 9
July 20, 2016",Mayor'sEconomicDevelopmentAdvisoryPanel/EconomicRecoveryTaskForce/2016-07-20.pdf
Mayor'sEconomicDevelopmentAdvisoryPanel/EconomicRecoveryTaskForce,EconomicRecoveryTaskForce,4,"Ms. Brown said that this is a good question, and that they haven't covered the Public
Records Act, which is the California version of the federal Freedom of Information Act. Staff
will need to decide about issuing City email addresses to Panel members, which is done for
City Council and some boards and commissions. If we get a request for emails of public
officials, their emails get sent to the public. Staff will discuss this and get back to the
Advisory Panel.
Panel member Laguerre wondered about using blind copy on emails.
Ms. Brown answered that this is tricky because it depends on the content of the email. It is
best to stay away.
Panel member Winters commented that this will force the Panel to keep tighter notes to bring
topics up in a public forum. The Brown Act and the Sunshine Ordinance make a lot of
sense for transparent government and keep people engaged in local democracy. From a
business sense, it is tough to swallow.
Panel member Grunt added if we are meeting only two or three times a year and this is the
only time we can brainstorm, it doesn't seem really productive.
Ms. Butler pointed out that the Panel can meet as often as they want.
Panel member Laguerre asked if it is okay if only three members got together to talk.
Ms. Brown answered yes, but this also is a slippery slope: if one of the three then goes and
talks with another Panel member about the same subject it could be a violation of the Brown
Act.
Panel member Mik suggested talking in subgroups (e.g. Alameda Point) that report back to
the panel in a public forum. That way the Panel can continue as it is used to doing in the
private sector while still complying with the law. Is that fair?
Ms. Brown said other bodies have successfully used ad hoc subcommittees. Still, there are
some precautions, but she can work with the Panel to set something up.
Mr. Grunt brought up socializing events to get to know one another, though there would be
a tendency to discuss Alameda.
Ms. Brown said socializing is fine, but advised that the panel members keep in mind the
purview of this body (see the purpose section in the Rules and Procedures document).
Community Development Director Debbie Potter noted that the Brown Act and the Sunshine
Ordinance applies to this setting (e.g. a public meeting of the Panel). The City intends to use
the Panel in a lot of different ways, such as business visitations, where the Brown Act would
not apply.
Draft Meeting Minutes
Page 4 of 9
July 20, 2016",Mayor'sEconomicDevelopmentAdvisoryPanel/EconomicRecoveryTaskForce/2016-07-20.pdf
Mayor'sEconomicDevelopmentAdvisoryPanel/EconomicRecoveryTaskForce,EconomicRecoveryTaskForce,5,"5-E
Provide Direction for the Preparation of a Citywide Economic Development
Strategic Plan (EDSP) -
Mr. Fonstein made the staff presentation. The staff report and attachment can be found
at:
  https://alameda.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=2781416&GUID=0D44D571-29E3-
4C96-B700-7294F6D6337F&Options=&Search=
Mr. Fonstein introduced Sujata Srivastava and Derek Braun of Strategic Economics to guide
the discussion.
Ms. Srivastava suggested starting with questions about the perception of the community in
the business world and from a resident's perspective.
Panel member Chubb talked about some of the assets at Alameda Point, particularly
space. It's edgy and weird.
Panel member Winters pointed out that this is also one of the biggest challenges for
Alameda Point, because as it gets developed, it runs the risk of this edginess going away.
The land represents a lot of opportunity, but the there is a risk of turning it into a
homogenous every-town. We want to keep populating the island with unique businesses,
which maintains a reason for coming to Alameda.
Panel member Elsesser remarked that from the other end of the City (Harbor Bay
Business Park), for a lot of folks who run businesses in San Francisco, and uniformly over
the years, the biggest reaction to Alameda is, where? Alameda is as close as you can be
to San Francisco, and people have no idea. There is a lack of awareness of where
Alameda is and how to get there. For more traditional businesses, they have found it
remarkable because there is easy access, lots of space, space is cheaper, and there are
great expansion opportunities. Mr. Elsesser said he is not sure if he wants people to
know, because it will mean more competition for space.
Panel member Monteko added on the flip side, there are a lot of success stories of
Alameda being a destination: Trader Joe's, the Antique Fair, and Spirits Alley. There
could be better story telling about the destination factor that already exists. People don't
know what a strong market this is.
Panel member Mik considered that part of the confusion is that the County shares the
name. From a marine perspective, the geography in the middle of the Bay is the best
aspect. The waterfront property is beautiful. It's got great access to the Oakland Airport.
And it's a very short distance by water to almost anywhere. It was a very easy choice for
them to locate their business here. The development of Alameda Point brings a bit of
concern about the gentrification on the waterfront and the loss of working waterfront to
something more attractive to a residential population. Maritime has a long history in
Draft Meeting Minutes
Page 5 of 9
July 20, 2016",Mayor'sEconomicDevelopmentAdvisoryPanel/EconomicRecoveryTaskForce/2016-07-20.pdf
Mayor'sEconomicDevelopmentAdvisoryPanel/EconomicRecoveryTaskForce,EconomicRecoveryTaskForce,6,"Alameda and he hopes that history continues, at least in some parts of the island. The
waterfront is commercially a very valuable product. The Navy gifted us with large hangars
and piers. It's a capital good; no one today would want to build all that infrastructure.
People don't appreciate where we are until they are on the island and look back at San
Francisco.
Panel member Chubb asked where are marine industries going? What are the big
industries in marine that we could attract?
Panel member Mik responded that Alameda has a maritime industry. The constant
challenge is truck access. All of the maritime industries agree that one of the difficulties is
the success of the island. It is crowded and there's a lot of traffic for large scale trucks
getting on and off the island.
Panel member Chubb then asked if a small port in Alameda is needed to support the
industry.
Panel member Mik said possibly, or perhaps a dedicated trucking lane. What is needed,
he said, is a recognition that this is a requirement to keep these industries going.
Panel member Grunt remarked that access is always going to be a problem. He thinks
the future is more about niche maritime industries, that don't necessarily rely on moving
large amounts of things onto or off of the island. The maritime history is really important
to preserve in some manner and to build on economies around that or to enhance existing
economies that are meaningful.
He also pointed out that Alameda probably has the most private marina slips in the Bay
Area. People who own slips come to Alameda from all over the place. The island is one
of the few places you can keep a boat in the Bay Area, and consequently has more of a
draw than it otherwise would.
Panel member Monteko said that there is a lot of underutilized land that can take some of
the commercial load. Rather than competing directly with industry, we should focus on
growing commercial on other locations. In answering the question of what key issues we
would like to see the EDSP address, two come to mind: 1) under-utilized land and 2)
transportation/accessibility to the island is also a serious issue, that will need to be fixed,
access and transportation for workers, mass transit. Retailers are looking at drive time,
and workers are looking for transit. Right now, neither of these are great.
Panel member Elsesser commented that Harbor Bay is this weird location in the Bay Area
that doesn't exist anywhere else. They draw from the furthest extents in every direction.
It is an appealing, reverse commute in most directions. This is one of the very few
locations where one can grow and scale a business. A lot of businesses in his industry
have moved out to Pleasanton, which brings other issues for its employment base. If
in
the Peninsula or Silicon Valley, one cannot attract the hourly workforce like he can.
Draft Meeting Minutes
Page 6 of 9
July 20, 2016",Mayor'sEconomicDevelopmentAdvisoryPanel/EconomicRecoveryTaskForce/2016-07-20.pdf
Mayor'sEconomicDevelopmentAdvisoryPanel/EconomicRecoveryTaskForce,EconomicRecoveryTaskForce,7,"Panel member Grunt agreed. They chose to build their new office on Harbor Bay, after an
initial decision to grow in Pleasanton. They rethought the decision during the recession,
when Alameda become more competitive in price. Harbor Bay makes sense to pull
employees from a lot of directions in the Bay Area. Alameda Point has a lot of potential to
offer the same thing.
Panel member Laguerre commented as a non-islander, the island has a very nice friendly
feel, which can be attractive to some businesses. One does not hear of crime and the
schools are considered good. There is an excellent community college, which has land to
grow. The faculty and staff of Alameda are different from other faculties-in that they care
a lot about Alameda and what happens on Alameda. There is a sense of family, when
looking at Alameda from a distance.
The college draws from the region to a certain extent and draws other people to Alameda.
The recruiters go out of the way to draw people from outside the island. The college has
a workforce development center in partnership with the County Workforce Development
Board. They have training centers that could be attractive to industries, such as
automotive, maritime, and other industries. They work with Bay Ship & Yacht.
Ms. Srivastava asked the Panel, what are the key priorities or pressing concerns that the
EDSP should address?
Panel member Chubb answered that he is interested in living and working in close
proximity. Also, Alameda is a very bikeable community. The City just put in a beautiful
bike path down by the beach.
Panel member Elsesser said that the concept of living in Alameda is pretty magical.
There are very few communities left that have the same current feel (warm, welcoming
small town, quirky beach town feel) that the residential part of Alameda has. As you add
businesses, it is critical to add them in a way that doesn't mess this part up. At the same
time, we want a thriving business environment, and that brings with it the challenges of
getting people on and off the island. An increasing number of employees are living in
Alameda. The economics of living here are still accessible at least for part of its
employment base. He emphasized doing economic development in the right places and
in the right ways, not just for the sake of economic growth. He would like to know why
there are a lot of shuttered retail spaces in the neighborhood stations. There are
opportunities there.
Panel member Grunt commented that Alameda is not on the path to anywhere. You only
come here if something brings you here. It is pretty unique, cut off from the rest of the
world and you know that you are in a different place. It has been incredible to watch
Alameda blossom over the past twenty years. It is like a shrub or tree: cut the dead
branches and it comes back stronger. We need to look for the dead branches and trim
them to allow new things to happen. We can be selective. We have a hugely diverse
community and lot going for ourselves.
Draft Meeting Minutes
Page 7 of 9
July 20, 2016",Mayor'sEconomicDevelopmentAdvisoryPanel/EconomicRecoveryTaskForce/2016-07-20.pdf
Mayor'sEconomicDevelopmentAdvisoryPanel/EconomicRecoveryTaskForce,EconomicRecoveryTaskForce,8,"Panel member Laguerre remarked from an education standpoint, it would be great to have
businesses getting together to discuss their workforce and training needs through the
college. This would provide greater numbers to build programs around. The community
college is here to meet the needs of the community.
Panel member Mik reflected that maybe we're going back in time to where people lived
near where they worked. We do need to address the balance of employment and
residential. The uniqueness of Alameda is its character. It would be a tragedy to lose
that. The EDSP should be a discussion about the types of businesses the City wants that
would also support the ability to live and work here. More of our employees are moving
closer to Alameda. But not everyone is going to live here. We should also talk about a
mass transit or transportation solution. We are going to be talking about the types of
businesses the City wants, where to put them, and the transportation solutions. Those
are the things I would want to see in the EDSP.
Panel member Monteko echoed the need to address the job-housing balance. The South
Shore Shopping Center is a large employer. Many of the people who work there would
like to live on the island but can't. They would love to see more housing near their center.
Also, retail leakage is part of the scope of work. It is a story that can be told. All these
people are leaving the island to shop, when those dollars can be spent here. It would be
really great to understand where people are going instead of Alameda and how to capture
that sales leakage. Underutilized land is an issue in other parts of the City besides
Alameda Point, such as neighborhood and community shopping centers. Permit time for
small businesses is challenging everywhere. Making it as easy as possible will bring
more business to Alameda.
Panel member Winters said that awareness is a big problem. Alameda Point is a great
area of opportunity to create other things that are unique to draw people and get them
talking about Alameda. On the flip side to sales leakage, we want inflow traffic from off of
the island and have people shop and stay here. The idea of putting a small artists'
community at Alameda Point would be great, such as turning the Bachelors Enlisted
Quarters into live/work artists space would create a unique experience. By their natures,
artists will create things that can only be found in Alameda. It will bring life to a dead area
and maintains the fun and weirdness factor. There are grants to help facilitate that.
Panel member Elsesser wanted to highlight this as a brilliant idea. Hunter's Point open
studios would draw thousands of visitors. The cost of doing this would be relatively little in
the scheme of things and the potential benefit would be kind of cool.
5-F
Provide Feedback on the City of Alameda's Approach to Attracting
Development to the Enterprise District at Alameda Point
Jennifer Ott, the City of Alameda's Base Reuse Director, introduced the item. The staff
report and attachments can be found at:
Draft Meeting Minutes
Page 8 of 9
July 20, 2016",Mayor'sEconomicDevelopmentAdvisoryPanel/EconomicRecoveryTaskForce/2016-07-20.pdf
Mayor'sEconomicDevelopmentAdvisoryPanel/EconomicRecoveryTaskForce,EconomicRecoveryTaskForce,9,"  https://alameda.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=2781417&GUID=16211D8D-2D63-
4E9A-8531-6366B3DB8COD&Options=&Search=
Panel member Grunt asked about the ferry terminal.
Ms. Ott said that the new Seaplane Lagoon terminal will be right in the heart of the
development in the Enterprise District. This is the number one issue for developers:
when is the ferry terminal coming? It will operate as a joint consolidated service with the
Main Street Terminal. Most likely, the Seaplane Terminal will be the commute ferry with
Main Street/Oakland supplying mid-day and weekend service. We did look at the
relocating the Main Street Terminal, but it would undermine the Oakland service. The
Oakland line cannot sustain itself and depends on Alameda ridership.
Panel member Mik commented that Main Street is the most popular ferry terminal and is at
capacity. They are selling out their boats. They are really adding capacity with the new
terminal.
Ms. Ott added that ferry ridership has grown 60 percent since 2012, which is unheard of
for public transit.
Panel member Chubb asked about the maker space cluster.
Ms. Ott said that the buildings are being redeveloped by master developers. They will
subdivide them into smaller spaces for specialty manufacturing, artist spaces and some
office. One floor will most likely become work/live, with tight restrictions on the residential
component.
Panel member Monteko asked who pays for the infrastructure in Site B.
Ms. Ott said the developer or end user through a negotiated land deal with the City.
Alameda Point's infrastructure costs are approximately $600 million, or $1 million per acre.
Panel member Elsesser asked about the square footage of entitled space and height
limits.
Ms. Ott answered that there is approximately 5.5 million square feet for all of Alameda
Point, which is a lot of entitlement. We do not want low intensity development; we want
jobs or catalyst benefit. The height limit is 100 feet. It is a very permissive, a big
envelope to create a lot of flexibility. We do not know who the end user(s) will be. We
want to create an opportunistic envelope to take advantage of each businesses' vision.
Ideally, we want a diversified base and not just one end user.
Panel member Monteko asked how is Cushman Wakefield advising on the commercial
market for companies being pushed out of San Francisco and moving to Oakland. On the
one hand, it is someone who wants the flexibility to expand quickly but they want it
yesterday. How are you going to address that?
Draft Meeting Minutes
Page 9 of 9
July 20, 2016",Mayor'sEconomicDevelopmentAdvisoryPanel/EconomicRecoveryTaskForce/2016-07-20.pdf
Mayor'sEconomicDevelopmentAdvisoryPanel/EconomicRecoveryTaskForce,EconomicRecoveryTaskForce,10,"John McManus of Cushman Wakefield, said, historically, companies that have grown up
like Genentech or Facebook start very small, incubate and then expand somewhere else.
In the last cycle, companies like Sun and Cisco moved out and tried to get geographic
diversity, grow as much in the South Bay and then buy another campus in Pleasanton.
We are not seeing that now. Many companies want to stay together in one place, like
Apple. Google X is an exception. We had hoped to see users that wanted that diversity
of locations, but it has not happened that way in this cycle. We believe that there will be
companies wanting to expand. In this awareness phase of the marketing, in addition to
contacting these companies directly, we are going around to brokerage houses in San
Francisco and on the peninsula that represent these companies. Cushman's message in
the weekly and monthly meetings is when you have a large campus requirement that
cannot go into an adaptive, existing building-typically bio-tech that requires building from
the ground up-we have 82 acres, through CEQA, you just need site plan, elevations, and
a design that works. The CEQA process is all done. We could also take incubators,
much like TheraSense in Harbor Bay that became Abbott Diabetes Care. They started at
5,000 square feet and has expanded to nearby buildings. So when the technology hits,
they go.
Panel member Monteko inquired why no one is biting now.
Mr. McManus said that there is no infrastructure; plus the City is picky. You can have a
warehouse distribution center now. Interest from warehouse users in short term, but they
are high traffic and low intensity. There is precedence with VF Outdoor. They moved
from San Leandro and picked up more land as they grew. As we get the infrastructure in
place with 9 to 15 acre projects that make it feasible, we can go down to four acre parcels
and start to look at Semifreddi's and Peet's Coffee that have come out of Emeryville and
Berkeley to Harbor Bay. It is not practical now to leapfrog Site A.
5-G Elect Chair and Vice Chair
Ms. Butler introduced the item.
Panel member Laguerre nominated Mr. Mik as Chair, quickly seconded by Mr. Winters.
The Panel unanimously voted in favor. The meeting was turnover to the newly elected
chair.
Panel member Elsesser nominated Mr. Winters as Vice Chair, seconded by Ms. Monteko.
The Panel unanimously voted in favor.
5-H
Adopt Rules and Procedures
The Chair asked if there was any discussion. There was none.
The Vice Chair moved to adopt the Rules and Procedures; seconded by Dr. Laguerre.
The Panel unanimously voted in favor.
Draft Meeting Minutes
Page 10 of 9
July 20, 2016",Mayor'sEconomicDevelopmentAdvisoryPanel/EconomicRecoveryTaskForce/2016-07-20.pdf
Mayor'sEconomicDevelopmentAdvisoryPanel/EconomicRecoveryTaskForce,EconomicRecoveryTaskForce,11,"5-I
Next Meeting
Mr. Fonstein said that the next meeting is anticipated to be in September to report on the
initial research for the EDSP.
6.
Written Communications: None.
7.
Oral Communications - Panel Members and Staff: None.
8.
Adjournment
Meeting adjourned at 9:07 p.m.
Draft Meeting Minutes
Page 11 of 9
July 20, 2016",Mayor'sEconomicDevelopmentAdvisoryPanel/EconomicRecoveryTaskForce/2016-07-20.pdf
Mayor'sEconomicDevelopmentAdvisoryPanel/EconomicRecoveryTaskForce,EconomicRecoveryTaskForce,1,"APPROVED
MINUTES OF THE MAYOR'S ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY PANEL
REGULAR MEETING OF THURSDAY, DECEMBER 5, 2019
CONFERENCE ROOM 391, CITY HALL
2263 SANTA CLARA AVENUE - 6:00 PM
1. CALL TO ORDER
Chairperson David Mik called the meeting to order at approximately 6:03pm.
1-A. Roll Call
Present: Gia Schneider, Tim Karas, Mike Rose, David Mik, Adam Elsesser, Debi Stebbins, Brock
Grunt, Madlen Saddik (via teleconference), Warren DeSouza.
Absent: Remy Monteko (excused).
Lois Butler (secretary) and Eric Fonstein are present as staff to the Commission.
1-B. Panel Introductions and Introduction of City Manager
Tim Karas - President at College of Alameda, Gia Schneider - President and CEO of Natel Energy,
David Mik - Power Engineering Construction, Adam Elsesser - Chairman and CEO at Penumbra,
Brock Grunt - Operations Manager for McGuire and Hester, Debi Stebbins - Executive Director
of City of Alameda Health Care District, Madlen Saddik - President and CEO of Alameda
Chamber of Commerce, Michael Rose - ""Mad Scientist"" at Semifreddi's Bakery, Warren DeSouza
- CFO at Sila Nanotechnologies, Eric Levitt - City Manager.
1-C. Welcome to New Members and Brief Review of Panel History and Purpose. Key points:
purpose is to improve business climate, and provide strategic policy and tactical advice for
business attraction and retention, ambassadors to potential businesses, network, advise on
policy issues, and to report key issues and support special projects/requests from City Council
for a variety of industries. Meets 1-2x/yr as needed. Members serve a two-year term.
2. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - PUBLIC
None.
3. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
None.
4. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS
4-A. 2019-7520 Discuss and Provide Guidance for a Citywide Economic Development Branding
Campaign
Staff Member Butler presented staff report on developing a Citywide Economic
Development Branding campaign. Key points: logo outdated; need for cohesive overall
branding messages; requesting input on important points for branding RFP to be
submitted to City Council; business parks Marina Village and Harbor Bay both currently
rebranding; purpose of rebranding to update messaging, encourage and retain
businesses, use for tourism, use for Econ Dev communication (mixers, supporting",Mayor'sEconomicDevelopmentAdvisoryPanel/EconomicRecoveryTaskForce/2019-12-05.pdf
Mayor'sEconomicDevelopmentAdvisoryPanel/EconomicRecoveryTaskForce,EconomicRecoveryTaskForce,2,"Minutes of the Mayor's Economic Development Advisory Panel
Regular Meeting
Thursday, December 5, 2019
business districts), request that Panel advise on general city branding vs. economic
development-focused branding.
Speaker Joe Ernst with Harbor Bay Business Park. Key points: history of park; rebranding
process included identifying target market (STEM, hard-tech, S.SFO companies),
location's key amenities, capturing key message (interviewed tenants) ""in an important
place doing important work""; redeveloping logo, aim to produce focused 12-mo
campaign, and correct challenges of park (transportation).
Clarifying questions: focus of campaign - brokers and CEOs (facilitators and decision
makers). Demonstrate key assets - space, modern facilities, and improved
transportation.
Speakers Dan McGill and David Ferrell with Marina Village. Key Points: rebranding to
focus on research, Life-Science and innovation, collaborative ""University feel"";
transportation challenges (identifying and supporting alternatives to tunnel); rebranding
aims are to focus on plentiful space, collaborating w/ other businesses, increasing
container amenities (food/coffee like Bay Meadows), and invest in tenant base
engagement and retention (kayaks, gym, mixers, etc).
Discussion. Key points:
Branding purpose to represent business parks, municipality, tourism, small business
and retail businesses in scope of branding;
RFP Ideas/Suggestions: develop tags/key words for RFP so that RFP proposals can be
properly assessed and to guide branding process, include in branding RFP (duration of
contract, be specific in type of branding consultants/agencies- - general vs. specialized,
clarify scope of RFP (overall city vs. variety of specific segments), specify who target
audience is (branding for business, hospitality, and community all very different);
good branding consultant will evoke key words; specify branding focus (living,
working, hospitality/tourism, etc); identify metrics for quantifying successful branding,
identify channels of distribution (brochures vs. social media), identify target audience,
should branding firm capture both B2B and B2C (Business to Business and Business to
Consumer) message; identifying attraction for existing companies (locational benefit
for existing employees); contemplate intersection of EDSP and branding and express
aesthetic that is modern and exciting, successful branding captures and sells what
differentiates Alameda from other cities, tie-in hospitality (the outlier) to existing
features; branding could weight certain aspects/tags from EDSP that drive other
economic strategic aims (i.e. business activities require adequate hotel amenities,
choice foods, etc); suggest Harbor Bay's concept/logo/themes could be starting point
for City's branding (effective and attractive branding).
Alameda's distinguishing features: hidden gem, ease of permitting process, full
concierge service from city, quality of life, reduced business costs, ample undeveloped
space and parking, variety of transportation options, ability to grow/scale, ability to
make products/things onsite, innovation and applied innovation, oasis in Bay Area,
surrounded by natural resources, beauty of views, educated community, Alameda
could be seen as innovation district, ""where innovation meets tradition"", historic
buildings, restoration/preservation (new-wave innovation versus preservation/reuse).
2",Mayor'sEconomicDevelopmentAdvisoryPanel/EconomicRecoveryTaskForce/2019-12-05.pdf
Mayor'sEconomicDevelopmentAdvisoryPanel/EconomicRecoveryTaskForce,EconomicRecoveryTaskForce,3,"Minutes of the Mayor's Economic Development Advisory Panel
Regular Meeting
Thursday, December 5, 2019
Naval Base feel - authenticity that is attractive, approachability of community, ribbon
cuttings for new businesses, and assistance w/ maintenance issues.
Logo: anchor perceived as logo although not, Logo ideas - variety of icons with shared
theme (i.e. color) allowing for departmental differentiation but shared overall brand.
Staff Member Butler summary: Harbor Bay Business Park rebranding appealing:
inspiration for City's branding process, RFP must have good metrics to measure
successful branding, where innovation meets tradition, ""come to work, stay to live"", can
have foundational/overall (business, residents, visitors = overall branding) idea with
separate ideas branching off (like economic development), and full concierge service.
4-B. 2019-7521 Progress Report on the Implementation of the Economic Development
Strategic Plan (EDSP)
Staff Member Fonstein presented staff report addressing the progress report on items
identified in the 5-10 yr roadmap for business attraction/retention/workforce
development to support Life Sciences, Clean/Green/High Tech, Blue Tech/Marine,
Tourism/Hospitality, Artists/Small Manufacturers, Transportation, Housing, Workforce
Development, City Services/Policy.
Commissioners had no clarifying questions.
Discussion: pedestrian and bicycle bridge between Alameda and Oakland (Jack London)
still in conceptual phase; the City's Vision-Zero pedestrian and bicyclist safety initiative,
the benefits of small business Saturday, City Manager Eric Levitt highlighted unique
challenges of small businesses and restaurants adjusting to the increase in minimum
wage and requested input from EDAP on how to support businesses (to be agendized
for next meeting), Madlen advised EDAP of small business networking event, Cocktails
and Commerce, on April 30, and of Junior Chamber activities where businesses are
invited to participate.
4-C. 2019-7522 Election of Officers
Staff Member Butler asked for nominations for the Chairperson position: Panel Member
Elsesser nominated current Chairperson Mik, seconded by Panel Member Rose. Panel
Member Stebbins moved to close nominations, seconded by Panel Member DeSouza.
Nominations closed. Nomination for additional term accepted by Chairperson Mik.
Motion passed unanimously.
Staff Member Butler asked for nominations for the Vice Chairperson position: Panel
Member Grunt nominated Panel Member Schneider, seconded by Panel Member
Stebbins. Panel Member Stebbins moved that nominations be closed, seconded by
Rose. Panel Member Schneider accepted nomination for Vice Chairperson. Motion
passed unanimously.
5. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS
None.
6. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - PANEL MEMBERS AND STAFF
Staff Member Butler clarified that schedule for the RFP is by June 30, 2020.
3",Mayor'sEconomicDevelopmentAdvisoryPanel/EconomicRecoveryTaskForce/2019-12-05.pdf
Mayor'sEconomicDevelopmentAdvisoryPanel/EconomicRecoveryTaskForce,EconomicRecoveryTaskForce,4,"Minutes of the Mayor's Economic Development Advisory Panel
Regular Meeting
Thursday, December 5, 2019
7. ADJOURNMENT
Chairperson Mik adjourned the meeting at approximately 8:08pm.
Respectfully submitted,
Lois Butler, Economic Development Manager
Secretary
Mayor's Economic Development Advisory Panel
4",Mayor'sEconomicDevelopmentAdvisoryPanel/EconomicRecoveryTaskForce/2019-12-05.pdf
Mayor'sEconomicDevelopmentAdvisoryPanel/EconomicRecoveryTaskForce,EconomicRecoveryTaskForce,1,"MINUTES OF THE MAYOR'S ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY PANEL
SPECIAL MEETING OF THURSDAY, May 14, 2020
VIRTUAL MEETING VIA ZOOM
6:00 PM
1. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL
President David Mik called the meeting to order at approximately 6:03pm.
Roll Call
Attendance: Gia Schneider, Tim Karas, David Mik, Adam Elsesser, Debi Stebbins, Brock Grunt,
Madlen Saddik, Remy Monteko, and Warren DeSouza.
Absent: Mike Rose.
City Staff: Lois Butler (secretary), Eric Fonstein, and Amanda Gehrke.
Honored Guests: Mayor Marilyn Ezzy Ashcraft and City Councilmembers Jim Oddie, Malia Vella,
and John Knox White.
2. MINUTES
2-A. 2020-7939 Review and Approve Mayor's Economic Development Advisory Panel Minutes
from December 5, 2019 A motion to approve the December 5, 2019 minutes was made by Panel
member Stebbins, and seconded by Panel member Schneider. Ayes: President Mik, Vice
President Schneider, Panel Members Karas, Elsesser, Stebbins, Grunt, Saddik, and Monteko
(NOTE: DeSouza vote was not recorded due to muted mic). Nays: none. The motion passed 8-0.
3. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - PUBLIC
None.
4. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
City branding has been put on hold. Discussions were tabled for a future meeting.
5. NEW BUSINESS
5-A. 2020-7940 Provide Direction for Creating a COVID-19 Economic Recovery Task Force; and
Recommendation to the City Manager regarding which Economic Development Advisory Panel
members, and business/business association representatives, should sit on the Task Force
Staff Member Fonstein presented a report on the creation of an Economic Recovery
Task Force. City staff sought input on proposed task force objectives and goals for short-
term, mid-term, and long-term recovery, and recommendations on Task Force
composition including business sectors/key stakeholders, and for EDAP members who
are interested in participating in the Task Force.
Fonstein welcomed comments and answered clarifying questions.
Panel members discussed and provided input on the presented topics. In addition to
supporting the proposed goals, objectives and timeline, Panel Members suggested the
Task Force develop a guide for businesses that offers best practices/protocols which",Mayor'sEconomicDevelopmentAdvisoryPanel/EconomicRecoveryTaskForce/2020-05-14.pdf
Mayor'sEconomicDevelopmentAdvisoryPanel/EconomicRecoveryTaskForce,EconomicRecoveryTaskForce,2,"Minutes of the Mayor's Economic Development Advisory Panel
Special Meeting
Thursday, May 14, 2020
encourage employee safety and reassure customers. Additionally, members
recommended the task force develop or synthesize materials that help businesses pivot
and adapt to the current situation, to serve as a starting point for businesses in their
resiliency plans. Suggested task force nominees included Panel Member Saddik,
Downtown Alameda Business Association Executive Director Kathy Weber, West
Alameda Business Association Executive Director Linda Asbury, Giuseppe Naccarelli of
Trabocco Restaurant, Dhruv Patel of Ridgemont Hospitality, and representatives from
Merlon Geier or Bank of Marin. Panel Members suggested representation from
restaurant/beverage, public health, urban planning, academia, county health,
hospitality, property owners, real estate, non-profit, childcare, business associations,
retail, and finance on the task force. Members recommended the task force be limited
to 8-10 members.
President Mik made a motion to approve a recommendation to develop a task force
composed of 8-10 representatives from identified key sectors (restaurant/beverage,
retail/property owners, public health/academia, city planning, childcare, banking,
hospitality, and Alameda Business Associations), and put forward several names
mentioned above to the City Manager as suggested task force members. Seconded by
Panel Member Grunt. Ayes: President Mik, Vice President Schneider, Panel Members
Karas, Elsesser, Stebbins, Grunt, Saddik, DeSouza, and Monteko. Nays: none. The motion
passed 9-0.
6. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS
None.
7.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - PANEL MEMBERS AND STAFF
Panel Member Saddik informed the panel of the Alameda Strong Community Grant
fund, a collaborative effort between the Downtown Alameda Business Association, the
West Alameda Business Association, The Chamber of Commerce, and the City, with an
aim of fundraising $200,000 plus to provide relief funding to Small Businesses, Sole
Proprietors, and other Alamedans who have been impacted by the COVID-19 crisis.
8. ADJOURNMENT
Panel Member Karas made a motion to adjourn the meeting. Seconded by Panel Member
DeSouza. The meeting was adjourned at approximately 7:09pm.
Respectfully submitted,
Lois Butler, Economic Development Manager
Secretary
Mayor's Economic Development Advisory Panel
2",Mayor'sEconomicDevelopmentAdvisoryPanel/EconomicRecoveryTaskForce/2020-05-14.pdf