body,date,page,text,path
CityCouncil,2005-06-07,1,"MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
TUESDAY- - -JUNE 7, 2005- - -7:30 P. M.
Mayor Johnson convened the Regular Meeting at 7:45 p.m.
Councilmember Matarrese led the Pledge of Allegiance.
ROLL CALL -
Present : Councilmembers Daysog, deHaan, Gilmore,
Matarrese, and Mayor Johnson - 5.
Absent :
None.
AGENDA CHANGES
(05-259) Mayor Johnson announced that she would present the
Proclamation expressing appreciation to Pacific Gas & Electric and
Alameda Power & Telecom [paragraph no. 05-260], the Proclamation
recognizing contributions to the City by our Gay and Lesbian
Citizens [paragraph no.05-261] and the Resolution Commending
Officer Frank Damian [paragraph no. 05-262] prior to the Consent
Calendar.
PROCLAMATIONS, SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY AND ANNOUNCEMENTS
(05-260) Proclamation expressing appreciation to Pacific Gas &
Electric and Alameda Power & Telecom for the prompt response in
relocating a gas line, thereby greatly aiding the City's efforts in
the construction of the new Main Library.
Mayor Johnson read and presented the proclamation to Susan Yee and
Tom Gaurino from Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E) and Dean Batchelor
from Alameda Power & Telecom (AP&T).
Susan Yee thanked the Council for the proclamation; stated PG&E's
priory has always been to be customer focused and provide the best
level of service possible.
Tom Gaurino thanked the Council for the recognition.
Dean Batchelor stated that AP&T appreciates the proclamation and
looks forward to working with departments to ensure the Library
project's success.
05-261) Proclamation recognizing contributions to the City by our
Gay and Lesbian Citizens and encouraging the community to recognize
these contributions particularly during the month of June, Gay
Pride Month.
Mayor Johnson read and presented the proclamation to Debra Arbuckle
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
1
June 7, 2005",CityCouncil/2005-06-07.pdf
CityCouncil,2005-06-07,2,"from Out on the Island and the Alameda Lesbian Potluck Society.
Ms. Arbuckle thanked the Council for the proclamation and for the
recognition of the Gay and Lesbian citizens.
REGULAR AGENDA ITEM
(05-262)
Resolution No. 13846, ""Commending Alameda Police
Department Officer Frank Damian for His Contributions to the City
of Alameda. Adopted.
Mayor Johnson read and presented the Resolution to Officer Frank
Damian.
Officer Damian thanked the Council for the Resolution and stated
that it has been an honor to serve with such a great department.
The resolution was adopted by consensus - 5.
***
Mayor Johnson called a recess at 7:58 p.m. and reconvened the
Regular City Council Meeting at 9:55 p.m.
***
PROCLAMATIONS, SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY AND ANNOUNCEMENTS
(05-263) Update on the new main library project.
The Project Manager provided a brief update.
Councilmember Matarrese thanked the Project Manager for ensuring
that the project is on time and on budget; stated that it would be
nice not to have to draw down on the $2 million fund redevelopment
bond money that has been earmarked for the project.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Mayor Johnson announced that the recommendation to accept the City
of Alameda Long-Term Park Use Policy [paragraph no. 05-267] and the
recommendations regarding Alameda Ferry Services [paragraph no. 05-
270) ] were removed from the Consent Calendar for discussion.
Vice Mayor Gilmore moved approval of the remainder of the Consent
Calendar.
Councilmember Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by
unanimous voice vote - 5.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
2
June 7, 2005",CityCouncil/2005-06-07.pdf
CityCouncil,2005-06-07,3,"[Items so enacted or adopted are noted by an asterisk preceding the
paragraph number. ]
( *05-264) - Minutes of the Special City Council Meeting held on May
12, 2005; and the Special and Regular City Council Meetings held on
May 17, 2005. Approved.
(*05-265) Ratified bills in the amount of $3,017,578.09
(*05-266) Recommendatior to authorize the Acting City Manager to
execute a temporary Agreement with Alameda County for the exclusive
provision of ambulance services by the City of Alameda Fire
Department to the City of Alameda. Accepted.
(05-267) Recommendation to accept the City of Alameda Long-Term
Park Use Policy.
Loretta Ferraro, Alameda, requested that there be a provision in
the Alameda Municipal Code (AMC) which would allow the Gold Coast
Coffee Mobile Expresso owner (proposed vendor) to use a parking
space at the Lower Washington Park area and operate his truck in
Alameda.
Michael Ferraro, Alameda, urged acceptance of the staff
recommendation; stated that there is no ordinance permitting mobile
vendors to operate within the City; provided a handout regarding a
Recreation and Parks Department public hearing on June 9, 2005.
Councilmember Daysog stated that the Council has been in contact
with the proposed vendor and staff has been requested to look into
the operational issues.
Susan Potter, Alameda, stated that other trucks are doing business
in Alameda without licenses which causes revenues leave the City.
Councilmember Daysog stated that the ordinance allows ice cream
trucks to roam through the City; the proposed vendor's request is
for parking; inquired whether the Recreation and Park Commission
would address the matter.
The Acting City Manager stated that there is an ordinance that
addresses mobile vendors; the proposed vendor's request is working
its way through the system.
The Assistant City Manager stated that there is a section in the
AMC that prohibits rolling stores from using City streets, with the
exception of selling fruit, vegetables, packed or labeled ice
cream, peanuts or popcorn; the proposed vendor would like to park
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
3
June 7, 2005",CityCouncil/2005-06-07.pdf
CityCouncil,2005-06-07,4,"in the parking lot near the Dog Park and then move from park to
park; there is a Use Permit provision in the Open Space section of
the Zoning Code that allows commercial concessionaires the
proposed vendor would need to get permission from the Recreation
and Park Commission first in order to get a Use Permit from the
Planning Commission to vend from a City park.
Mayor Johnson suggested having a workshop involving the business
community and Recreation and Park Commission; stated that there is
a significant difference in using a park versus a City street; the
possibility of 10 trucks selling coffee in one place needs to be
considered.
Councilmember deHaan stated there was a mobile canteen at Alameda
Point; it is important to review the whole picture.
Mayor Johnson stated that she was not clear on the recommended
policy.
Councilmember Matarrese stated that he does not believe the draft
policy is ready for adoption; the policy does not establish or
define standards for non-City use, long-term use, construction or
renovation, or private uses; concessionaire needs to be defined;
stated that he would oppose any private use that is 25% of the
total park acreage available; the park application and review
process is a procedure and not a policy procedures and policies
need to be kept separate; suggested that the policy be sent back to
the Recreation and Park Commission.
Mayor Johnson concurred with Councilmember Matarrese; noted that
the statement regarding the Recreation and Park Department's
authority to deny non-City uses is unclear; Recreation and Park
Commission decisions need to be able to be appealed to the City
Council stated that it was not the Council's intent to have the
Recreation and Parks Department have the sole determination to deny
non-City uses; the language needs to be changed; the Council did
not request a policy that limited any appeal rights or delegation
of Council authority.
Vice Mayor Gilmore stated that it appears that the policy was
combined with the process and did not follow through on either one
completely.
Councilmember deHaan stated there is a need for a policy.
Vice Mayor Gilmore moved that the matter be sent back to the
Recreation and Park Commission.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
4
June 7, 2005",CityCouncil/2005-06-07.pdf
CityCouncil,2005-06-07,5,"Councilmember Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by
unanimous voice vote - 5.
Mayor Johnson inquired whether Council was clear on direction
regarding the Recreation and Park Commissions review the coffee
vendor issue, to which the Acting City Manager responded the
Recreation and Park Commission is currently reviewing the matter.
Councilmember deHaan stated it appears that the matter is farther
reaching than just the Recreation and Park Commission and could
spill over into other activities.
Councilmember Daysog stated there is no need to change the
ordinance if the proposed vendor does not want to have a rolling
store; the proposed vendor's sole intent to park his truck would be
a separate issue.
Mayor Johnson stated the matter would come back to the Council if
necessary.
Councilmember Matarrese stated that the Council's intent was to
have a policy in place before another request for use of parks was
received which might cause some difficulty with the neighbors or
the use of the park; stated that he wants the matter to come back
to the Council regardless of what the Recreation and Parks
Commission determines.
(*05-268) Recommendation to approve First Amendment to Agreement
with Consolidated Construction Management extending the term, scope
of work and price for the New Main Library Project. Accepted.
( *05-269) - Recommendation to set June 21, 2005 as the hearing date
for Delinquent Integrated Waste Management Charges. Accepted.
(05-270) Recommendations regarding Alameda Ferry Services :
(05-270A) Resolution No. 13847, ""Applying for Five Percent
Unrestricted State Funds and Two Percent Bridge Toll Revenue Funds
for Operating Subsidy and Capital Projects for the City of Alameda
Ferry Services, and Authorizing the Acting City Manager to Enter
into All Agreements Necessary to Secure These Funds. Adopted;
(05-270B) Recommendation to authorize the Acting City Manager to
execute extension of the Ferry Service Agreement with the Port of
Oakland; and
(05-270C) - Recommendation to authorize the Acting City Manager to
execute extension of the Blue and Gold Fleet Operating Agreements
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
5
June 7, 2005",CityCouncil/2005-06-07.pdf
CityCouncil,2005-06-07,6,"for the Alameda/Oakland Ferry Services (AOFS) and adopt associated
budget.
Councilmember Matarrese stated that there was a public hearing
regarding the Harbor Bay ferry which addressed increasing ridership
and marketing services the public should know that the City is
trying to get as much grant money as possible to keep the ferries
operating the ferries need to be in front of the public's eye;
encouraged people to take the ferries.
Councilmember deHaan stated the Water Transit Authority (WTA)
joined forces with the City in moving forward with publicity; noted
the Port of Oakland's $140,000 contribution is now reduced to
$83,000; there is talk about the Port not contributing at all;
noted there would be a major glitch if the contribution amount was
not maintained at the current amount or higher.
The Acting City Manager stated the contribution was going to be a
budget cut for the Port of Oakland; the Port was persuaded to make
a contribution of $83,325 for the next fiscal year; getting the WTA
to take over in the future would solve the problem with the Port of
Oakland funding the ferries.
Councilmember DeHaan stated that it appears that the WTA is going
forward to establish runs in various directions inquired whether
it was the Council's desire to join forces with the WTA at some
point.
The Acting City Manager responded that joining forces with the WTA
would be a Council decision; the WTA's first goal is to establish
new ferry services; the WTA is starting to look at the Harbor Bay
Ferry Service for merchandising and providing some other services
to the City.
Councilmember deHaan inquired whether the WTA would have
jurisdiction over funds.
Mayor Johnson responded that the WTA is a transit agency and would
have access to funding that the City does not have.
The Acting City Manager stated that the WTA has access to Regional
Measure 2 Funds which are difficult for the City to access except
through the WTA; the City is currently using Regional Measure 1
Funds through the Metropolitan Transportation Commission.
Councilmember deHaan moved adoption of the Resolution and
acceptance of the staff recommendations.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
6
June 7, 2005",CityCouncil/2005-06-07.pdf
CityCouncil,2005-06-07,7,"Under discussion, Councilmember Daysog stated that the Council
needs to be careful with the WTA taking over the Harbor Bay ferry
or any of the ferries; the Blue and Gold ferry, and to some extent
the Harbor Bay ferry, are locally controlled; the WTA might decide
to have the ferry leave from somewhere else.
Mayor Johnson stated the level of service and location can be
negotiated.
On the call for the question, Councilmember Matarrese seconded the
motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.
( *05-271) Resolution No. 13848, ""Approving the Paratransit Service
Plan and Applying for Measure B Paratransit Funding. Adopted.
(*05-272) Resolution No. 13849, ""Authorizing Open Market Purchase
from Cogent Systems, Inc. Pursuant to Section 3-15 of the Alameda
City Charter, of Cogent Automated Palm/Fingerprint Identification
System Upgrade in the Amount of $37,815. "" Adopted.
(*05-273) Resolution No. 13850, ""Adopting an Agreement for
Participation in Alameda County Operational Area Emergency
Management Organization. Adopted.
(*05-274) Resolution No. 13851, ""Designating All Alameda Fire
Stations as Receiving Points for Surrendered Babies Under the
California State Health and Safety Code Section 1255.7 known as
the Safely Surrendered Baby Law. "" Adopted.
( *05-275) Resolution No. 13852, ""Requesting and Authorizing the
County of Alameda to Levy a Tax on All Real and Personal Property
in the City of Alameda as a Voter Approved Levy for the General
Obligation Bonds Issued Pursuant to a General Election Held
November 7, 2000. "" Adopted.
REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS
(05 5-276 - ) Ordinance No. 2941, ""Amending the Alameda Municipal Code
to Increase the Composition of the Recreation and Park Commission
from Five to Seven Members by Amending Subsections 2-7.2
(Membership; Appointment; Removal), 2-7.3 (Qualification; Voting)
of Section 2-7 (City Recreation and Park Commission) . "" Finally
passed.
Councilmember Matarrese moved final passage of the Ordinance.
Councilmember deHaan seconded the motion, which carried by
unanimous voice vote - 5.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
7
June 7, 2005",CityCouncil/2005-06-07.pdf
CityCouncil,2005-06-07,8,"(05-277) Public Hearing to consider an Appeal of the Historical
Advisory Board's approval of a Landscaping Plan for planting two
Coast Live Oak trees on the vacant property at 301 Spruce Street.
The submittal of a Landscaping Plan, as part of new development
proposals, was required by the Historical Advisory Board as a
condition for the removal of one Coast Live Oak tree in 2001 and
adoption of related resolution. The site is located at 301 Spruce
Street within the R-4 Neighborhood Residential Zoning District.
Applicant: Bill Wong for Hai Ky Lam. Appellant Patrick Lynch and
Jeanne Nader. Continued to June 21, 2005.
05-278 ) Resolution No 13853, ""Confirming the Business Improvement
Area Report for FY 2005-2006 and Levying an Annual Assessment on
the Alameda Business Improvement Area of the City of Alameda for FY
2005-2006. Adopted.
Councilmember deHaan moved adoption of the Resolution.
Vice Mayor Gilmore seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous
voice vote - 5.
( 05 -279 - ) Recommendation to accept the Donor Recognition and Names
Gifts Policy for the Library.
The Library Director gave a brief presentation.
Mayor Johnson inquired whether the $30,000 contribution for the
mural was reflective of the cost.
The Library Director responded in the affirmative; stated that four
or five works of art have been selected for the new Main Library ;
there is funding for only one.
Councilmember deHaan inquired whether the proposed policy has been
patterned after other libraries, to which the Library Director
responded in the affirmative.
Councilmember deHaan commended the Library Director's ingenuity
inquired whether plaques would be placed in appropriate spots
reflecting the donation.
The Library Director responded there would be a donor wall;
individuals who donate $5,000 over their lifetime would be
recognized on the donor wall; rooms and pieces of furniture would
also be recognized; areas of the library will be built without
donations; donations can specifically name and honor the donor in a
particular area of the Library.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
8
June 7, 2005",CityCouncil/2005-06-07.pdf
CityCouncil,2005-06-07,9,"Mayor Johnson inquired who would decide on the wording and size of
the plaques.
The Library Director responded that there would be different sizes
for different donation levels; the donor and the Foundation will
work together to finalize wording and ensure appropriateness.
Mayor Johnson stated the size and approved wording should be
established; inquired whether there would be a provision to not
accept a donation.
The Library Director stated that the final bullet in Exhibit A of
the staff report states that final approval rests with the City
Council; inquired whether the Council would like to review the
policy again.
Mayor Johnson responded that the Council would like to review the
policy when the finer details are in place.
The Library Director stated that the named gift list is not final.
Councilmember Daysog stated that the Council might want to move
slower and get more public input.
The Library Director stated that there has been a public process.
Councilmember Daysog stated the Library is public space and almost
becomes a quazi-privatized space with all the donation recognition
markings it is important to have balance.
Councilmember Matarrese stated the criteria regarding the ability
to refuse a contribution, prohibiting corporate logos, and
appropriate recognition should be spelled out.
Mayor Johnson stated criteria for appropriate wording should also
be included.
The Library Director stated some suggested wording could be ""Gift
from"" or ""In honor of. ""
Mayor Johnson inquired whether a wall of recognition was considered
instead of plaques on objects throughout the Library.
The Library Director responded the wall recognition was also
intended.
Mayor Johnson inquired whether it was necessary to have both the
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
9
June 7, 2005",CityCouncil/2005-06-07.pdf
CityCouncil,2005-06-07,10,"wall recognition and the plaques, to which the Library Director
responded that having both is usual.
Councilmember deHaan stated the Council is concerned with
positioning too many plaques through various areas of the Library;
inquired whether the donor plaque recognition would be replicated
on the wall.
The Library Director responded that any donor who gives $5,000 or
more would be recognized on the donor wall; noted the Library
Foundation has begun to schedule meetings with donors.
Mayor Johnson stated she likes the idea of the large item and area
recognition; inquired whether fund raising efforts would be
impacted.
The Library Director responded that having recognition for large
items and areas might be an incentive.
Councilmember Daysog stated that the Council should get
clarification on the legal issues of refusing a contribution.
The City Attorney stated that any reasonable rules could be
imposed; the City cannot say no for the wrong reasons. parameters
can be drafted.
Councilmember Matarrese stated that he agrees with the concept and
framework of the policy; inquired when the policy defining the
criteria to refuse a contribution and appropriate recognition would
come back to Council, to which the Library Director responded that
she would hope the policy could come back at a City Council meeting
in July.
Councilmember DeHaan stated how the plaque would read is important.
Mayor Johnson stated she would like to have a recognition wall only
as long as there would be no fundraising impact; suggested looking
into what other libraries and public buildings have done.
The Library Director stated it was not unusual to place names on
shelves.
(05-280) Recommendation to accept the Webster District Strategic
Plan Report.
Councilmember deHaan stated that having a grocery store as a key
anchor was not possible; inquired whether parking is being
proposed.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
10
June 7, 2005",CityCouncil/2005-06-07.pdf
CityCouncil,2005-06-07,11,"The Business Development Division Manager responded she is talking
to an owner.
Councilmember deHaan stated parking accommodations are all
important for any business and retail area.
Councilmember Daysog encouraged doing an analysis on the demand for
parking spaces.
The Business Development Division Manager stated that the report
addresses the need to review parking in the entire area; when new
businesses try to existing buildings to a new use, meeting the
parking requirements is difficult; there is a need to look at
a
parking policy for the area which would met the parking demand.
Councilmember Daysog stated that quantifying is important; there
are pros and cons; some neighbors might not want parking structures
while businesses would.
Councilmember deHaan stated the Council gave direction to purchase
an existing parking area that was previously rented.
Sherri Stieg, West Alameda Business Association (WABA) , expressed
her appreciation for the support that WABA has received from the
Council and City staff; stated WABA supports the goals of the
Strategic Plan and urges implementation as soon as possible; WABA
does not want the Plan to close off viewpoints for other
opportunities; the funding for Goal #5 [Small Business Assistant
Program] has been eliminated because of reduced funding; there is
continued funding for the Façade Grant Program and some funding for
a recruiter; noted the analysis of opportunity sites was limited to
vacant land on Webster Street; there are other opportunities WABA
will address the need for long- and short-term parking solutions;
stated she receives daily calls regarding parking issues; parking
will bring in additional business.
Councilmember deHaan moved approval of the staff recommendation
Vice Mayor Gilmore seconded the motion, which passed by unanimous
voice vote - 5.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA
(05-281) The following speakers spoke in opposition to the
proposed theatre multiplex and parking structure: Deborah
Overgfield, Alameda Jay Levine, Alameda; Robert Gavrich, Alameda;
Richland Tester, Alameda; Jennifer Van Airsdale, Alameda (submitted
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
11
June 7, 2005",CityCouncil/2005-06-07.pdf
CityCouncil,2005-06-07,12,"Council.
(05-284) Richard Neveln, Alameda, stated that public transit is
still a problem in Alameda; parking is allowed at bus stops;
temporary bus stops should be fixed to allow accessibility.
(05-285) Michael Ferraro, Alameda, stated that the proposed coffee
vendor [who would like to park near City parks] is seeking a
working permit for the whole City; he is not proposing to do
business within the Park Street or Webster Street areas; stated Mr.
Siden, East Bay Regional Park District, suggested seeing if there
was a way the proposed vendor could have access to the park for his
business.
(05-286) Sherri Stieg, WABA, stated that the Grand Opening of the
Webster Street Farmers Market would be Thursday from 4:00 p.m. to
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
12
June 7, 2005",CityCouncil/2005-06-07.pdf
CityCouncil,2005-06-07,13,"8:00 p.m. i Friday night will be the first of the Concerts at the
Cove; the third Thursdays of the month will offer a variety of
festivities; encouraged everyone to attend.
(05-287) Robb Ratto, Park Street Business Association, stated
there is a misconception that the Park Street streetscape is being
done to eliminate parking in order to create a need for the parking
structure; two parking spaces have been lost on Santa Clara Avenue
because of the new bus plaza and one parking space has been lost in
front of Bonniere Bakery on Park Street; stated he spoke in favor
of the original Exclusive Negotiating Agreement for the theatre
four years ago; a Request for Proposal was sent out and no one ever
came forward with any plans.
Vice Mayor Gilmore moved approval of addressing the Council
Communications items past midnight.
Councilmember Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by
unanimous voice vote - 5.
COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS
(05-288) Discussion regarding City of Alameda Management Practice
#37 : Staff-Council Communication Policy.
Mayor Johnson stated that an informational library is being
compiled which would allow Council to have access to information at
one location at City Hall; she feels that Alameda Management
Practice #37 is more restrictive than what the Charter provides
the Practice should be reviewed and either revoked or replaced.
Councilmember Matarrese concurred with Mayor Johnson.
Councilmember Daysog stated that issues that led to past
discussions on the matter should be discussed when brought back to
Council.
Vice Mayor Gilmore stated that everyone seems to agree to place the
matter on the agenda.
(05-289) - Consideration of Mayor's nomination for appointment to
the Public Utilities Board.
Mayor Johnson nominated Peter W. Holmes and John R. McCahan.
(05-290) Councilmember Matarrese requested an update on the
Bridgeside Center; stated there were previous discussions regarding
the Video Station's ability to either occupy a space at the Center
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
13
June 7, 2005",CityCouncil/2005-06-07.pdf
CityCouncil,2005-06-07,14,"and the possibility having a Blockbuster; requested an update on
when construction would start and the leasing mix.
(05-291) Councilmember deHaan requested staff to review how
existing transit operations, such as paratransit and Kid's Coach
services, could provide inter-Alameda transportation intertwining
with Alameda Point.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the
meeting at 12:04 p.m.
Respectfully Submitted,
Lara Weisiger
City Clerk
The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown
Act.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
14
June 7, 2005",CityCouncil/2005-06-07.pdf
CityCouncil,2005-06-07,15,"MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING
TUESDAY- - -JUNE 7, 2005- - -5:30 P. M.
Mayor Johnson convened the Special Meeting at 6:30 p.m.
Roll Call - Present : Councilmembers Daysog, deHaan, Gilmore,
Matarrese, and Mayor Johnson - 5.
Absent :
None.
The Special Meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider :
(05-254) Public Employee Performance Evaluation; Title: City
Manager.
( (05-255) Conference with Legal Counsel - Existing Litigation; Name
of case : McGee V. City of Alameda.
(05-256) Conference with Labor Negotiators Agency Negotiators:
Human Resources Director and Craig Jory Employee Organizations :
International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers ( IBEW) and
Management and Confidential Employees Association (MCEA)
.
Following the Closed Session, the Special Meeting was reconvened
and Mayor Johnson announced that regarding Public Employee
Performance Evaluation, the Council discussed the performance of
the Acting City Manager; regarding Conference with Legal Counsel -
Existing Litigation, the Council obtained briefing from Legal
Counsel: and regarding Conference with Labor Negotiators, the
Council obtained briefing from the Human Resources Director.
Adjournment
There being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the
Special Meeting at 7:30 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Lara Weisiger
City Clerk
The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown
Act.
Special Meeting
Alameda City Council
June 7, 2005",CityCouncil/2005-06-07.pdf
CityCouncil,2005-06-07,16,"MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL JOINT CITY COUNCIL,
COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION, AND ALAMEDA
REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING
TUESDAY- - -JUNE 7, 2005- -7:25 P.M.
Mayor/Chair Johnson convened the meeting at 7:59 p.m.
ROLL CALL -
Present
:
Councilmembers/Commissioners/Board Members
Daysog, deHaan Gilmore, Matarrese, and
Mayor/Chair Johnson - 5.
Absent :
None
MINUTES
(05-257CC/05-029CIC) Minutes of the Special Joint City Council,
Community Improvement Commission, and Alameda Reuse and
Redevelopment Authority Meeting of May 17, 2005. Approved.
 ouncilmember/Commissioner/Board Member deHaan moved approval of
minutes with the amendment that the minutes state: ""Recommendation
to receive and file revised Alameda West Strategic Retail
Implementation recommendations.
Councilmember/Commissioner/Board Member Matarrese seconded the
motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.
AGENDA ITEMS
ARRA Resolution No. 36 , ""Approving and Adopting the Operating
Budget and Appropriating Certain Moneys for the Expenditures
Provided in Fiscal Year 2005-06. "" Adopted
(05-030CIC) Resolution No. 05-137, ""Approving and Adopting the
Operating Budget and Appropriating Certain Moneys for
the
Expenditures Provided in Fiscal Year 2005-06. "" Adopted; and
(05-258CC) Resolution No. 13845, ""Approving and Adopting the
Operating Budget and Appropriating Certain Moneys for the
Expenditures Provided in Fiscal Year 2005-06. Adopted.
The Acting City Manager/Executive Director stated that this is the
first time that the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
(ARRA) Community Improvement Commission (CIC) and City Council
budgets have been presented at one time noted it is important to
receive the budgets together because there is a considerable amount
of interaction between the three agencies; a long-term financial
plan for ARRA is provided and a ten-year financial plan for the
City would be provided in the near future; additional CIC
Special Joint Meeting
Alameda City Council, Community
1
Improvement Commission, and Alameda
Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
June 7, 2005",CityCouncil/2005-06-07.pdf
CityCouncil,2005-06-07,17,"information would lay the ground work for the next fiscal year
budget the balanced budget has no new or increased taxes; there is
a significant deficit in the infrastructure maintenance; the City
needs to spend considerably more than what is included in the
budgets to maintain the City streets, sidewalks, and trees; a
proposal on how to approach the backlog will be presented to
Council during the next six months; stated that service delivery
impact presentations will be presented to the Council by the
departments with the most significant impacts.
The Finance Director gave a brief presentation on the changes in
revenues for the next fiscal year.
The Fire Chief gave a brief presentation on the Fire Department's
budget reduction impacts.
The Police Captain of Bureau of Operations gave a brief
presentation on the Police Department's budget reduction impacts.
Vice Mayor Gilmore stated the Police Department is being asked to
do more with less resources crime statistics and how the Police
Department handles duties matter to the citizens in Alameda; that
she received an e-mail recently stating how well the Police
Department fights crime and that overall crime statistics have gone
down; requested statistics be shared with the public.
The Police Captain of Bureau of Operations outlined the following
statistics for 2004: Part 1 crimes for more serious crimes
decreased by 16.5%; Part 2 crimes for misdemeanors decreased by
4.6%; arrests were up 3.5%.
Mayor Johnson inquired whether 2005 statistics were available, to
which the Police Captain of Bureau of Operations responded that
Part 1 and 2 crimes are down, but that he does not have the exact
numbers; arrests are on par with last year.
Councilmember Daysog stated that he appreciates the hard work of
the Police Department and the pro active approach; Alameda has an
earned reputation to be a place where people who have served time
do not want to come; reaching appropriate staffing levels is a
challenge; his suggestion [to increase the number of police
officers] addressed 18 months ago should be revisited.
Counci lember Matarrese stated that he leaves the ability to keep
crime levels down to experts; Council should be advised when
staffing levels dip below 99 officers; stated the City has 5,000
Special Joint Meeting
Alameda City Council, Community
2
Improvement Commission, and Alameda
Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
June 7, 2005",CityCouncil/2005-06-07.pdf
CityCouncil,2005-06-07,18,"marine slips for property tax paying boats; inquired whether the
Council wants to make a policy decision not to have patrol boat
services; inquired what the cost would be to restore the police
patrol boat to last summer's level.
The Police Captain of Bureau of Operations responded the Harbor
Patrol Program has never been full time; the Program takes two or
three officers out of patrol on weekends, which requires overtime
backfilling.
Councilmember Matarrese requested figures on what it would cost to
restore the patrol operation to last summer's level.
Mayor Johnson stated that the Oakland Police Chief was advocating
for boat funding from Homeland Security; inquired whether the City
could join the Coast Guard, City of Oakland, and Sheriff's
department, to provide patrol services on the Estuary
The Police Captain of Bureau of Operations responded that the
Sheriff's Department has been a wonderful resource for harbor
assistance.
Mayor Johnson inquired whether the Sheriff's Department has estuary
patrol, to which the Police Captain of Bureau of Operations
responded in the affirmative.
Mayor Johnson inquired whether the Sheriff's Department performs
enforcement patrols, to which the Police Captain of Bureau of
Operations responded in the affirmative; stated that the Coast
Guard's priorities are different from municipalities and counties;
stated that he will research the Harbor Patrol Program costs.
Mayor Johnson inquired whether the City of Oakland utilized their
boat, to which the Police Captain of Bureau of Operations responded
that the City of Oakland was not spending much time on the boat due
to the shortage of patrol cars on the streets; the situation might
have changed; he would look into the matter and report back to
Council.
Vice Mayor Gilmore stated that the figures for revitalizing the
estuary patrol should also include the boat repair costs.
The Police Captain of Bureau of Operations stated that the boat is
a very expensive piece of equipment; one of the problems with the
boat program is that officers' skills diminish due to the limited
time spent on the boat; lack of expertise and training also add to
Special Joint Meeting
Alameda City Council, Community
3
Improvement Commission, and Alameda
Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
June 7, 2005",CityCouncil/2005-06-07.pdf
CityCouncil,2005-06-07,19,"the expense of the boat operation.
The City Attorney gave a brief presentation on the City Attorney' S
office budget reduction impacts.
Mayor Johnson requested further explanation on the impacts of the
City Attorney's office reductions.
The City Attorney stated that the duties of two full-time positions
that are being cut would be absorbed within the existing staff and
would result in some delays in quantity and timeliness of the
workload.
Mayor Johnson inquired whether the reduction would cause delays in
reviewing contracts, to which the City Attorney responded that the
current contract review time is two days; contract review will
continue to be treated as a priority.
Mayor Johnson inquired whether two days is an average time for
contract review, to which the City Attorney responded the two-day
turnaround time was the average time for contract review during the
last five months.
Mayor Johnson inquired what service impacts the City departments
could expect; stated that a Charter change might be necessary if
there was a delay in the City Attorney's office approving a
contract.
The City Attorney responded that the existing workload would be
spread among existing staff; phones may need to be placed on voice
mail at lunch time there may be a delay in document production and
routine tasks; stated the City Attorney's office is trying to work
smarter the workload that is handled by the Administration
Management Analyst would need to be spread among the remaining
staff; there would be a need to have Department Heads do more in
terms of contract preparation and review.
Mayor Johnson inquired whether there was a way to advise the
Department Heads which contracts need to be approved by the City
Attorney's office and which do not.
The City Attorney stated that she has tried to triage the contracts
by preparing a training program and getting forms and options on
line to enable the departments to do more of the routine tasks; the
level of the budget cut requires that things be done differently.
Special Joint Meeting
Alameda City Council, Community
4
Improvement Commission, and Alameda
Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
June 7, 2005",CityCouncil/2005-06-07.pdf
CityCouncil,2005-06-07,20,"Mayor Johnson inquired whether there would be a separate
presentation for Risk Management, to which the Acting City Manager
responded that Risk Management has been included in the City
Attorney's presentation.
Mayor Johnson stated that she would address the litigation
contingency account issue later.
Councilmember Daysog stated that service to the departments is an
important issue; every Councilmember is in agreement with
streamlining efforts; the Council appreciates the service that the
City Attorney's office has rendered to the public on issues such as
the Casino and the Oakland Airport; an 18% cut is a huge hit;
stated that the value of the City Attorney's service to the
citizens could not be overstated.
The Acting Recreation and Parks Director gave a brief presentation
on the impacts of the budget reduction.
Mayor Johnson inquired what the cost would be to implement the Park
Master Plan.
The Acting Recreation and Parks Director responded estimates are
between $75,000 and $125,000, depending upon the number of public
meetings, the review process, and the number of times the matter is
brought back to various entities.
Mayor Johnson inquired whether maintenance would be included in the
Park Master Plan, to which the Acting Recreation and Parks Director
responded the Park Master Plan would be an overall park plan
covering almost every detail of the park system.
Vice Mayor Gilmore inquired how many grants are successfully
applied for each year, to which the Acting Recreation and Parks
Director responded that the City received approximately $860,000 in
grants from the last two State bonds [Propositions 12 and 40]; the
three grants pending are Estuary Park, Paden School Trail, and
Alameda Point Gym.
Vice Mayor Gilmore inquired whether there has been a full-time
grant writer in the past, to which the Acting Recreation and Parks
Director responded in the negative; grant writing has been divided
among the administrative staff.
Vice Mayor Gilmore stated that a grant writing position might be
worth reviewing.
Special Joint Meeting
Alameda City Council, Community
5
Improvement Commission, and Alameda
Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
June 7, 2005",CityCouncil/2005-06-07.pdf
CityCouncil,2005-06-07,21,"Mayor Johnson inquired whether a grant writing position could be
utilized by all departments.
The Acting City Manager responded there has been consideration to
have an experienced grant writing volunteer; stated grant
application opportunities will not be missed.
Councilmember Daysog stated there are consulting companies that
provide grant search and administration services and only charge a
portion of the grant amount.
Mayor Johnson stated that a professional grant writer might be more
aware of grant opportunities the possibility of contracting out
Citywide grant writing services should be reviewed.
Councilmember deHaan inquired whether $75,000 to $125,000 for the
Park Master Plan consulting services is included in the budget, to
which the Acting Recreation and Park Director responded in the
negative.
Councilmember deHaan inquired whether anything has been done on the
Park Master Plan, to which the Acting Recreation and Park Director
responded the initial research has been performed; a Citywide needs
assessment was performed a few summers ago.
The Human Resources Director gave a brief presentation on the Human
Resources Department's budget reduction impacts.
The Building Official gave a brief presentation on the Planning and
Building Department's budget reduction impacts.
Mayor Johnson stated that there are part-time planners at Alameda
Point and City Hall: inquired whether having all planners at one
location would be more efficient.
The Building Official responded there is one Planner working two
days a week at Alameda Point and the rest of the week at City Hall;
the schedule has worked out well; the Planner will need to spend
more time at City Hall because of the Planning Services Manager
cut.
Vice Mayor Gilmore inquired whether the Planning Department's cost
recovery is still at 90%, to which the Building Official responded
cost recovery is at 100%.
Special Joint Meeting
Alameda City Council, Community
6
Improvement Commission, and Alameda
Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
June 7, 2005",CityCouncil/2005-06-07.pdf
CityCouncil,2005-06-07,22,"Vice Mayor Gilmore stated that cutting a position that generates
revenue may need to be re-thought the City needs to be business
friendly.
Councilmember deHaan inquired whether the City uses contract
assistance when there are surges in the workload and whether the
costs would be covered by the fees, to which the Building Official
responded in the affirmative.
louncilmember Matarrese inquired whether the cut of the Planning
Services Manager would slow down the permit and plan review
process, to which the Building Official responded that there would
be a slow down in plan review with a ripple effect on advanced
planning projects.
Councilmember Matarrese stated the cut is not large enough to
justify the slow down; the costs incurred due to the cut would be
far greater than the savings.
Mayor Johnson inquired about the possibility of utilizing outside
consultants.
The Acting City Manager responded that surges and decreases in
activity make it difficult to maintain even staffing levels;
outside consultants are used to staff up for surges and are paid
for by the applicant.
Mayor Johnson stated that staffing should not be leveled to meet
the peak demand.
The Acting City Manager stated that the new Planning and Building
Director could determine the right amount of staffing to handle the
workload.
Councilmember Matarrese stated that he is concerned with the
intermediate and smaller projects whose proponents and owners do
not have the ability to absorb the delay; doing work without
permits might be encouraged and cause a deterioration of the
housing stock across the City; the City should be mindful in trying
to save a small amount of money and paying a large price in the
future.
Councilmember deHaan inquired what the status was for establishing
a one-stop permit center and whether it was within the budget.
The Building Official responded that staff is working with the
Special Joint Meeting
Alameda City Council, Community
7
Improvement Commission, and Alameda
Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
June 7, 2005",CityCouncil/2005-06-07.pdf
CityCouncil,2005-06-07,23,"Acting City Manager to determine where an appropriate one-stop
permit center could be; funding has been set aside.
Councilmember deHaan inquired whether there is an improvement in
the vver-the-counter permit processing.
The Building Official responded in the affirmative; stated front
line staff upgrades have freed up Planners' time.
Councilmember deHaan inquired whether goals could be met with
streamlined staffing, to which the Building Official responded in
the affirmative.
The Development Services Director gave a Power Point presentation
on the Development Services Department, CIC and ARRA budget.
Mayor/Chair Johnson inquired whether there would be a Metropolitan
Transportation Commission (MTC) grant available for the Phase 2 of
the Park and Webster Streets Streetscape Projects next year, to
which the Development Services Director responded that MTC believes
the City would be a better candidate once the project has been
completed.
Mayor/Chair Johnson inquired whether the City would apply for grant
funding next year, to which the Development Services Director
responded in the affirmative.
Mayor/Chair Johnson inquired how much the City's match would be.
The Development Services Director responded that the formula
criteria is not known; stated that a number of funding options have
been identified, such as supplemental tax increment payments or
unused redevelopment bond money earmarked for the Library project.
Mayor/Chair Johnson stated that it is important to ensure that
money is budgeted for Phase 2 next year.
Commissioner/Board Member Daysog stated that the City needs to be
very careful in Fiscal Year 2005-061 what happens in the coming
year will ripple into the following years; stated there are a lot
of committed projects.
The Development Services Director concurred with Commissioner/Boaró
Member Daysog; stated that the Development Services Department is
anticipating the resignation of a division director mid year; the
position will not be filled; a number of the Development Services
Special Joint Meeting
Alameda City Council, Community
8
Improvement Commission, and Alameda
Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
June 7, 2005",CityCouncil/2005-06-07.pdf
CityCouncil,2005-06-07,24,"Department funds cannot cross pollinate into other activities; the
overhead and staffing in the CIC budget is a little over 10%; there
are very few bodies managing CIC projects Community Development
Block Grant (CDBG) funded staff cannot be moved to CIC projects
because it is not eligible for them under the grant dollars; there
is flexibility within ARRA and CIC staff; only four people are
funded through lease revenues; one person will be eliminated; the
Development Services Department will continue to morph throughout
the year; almost all of the cash flows have been completed, which
will provide a good picture of all obligations, pass-throughs,
contractual arrangements, etc.
Commissioner/Board Member Daysog stated there is a greater control
over the operating costs for staff; the City will need to keep a
close eye on projects.
The Development Services Director stated there is not a lot of
cushion built in for all of the capital projects.
Commissioner Daysog stated that the $2 million earmarked for the
Library might not go for the Library because the money might be
needed for the redevelopment projects.
The Development Services Director stated the cycle is very common;
when large construction projects are started there is a slip period
of 18 months to three years before the projects hit the tax rolls.
Commissioner Daysog stated that it is important to be very cautious
with the large budget projects; the Alameda Power & Telecom cable
television project was estimated at $16 million and cost $29
million.
The Development Services Director stated that construction costs
continue to escalate.
Commissioner Daysog thanked the Development Services Director for
the leadership shown.
Commissioner/Board Member deHaan stated the budget is fragile at
the best; any Alameda Point glitches would be a major concern;
noted he has deep concerns for the future years; stated that he
would like to see budgeting for the retail recruiter position in
the future.
The Development Services Director stated that a retail recruiter
has been funded for one year.
Special Joint Meeting
Alameda City Council, Community
9
Improvement Commission, and Alameda
Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
June 7, 2005",CityCouncil/2005-06-07.pdf
CityCouncil,2005-06-07,25,"Mayor/Chair Johnson stated that if recruiter benefits are realized,
funding can be added for the future years re-emphasized that 2005,
2006, and 2007 will be extremely lean years ; stated that she
appreciates the complex and difficult work done by the Development
Services Department; efforts will help to bring Alameda back to the
viable community and good business center of 20 to 50 years ago.
Commissioner/Boar Member Gilmore thanked the Acting City
Manager/Acting Executive Director and Department Heads for an
extremely useful budget presentation; requested additional
information on the COPS Unit and additional staffing of the DARE
Program.
Councilmember Daysog requested an Off Agenda Report providing up to
date information on the issue of telephone tax for public safety.
Vice Mayor Gilmore inquired whether the proposal to fund
infrastructure included an increase in the property transfer tax
and the legality of using the funds for streets and sidewalks.
The Acting City Manager responded that he would include the
property transfer tax increase in the proposal; the City Attorney
will look into the legality of the matter Proposition 218
addresses what can and cannot be done.
Mayor/Chair Johnson stated that she would like to continue to look
at attorney and risk management costs; she would like to spend as
little as possible on attorneys so that the money could be spent
elsewhere; stated that it is important to be efficient with money
and not cut in ways that eventually lead to spending more; stated
that the Council needs to exercise some oversight over the
litigation contingency budgets; the total amount budgeted for Risk
Management is approximately $470,000 and approximately $350,000 for
Alameda Power & Telecom; suggested that the money be allocated as
proposed in the budget but that the City Attorney bring requests
to hire outside counsel to the City Council; the City Attorney
could be authorized to spend around $2500 for emergencies until the
approval to hire outside counsel can be brought to Council. stated
she is open to suggestions from the City Attorney noted that the
Charter gives the Council oversight of hiring outside counsel.
Councilmember Matarrese inquired whether the Planning and Building
reduction is a lay off or an unfilled position, to which the Acting
City Manager responded the position would not be filled; stated he
would like to fill the Planning and Building Director position
Special Joint Meeting
Alameda City Council, Community
10
Improvement Commission, and Alameda
Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
June 7, 2005",CityCouncil/2005-06-07.pdf
CityCouncil,2005-06-07,26,"first and then get staffing recommendations.
Councilmember Matarrese reiterated that the dollar amount of the
reduction is small. that he likes the idea of contracting services;
having a reduction in the processing of permits and review of plans
costs the City and customer money in the long run; other budget
issues are hard realities; stated City services cost a lot of
money.
Councilmember deHaan inquired whether there was $150 million in
permits this year, to which the Building Official responded permits
have totaled $138 million.
Councilmember deHaan stated that there was not a budget for FY
2004-05 for nine months the ten-year plan will give better
insight he is concerned with the future years; praised the efforts
of all involved with the budget preparation; stated the information
provided is good, hard data; it is important to have some balances
in equity within pay structures and labor management agreements.
Vice Mayor Gilmore stated that she was glad that the public was
present at tonight's meeting; she hoped that more people attend
when the ten-year budget is presented; the City's past commitments
will pay a big role in the future.
Councilmember Daysog stated that having a ten-year budget is great
but it is important to have a strong hold on the budget situation
for the next 6 to 18 months suggested devising a system to track
spending and see how the budget is evolving every two weeks.
The Acting City Manager stated that he always reviews the budget
with the Finance Director. stated that said information can be
passed on to Council.
Councilmember Daysog requested an Off Agenda Report on grant models
and payment options; stated he looked forward to the City
Attorney's review on how to handle the budget issues regarding",CityCouncil/2005-06-07.pdf
CityCouncil,2005-06-07,27,"would like to have a six month review; she does not want to bog
down the process; the right amount of money needed for urgent
matters should be set; the Charter also allows the Council to
delegate the authority to other boards and commissions; the Council
should consider delegating the hiring of outside counsel for
Alameda Power & Telecom to the Public Utilities Board.
Councilmember Daysog stated that he does not feel there is over
spending in the City Attorney's office.
Mayor Johnson stated that she is not suggesting changing the budget
amount she is trying to follow the Charter.
Councilmember deHaan stated that the budget began with focus on the
General Fund; special revenue funds, capital projects, debt
service, and enterprise funds also need to be reviewed.
Mayor Johnson stated that all the funds are intermingled to
a
certain extent and have impacts on each other.
Board Member deHaan moved adoption of the Alameda Reuse and
Redevelopment Authority Resolution.
Board Member Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by
unanimous voice vote - 5.
Commissioner deHaan moved adoption of the Community Improvement
Commission Resolution.
Commissioner Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by
unanimous voice vote - 5.
Councilmember Daysog moved adoption of the City Council Resolution.
Councilmember Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by
unanimous voice vote - 5.
(05-031CIC) - Recommendation to approve the Determination that
planning and administrative expenses incurred during FY 2004-05 are
necessary for the production, improvement or preservation of low-
and moderate-income housing.
Commissioner Gilmore moved approval of the staff recommendation.
Commissioner Daysog seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous
voice vote - 5.
Special Joint Meeting
Alameda City Council, Community
12
Improvement Commission, and Alameda
Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
June 7, 2005",CityCouncil/2005-06-07.pdf
CityCouncil,2005-06-07,28,"ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, Mayor/Chair Johnson adjourned the
meeting at 9:54 p.m.
Respectfully Submitted,
Lara Weisiger, City Clerk
Secretary, Community Improvement
Commission
Agenda for meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act.
Special Joint Meeting
Alameda City Council, Community
13
Improvement Commission, and Alameda
Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
June 7, 2005",CityCouncil/2005-06-07.pdf