body,date,page,text,path
CityCouncil,2007-02-20,1,"MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
TUESDAY - -FEBRUARY 20, 2007- 7:30 P.M.
Mayor Johnson convened the Regular City Council meeting at 8:30
p.m.
ROLL CALL -
Present : Councilmembers
deHaan,
Gilmore,
Matarrese, Tam, and Mayor Johnson - 5.
Absent :
None.
AGENDA CHANGES
(07-073 - ) Mayor Johnson announced that the Resolution Appointing
Walter Schlueter [paragraph no. 07-088] would be heard before the
Consent Calendar items removed for discussion.
PROCLAMATIONS, SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY AND ANNOUNCEMENTS
(07-074) Proclamation declaring the period of January 30, 2007 to
April 4, 2007 as A Season for Nonviolence.
Mayor Johnson read and presented the proclamation to Audrey Lord-
Hausman with the Development Services Department.
Ms. Lord-Hausman thanked Council for the proclamation; stated it is
important to ensure that children live in a safe community; a youth
speech contest has been initiated in partnership with the School
District.
(07-075) Presentation of City Map Project.
The Development Services Director gave a brief report.
Mayor Johnson thanked Jeanette Copperwaite with Copperwaite Digital
Media for the City Map design.
Ms. Copperwaite stated it was a pleasure to work on the City Map.
Kathy Moehring, West Alameda Business Association (WABA) , thanked
the City for providing the City Map.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Mayor Johnson announced that the recommendation to accept the
Quarterly Investment Report [paragraph no. 07-079], the
recommendation to amend Contracts [paragraph no. 07-080], and
Resolutions Amending City of Alameda Resolution Nos. 13937 and
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
1
February 20, 2007",CityCouncil/2007-02-20.pdf
CityCouncil,2007-02-20,2,"13907 [paragraph nos. 07-086 and 07-086A] were removed from the
Consent Calendar for discussion.
Councilmember Matarrese moved approval of the remainder of the
Consent Calendar.
Vice Mayor Tam seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous
voice vote - 5. [ Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an
asterisk preceding the paragraph number. . ]
( * 07-076) - Minutes of the Special and Regular City Council Meetings
held on February 6, 2007. Approved.
(*07-077) Ratified bills in the amount of $3,803,536.53.
(*07-078) Recommendation to accept the Quarterly Sales Tax Report
for the period ending September 30, 2006. Accepted.
(07-079) Recommendation to accept the Quarterly Investment Report
for the period ending December 31, 2006.
Vice Mayor Tam stated the County Auditor-Controller offered to
review the City's investment portfolio and facilitate a meeting
with the County Treasurer to review investment opportunities
The City Treasurer gave a briefing on the City's Investment Report.
Mayor Johnson inquired whether the two manager's performances
differ.
The City Treasurer responded the difference is very small; stated
one manager manages longer term bonds, which gives a little higher
return over time.
Mayor Johnson requested that the City Treasurer review the City's
Investment Policy when meeting with the County Auditor-Controller
or that he conduct his own review.
The City Treasurer stated the Finance Director is very bright and
continues to investigate the investment arena.
Vice Mayor Tam moved approval of the staff recommendatior with
direction that the City Treasurer meet with the County Auditor-
Controller and County Treasurer to review the City's investment
portfolio and policy and to report back to Council in the next
Quarterly Report or sooner.
Councilmember Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
2
February 20, 2007",CityCouncil/2007-02-20.pdf
CityCouncil,2007-02-20,3,"unanimous voice vote - 5.
(07-080 -
)
Recommendation to amend Contracts with Lamphier-Gregory
and Omni Means for environmental and traffic evaluations of the
proposed expansion of the Alameda Towne Centre and amend Contract
with Harsch Investment Realty for payment of consultant and staff
costs.
The Supervising Planner provided a brief presentation.
Eugenie Thomson, Alameda (submitted handout) urged Council to send
the scope back to the Planning Board for further discussion.
Dorothy Reid, Alameda, stated she is concerned with the scope;
accurate traffic numbers are needed to make a real decision.
Claire Risley, Alameda (submitted handout) urged Council not to
approve the requested Contract revisions; the scope of work fails
to analyze the environmental impacts of the entire Target building;
the project is piece mealed; the California courts make it very
clear that a public agency may not divide a single project into
smaller sub-projects to avoid the responsibility of considering the
environmental impact of the project as a whole.
There being no further speakers, Mayor Johnson closed the public
portion of the hearing.
Councilmember deHaan stated the proposed additional work is a
direct outgrowth of the Planning Board, Transportation Commission
and general public; inquired whether the additional scope of work
is covered adequately.
The Supervising Planner responded in the affirmative; stated the
$12,000 referenced by Ms. Thomson is included in the existing
traffic study and the draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) ; the
work was performed outside the original scope of work; staff has
reviewed all comments received after the draft EIR; piece mealing
comments have been submitted into the record; responses will be
included in the final EIR.
Councilmember deHaan inquired whether staff would be provided with
the Planning Board, Transportation Commission and public comments.
The Supervising Planner responded comments would be addressed in
the future; stated the Traffic Engineer, Public Works and Planning
staff, City Attorney's office, and environmental consultant had
extensive discussions on how to respond to comments received; there
were concerns about additional intersections on Park Street and
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
3
February 20, 2007",CityCouncil/2007-02-20.pdf
CityCouncil,2007-02-20,4,"Otis Drive and unanticipated conseguences from existing traffic
signal improvements.
Councilmember deHaan inquired how the study would dovetail with the
Transportation Commission's concerns regarding looking beyond the
focused area.
The Supervising Planner responded staff is looking at intersections
as far away as Park Street and Lincoln Avenue; stated staff is
following up with the Transportation Commission's bicycle
interconnection, transit and pedestrian concerns; an on-sight
workshop is scheduled with the Planning Board on March 12.
Councilmember deHaan inquired whether the Safeway fueling station
and Alameda Landing entitlement changes would be discussed.
The Supervising Planner responded that he received comments on the
Safeway fueling station from John Knox White with the
Transportation Commission; stated comments would be discussed at
the March 12 Planning Board meeting; staff is not looking at how
Alameda Landing relates to the project.
Councilmember deHaan inquired whether 2005 was the baseline date
for determining tax and traffic data.
The Supervising Planner responded real data was gathered in 2002-
2003 for the previous shopping center expansion proposal; stated
Omni-Means - collected new data for the 2005 proposal; traffic levels
were lower because of vacancies; the higher number was used in the
traffic study.
Councilmember deHaan stated not all retail is equal : inquired
whether a different retailer would have a different requirement.
The Supervising Planner responded the project is treated as a
shopping center with a variety of retail uses; stated retailers are
treated the same.
Councilmember deHaan provided a handout stated tax data was used
as a base to make traffic determinations.
The Supervising Planner stated that the traffic study was based on
trip generation factors; the information was consolidated into
standard numbers that apply to a broad range of shopping centers.
Councilmember Gilmore stated the Bayfair Mall Target has the same
retail square footage as the proposed Target ; the Bayfair Mall
Target is near BART, bus lines, and Interstates 880 and 580;
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
4
February 20, 2007",CityCouncil/2007-02-20.pdf
CityCouncil,2007-02-20,5,"inquired why traffic impacts would not be assumed when
transportation access is not good.
The Supervising Planner inquired whether Councilmember Gilmore was
referring to the total size of the store.
Councilmember Gilmore responded Target needs to generate sale
numbers to make the store work; stated the Bayfair Target is a
regional shopping center that would draw more consumers because of
the better transportation corridor; the proposed Target has the
same size retail space and worse transportation access ; inquired
why a same size store would be built if retail sales would not be
the same.
The Supervising Planner responded the traffic study is based on the
total square footage of the shopping center, including Target ;
stated measurements are made by either counting cars or calculating
standard trip generation factors for different types of businesses.
Councilmember Matarrese stated impacts are not being debated ;
questions need to be answered on whether the draft EIR has
deficiencies; he does not believe the proposed Target would have no
traffic impact.
The Supervising Planner stated the draft EIR identifies significant
traffic impacts and includes mitigation measures.
Councilmember Matarrese inquired whether there is some flexibility
for when the work should be done or for adjustments to data
collection methods.
The Supervising Planner responded the project has been in the
City's hands for two years; stated the process should have been
completed a year ago under the Permit Streamlining Acti he would
not recommend waiting to update the traffic study; the existing
draft EIR includes some mitigation monitors.
Councilmember Matarrese inquired whether the final EIR would
describe methods used to do the additional work, to which the
Supervising Planner responded in the affirmative.
Councilmember Matarrese stated there are unanswered questions the
Contract needs to be approved to get the work done; inquired
whether Ms. Risley's issue would be addressed in the final EIR.
The Supervising Planner responded the piece mealing comments have
been submitted and would be addressed in the final EIR.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
5
February 20, 2007",CityCouncil/2007-02-20.pdf
CityCouncil,2007-02-20,6,"Mayor Johnson inquired whether the additional work is the result of
the Planning Board, Transportation Commission, and community input,
to which the Supervising Planner responded in the affirmative.
Vice Mayor Tam stated additional traffic analysis is recommended by
the Planning Board, Transportation Commission, and public; inquired
what is not being addressed in the current scope.
The Supervising Planner responded that he did not know; stated no
specifics were offered; staff is responding to any written comments
received; the City's EIR guidelines require written response to any
comments.
Vice Mayor Tam inquired whether the additional analysis would
address timing, Target size, and tenant issues.
The Supervising Planner responded said issues would be covered in
the additional analysis or in staff's professional judgment.
Councilmember deHaan inquired whether the Planning Board had the
opportunity to review the scope of work.
The Supervising Planner responded in the negative; stated staff
consolidated all comments received, which was two inches thick.
Councilmember deHaan inquired whether going back to the Planning
Board would be more prudent.
The Supervising Planner responded a special meeting is scheduled
for March 12 to walk the site.
Councilmember Matarrese stated the scope is sufficiently broad to
allow interaction between the Planning Board and staff to move
forward and make adjustments as information is gathered from the
March 12 meeting.
Councilmember Matarrese moved approval of the staff recommendation.
Councilmember Gilmore inquired what is the comment and discussion
period once the final EIR is prepared.
The Supervising Planner responded there is a mandatory fifteen day
comment period once the final EIR is provided; stated that he
anticipates more than a fifteen day comment period because the
Planning Board wants opportunities to discuss the final EIR before
the public hearing.
Councilmember Gilmore stated there would be a full-noticed hearing
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
6
February 20, 2007",CityCouncil/2007-02-20.pdf
CityCouncil,2007-02-20,7,"the Planning Board would take action on the final EIR; inquired
what would happen if the Planning Board approved the final EIR.
The Supervising Planner responded the Planning Board would have the
option of certifying the EIR and approving or denying the project
stated a workshop could be scheduled to discuss responses.
Councilmember Gilmore inquired whether the Planning Board decision
could be appealed to Council, to which the Supervising Planner
responded in the affirmative.
Councilmember Gilmore inquired whether there would be opportunities
for the public and Planning Board to comment on the final EIR, to
which the Supervising Planner responded in the affirmative.
Councilmember Gilmore seconded the motion, which carried by the
following voice vote: Ayes: louncilmembers Gilmore, Matarrese, Tam,
and Mayor Johnson - 4. Noes : Councilmember deHaan - 1.
Councilmember deHaan stated the scope should have gone to the
Planning Board; that he cannot support the staff recommendation.
(*07-081) Recommendation to allocate $347,000 in Measure B Funds
and award a Contract for Design and Construction Administration
Services in the amount of $102,695, including contingencies, to
Baseline Engineering for Grand Street Bridge and Ballena Boulevard
Bridge Repair and Resurfacing, No P. W. 11-06-24. Accepted.
(
*07-082) Recommendation to authorize installation of Stops Signs
to replace Yield Signs at the intersections of Adams Street and
Peach Street; Post Street and Washington Street; Calhoun Street and
Peach Street, Fairview Avenue and Cornell Drive; Bayo Vista Avenue
and Cornell Drive; Harvard Drive and Windsor Drive; Cambridge Drive
and Windsor Drive. Accepted.
(
*07-083) Recommendation to adopt Plans and Specifications and
authorize Call for Bids for installation of Countdown Pedestrian
Signal Heads and Audible Pedestrian Signals, No. P.W. 01-07-01.
Accepted.
(*07-084) Resolution No. 14068, ""Authorizing Open Market Purchase
Pursuant to Section 3-15 of the Alameda City Charter for Repair of
the Main Street Ferry Terminal Pier, and Authorizing the City
Manager to Enter into Such an Agreement."" Adopted.
( *07-085) Resolution No. 14069, ""Approving the Application for
California Cultural and Historical Endowment (CCHE) Grant Funds
Under the California Clean Water, Clean Air, Safe Neighborhood
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
7
February 20, 2007",CityCouncil/2007-02-20.pdf
CityCouncil,2007-02-20,8,"Parks and Coastal Protection Act of 2002. Adopted.
(07-086) Resolution No. 14070, ""Amending City of Alameda
Resolution No. 13937 to Change the Timing of Compliance for the
Final Lighting and Signage Plan Condition of Approval for Design
Review DR-5-0041, the Proposed Cineplex at 2305 Central Avenue,
from ""Prior to Issuance of Building Permit"" to ""Prior to the
Issuance of a Temporary Certificate of Occupancy"". and to Change
the Timing of Compliance for the Final Lighting, Signage, and
Landscaping Plan Condition of Approval for Design Review DR05-0028,
the Proposed Parking Garage at 1416 Oak Street, from ""Prior to
Issuance of Building Permit"" to ""Prior to the Issuance of
a
Temporary Certificate of Occupancy. Adopted; and
(07-086A) Resolution No. 14071, ""Resolution Amending City of
Alameda Resolution No. 13907 to Change the Timing of Compliance for
the Queuing Plan Condition of Approval for Use Permit UP05-0018
from ""Prior to Issuance of Building Permit"" to ""Prior to the
Issuance of a Temporary Certificate of Occupancy. "" Adopted.
Councilmember Gilmore stated she would like the Planning Board to
have a full discussion on trees; she likes the idea of continuing
the sycamore trees along Central Avenue; tree spacing issues can be
worked out.
Mayor Johnson concurred with Councilmember Gilmore; stated planting
a different type tree would be contrary to the Master Tree Plan;
major streets should have the same type tree.
Councilmember Gilmore requested staff to review the Oak Street tree
treatment.
Councilmember Matarrese stated aphid infested trees are messy.
Councilmember Gilmore moved adoption of the resolutions with
direction that the Planning Board address tree selection.
Councilmember Matarrese seconded the motion.
Under discussion, Councilmember deHaan inquired whether other
developers have been given the opportunity to postpone discussions
in order not to delay design approval.
The Development Services Director responded it is very unusual to
have sign and landscaping designs done so early in the project.
On the call for the question, the motion carried by unanimous voice
vote - 5.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
8
February 20, 2007",CityCouncil/2007-02-20.pdf
CityCouncil,2007-02-20,9,"(*07-087) Ordinance No. 2963, ""Repeal the Existing Time Limit for
Incurring Debt in the Business and Waterfront Improvement Project. ""
Finally passed.
REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS
(07-088) Resolution No. 14072, ""Appointing Walter Schlueter as a
member of the Housing Commission. Adopted.
Councilmember Matarrese moved adoption of the resolution.
Councilmember Gilmore seconded the motion, which carried by
unanimous voice vote - 5.
The City Clerk administered the Oath and presented a certificate of
appointment to Mr. Walter Schlueter.
Mr. Schlueter stated that he looks forward to serving on the
Housing Commission.
(07-089) Public Hearing to consider Parcel Map No. 9286, (1900,
1910, 1920, 1930, 1950, 1960, and 1980 North Loop Road) to merge
six existing parcels into five parcels with each parcel
accommodating new flexible use building (warehouse, distribution,
light manufacturing and administrative office) The site is located
within the Harbor Bay Business Park in the C-M-PD, Commercial
Manufacturing, Planned Development Zoning District; and
(07-089A) Resolution No. 14073, ""Approving Parcel Map 9286 (TM 06-
0005) for the Purpose of Establishing Five Commercial Lots Located
at 1900-1980 North Loop Road. Adopted.
The Planning and Building Director gave a brief presentation.
Councilmember deHaan moved adoption of the resolution.
Councilmember Matarrese seconded the motion.
Under discussion, Councilmember Matarrese stated good progress has
been made; he looks forward to having commercial, non-retail
development since the Quarterly Sales Tax report shows a decrease
in business-to-business taxes.
Councilmember deHaan inquired whether the area is parceled out.
The Planning and Building Director responded the Ferry Terminal
area is still undeveloped.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
9
February 20, 2007",CityCouncil/2007-02-20.pdf
CityCouncil,2007-02-20,10,"On the call for the question, the motion carried by unanimous voice
vote - 5.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA
None.
COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS
(07-090 - ) Consideration of Mayor's nomination for appointment to
the Golf Commission.
Mayor Johnson nominated Bill R. Delaney.
(07-091) Vice Mayor Tam stated she attended the League of
California Cities East Bay Division February 15, 2007 dinner
meeting bond funding allocation principles and term limits were
discussed.
(07-092) Councilmember Matarrese requested a report on the new
Library operations, staffing and long range plans, including
library branch improvements.
(07-093) Councilmember Matarrese requested that staff provide a
picture and an Off Agenda Report on how Long's will look after
construction is complete; requested that staff inquire whether
Long's would consider landscaping the corner across from City Hall.
(07-094) Councilmember deHaan requested that vegetation options be
considered for Long's north side.
(07-095
-
)
Councilmember deHaan stated CalTrans plans to replace the
Webster Street Tube lighting similar to the Caldecott Tunnel
lighting; there is garbage in the Webster Street Tube entryway the
fence is damaged Alameda's gateway looks scraggly.
(07-096 - ) Mayor Johnson stated she spoke to Oakland Councilmember
Quan regarding the City of Oakland's styrofoam ordinance which has
been in effect since January 1, 2007; San Francisco's ordinance
will become effective July, 2007; Berkeley has an ordinance.
requested that the Climate Protection Campaign Task Force review
the matter.
(07-097) Councilmember deHaan thanked staff for efforts made to
eliminate the clothing collection bins on public areas.
The City Manager stated Code Enforcement was responsible for the
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
10
February 20, 2007",CityCouncil/2007-02-20.pdf
CityCouncil,2007-02-20,11,"removal of the bins.
ADJOURNMEN'T
There being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the
Regular Meeting at 9:46 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
11
February 20, 2007",CityCouncil/2007-02-20.pdf
CityCouncil,2007-02-20,12,"MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING
TUESDAY - -FEBRUARY 20, 2007-6:45 p.m.
Mayor Johnson convened the Special Meeting at 6:50 p.m.
Roll Call - Present : Councilmembers
deHaan,
Gilmore,
Matarrese, Tam, and Mayor Johnson - 5.
Absent :
None.
The Special Meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider :
(07-072) Conference with Labor Negotiators: Agency Negotiators :
Craig Jory and Human Resources Director; Employee Organizations :
All City Bargaining Units.
Following the Closed Session, the Special Meeting was reconvened
and Mayor Johnson announced that Council received a briefing from
Labor Negotiators on the status of negotiations with various City
bargaining units; no action was taken.
Adjournment
There being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the
Special Meeting at 7:35 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
February 20, 2007",CityCouncil/2007-02-20.pdf
CityCouncil,2007-02-20,13,"MINUTES OF THE COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION MEETING
TUESDAY - -FEBRUARY 20, 2007- -7:27 P.M.
Chair Johnson convened the Special Meeting at 7:40 p.m.
Commissioner Matarrese led the Pledge of Allegiance.
Roll Call - Present : Commissioners deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese,
Tam, and Chair Johnson - 5.
Absent :
None.
MINUTES
(07-003) Minutes of the Community Improvement Commission Meeting
held on January 16, 2007. Approved.
Commissioner Tam moved approval of the minutes.
Commissioner Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by
unanimous voice vote - 5.
SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY
(07-004) Report on Alameda Theater, Cineplex, and Parking Structure
Project Construction update.
The Redevelopment Manager gave a brief Power Point presentation.
Commissioner deHaan inquired what is the likelihood of bringing
back value-engineering items.
The Redevelopment Manager responded the likelihood is good if there
are no significant surprises.
Commissioner deHaan stated the date has expired on approximately
25% of the items.
The Redevelopment Manager stated the majority of the façade items
have no immediate time limit.
Commissioner Gilmore inquired what is the last date for adding in
the bas-relief; further inquired what type of finish is on the bas-
relief.
The Redevelopment Manager responded staff has requested the
Contractor to hold the price for six months; stated the bas-relief
finish is cast concrete.
Vice Mayor Tam stated that she is concerned the cost expended for
Special Meeting
Community Improvement Commission
1
February 20, 2007",CityCouncil/2007-02-20.pdf
CityCouncil,2007-02-20,14,"responded in the affirmative.
Commissioner deHaan inquired whether the General Contractor plans
on adding back value engineering items, to which the Redevelopment
Manager responded in the negative.
Commissioner deHaan inquired whether the canopies would be
standard.
The Architect responded that the State Architect and Section 106
Consultant requested that the historic theater, Cineplex and
parking structure canopies be different.
Special Meeting
Community Improvement Commission
2
February 20, 2007",CityCouncil/2007-02-20.pdf
CityCouncil,2007-02-20,15,"Commissioner deHaan inquired whether the Architect is comfortable
with different canopies, to which the Architect responded in the
affirmative.
Commissioner Matarrese inquired whether the north elevation could
be corrected; stated the original design is better.
The Architect responded keeping all facades level is expensive.
Commissioner Matarrese inquired what the cost would be, to which
the Architect responded at least $50,000.
Commissioner Matarrese inquired what would be left in the
contingency fund by putting the sheer wall back or spending $50,000
to fix the wall.
The Architect responded combining the two sheer walls into one wall
saved a lot of money i stated a false sheer wall would cost between
$80,000 and $90,000.
Commissioner Matarrese inquired what would be the remaining
contingency, to which the Redevelopment Manager responded
approximately $260,000.
Commissioner Matarrese requested staff to investigate options to
mitigate the parking garage north wall sloping appearance; stated
the Oak Street presentation is nice.
The Redevelopment Manager stated options would be explored.
Commissioner Gilmore inquired what is the final date to make
decisions.
The Architect responded decisions could be made later because the
issue is not structural.
Commissioner deHaan inquired whether the timeline is being held to
November.
The Redevelopment Manager responded the timeline is subject to
schedules noted in the Contract.
Commissioner deHaan stated great progress has been made with the
historic theater and parking garage; inquired whether the Cineplex
would dovetail with the historic theater and parking garage
completion.
The Redevelopment Manager responded the Cineplex would take less
Special Meeting
Community Improvement Commission
3
February 20, 2007",CityCouncil/2007-02-20.pdf
CityCouncil,2007-02-20,16,"time; stated the Contractor is hoping for completion at the end of
this year; the first couple of months of 2008 is more realistic.
ADJOURNMEN'T
There being no further business, Chair Johnson adjourned the
Special Meeting at 8:30 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Lara Weisiger
Secretary
The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown
Act.
Special Meeting
Community Improvement Commission
4
February 20, 2007",CityCouncil/2007-02-20.pdf
CityCouncil,2007-02-20,17,"MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL JOINT CITY COUNCIL,
ALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, AND
COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION MEETING
TUESDAY- - - -FEBRUARY 20, 2007- - -7:31 P. M.
Mayor/Chair Johnson convened the Special Joint Meeting at 9:46 p.m.
ROLL CALL -
Present : Councilmembers/Board Members/Commissioners
deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese, Tam and
Mayor/Chair Johnson - 5.
Absent :
None
AGENDA ITEM
(07-098CC/07-005CIC) Recommendation to accept the Fiscal Year 2007
Second Quarter Financial Report and budget adjustments.
The Finance Director gave a brief presentation.
Mayor/Chair Johnson inquired whether reserve money is funding the
Golf budget, to which the Finance Director responded in the
affirmative.
Mayor/Chair Johnson inquired how much is being drawn from the
reserves.
The Finance Director responded the Fiscal Year would end with a
$500,000 loss; stated depreciation is part of the loss; the net
cash loss is approximately $250,000 to $300,000.
Mayor/Chair Johnson stated the money used to supplement the Golf
budget was set aside for the Clubhouse; finding a way to stop
spending reserve money is important.
The City Manager stated several options are being considered; the
Golf Commission recommended a rate increase be presented to Council
at the March 20 City Council meeting.
Mayor/Chair Johnson stated that she is interested in cost savings
rather than a rate increase; rounds are declining; budget controls
need to be put in place; alarms should have gone off when reserve
money was being spent a separate, inaccessible account should be
set for a reasonable operating reserve; the money has not been used
for the intended purpose.
Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Gilmore stated a resolution
could be adopted that states that the Golf Commission cannot spend
Special Joint Meeting
Alameda City Council,
1
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority,
and Community Improvement Commission
February 20, 2007",CityCouncil/2007-02-20.pdf
CityCouncil,2007-02-20,18,"Member/Commissioner Gilmore's suggestion; the budget should not use
the net asset balance as part of the regular operating budget ; the
intended purpose is not to use the money for operations.
The City Manager stated the matter would be brought back to address
impacts and recommend budget adjustments.
Councilmember/Board MMember/Commissioner deHaan stated a short-term
fix is needed; setting a benchmark would be a healthy start.
Mayor/Chair Johnson stated the budget would be set, not benchmarks.
Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Matarrese inquired whether
the [General Fund reserve would be over 20% with the adjustment,
to which the Finance Director responded in the affirmative.
In response to Councilmember/Boaro Member/Commissioner Matarrese's
inquiry about the amount, the Finance Director stated $415,645.
Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Matarrese inquired whether
spending $400,000 on deferred maintenance would be better, to which
the Finance Director responded that she would not recommend using
the money for deferred maintenance. the matter could be considered
in the next budget.
Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Matarrese stated the matter
should be included in the next budget.
louncilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Gilmore stated discussions
should address whether and when to build reserves back up to 25%.
Vice Mayor/Board Member/Commissioner Tam requested that the
Special Joint Meeting
Alameda City Council,
2
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority,
and Community Improvement Commission
February 20, 2007",CityCouncil/2007-02-20.pdf
CityCouncil,2007-02-20,19,"discussion include a review of the reserve threshold needed to
secure good bonding rates.
Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan inquired why the
reserve target is 25%.
The Finance Director responded 25% represents approximately two to
three months of payables; stated 25% has been memorialized as part
of the City's financial policies; the amount was temporarily
reduced in order to meet deferred maintenance goals.
Councilmember/Board  ember/Commissioner deHaan stated the reserve
should get back to 25%; including a 1% to 2% increase in the next
budget cycle would be nice.
Mayor/Chair Johnson stated the issue should be discussed; the 25%
reserve was accumulated from deferring maintenance; the goal should
be 25% but not at the expense of accumulating deferred maintenance.
Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan stated the deferred
maintenance backlog should be understood by the next budget.
The City Manager stated an infrastructure update would be
presented.
Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan inquired whether the
ten-year forecast would be pursued.
The Finance Director responded the mid-year items would be added to
the ten-year forecast; past performance is no predictor of the
future.
Mayor/Chair Johnson inquired whether the sewer fund is lower than
expected to which the Finance Director responded the sewer fund is
lower because only a partial payment has been received from the
County.
Mayor/Chair Johnson inquired when the proposed Golf resolution
could come back, to which the City Manager responded 30 days.
The Finance Director stated the resolution could be addressed at
the March 20 City Council meeting.
In response to Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan's
inquiry regarding Golf cost allocation charges, the Finance
Director stated Council could decide not to charge a particular
Special Joint Meeting
Alameda City Council,
3
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority,
and Community Improvement Commission
February 20, 2007",CityCouncil/2007-02-20.pdf
CityCouncil,2007-02-20,20,"fund.
Mayor/Chair Johnson stated cost allocations reflect the cost of
doing business; the General Fund or other departments would be
subsidizing Golf operations if cost allocations were eliminated.
Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan stated costs are
standard overhead costs that should be a burden against the
activity; the Golf Commission was under the interpretation that the
money was going to the General Fund and being used as discretionary
which is not the case; the Commission needs to understand that the
costs support operations.
The Finance Director stated the general administrative services are
a
function found in any business; all operating departments need to
share in the costs.
Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan stated that he did
not want any confusion.
Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Matarrese moved approval of
the staff recommendation with direction to bring a resolution
forward to mandate a balanced budget in the Golf Fund and to have a
discussion on Reserve funds at the next budget cycle.
Vice Mayor/Board Member/Commissioner Tam seconded the motion.
Under
discussion,
Mayor/Chair
Johnson
stated
the
Council/Board/Commission requested that the resolution come back
within 30 days; a balanced budget could be implemented sooner.
On the call for the question, the motion carried by unanimous voice
vote - 5.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, Mayor/Chair Johnson adjourned
the Special Joint Meeting at 10:18 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Lara Weisiger, City Clerk
Secretary, Community Improvement
Commission
The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown
Special Joint Meeting
Alameda City Council,
4
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority,
and Community Improvement Commission
February 20, 2007",CityCouncil/2007-02-20.pdf
CityCouncil,2007-02-20,21,"Act.
Special Joint Meeting
Alameda City Council,
5
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority,
and Community Improvement Commission
February 20, 2007",CityCouncil/2007-02-20.pdf