body,date,page,text,path
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority,2008-10-01,1,"APPROVED
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE
ALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
Wednesday, October 1, 2008
The meeting convened at 7:36 p.m. with Chair Johnson presiding.
2-B
1.
ROLL CALL
Present: Chair Beverly Johnson
Boardmember Doug deHaan
Boardmember Frank Matarrese
Boardmember Marie Gilmore
Vice Chair Lena Tam
2.
CONSENT CALENDAR
2-A. Authorize Execution of a No-Cost Sublease for Alameda Development Corporation at
Alameda Point.
Member Gilmore motioned approval of the Consent Calendar, seconded by Member Tam,
and passed by the following voice votes: Ayes - 5, Noes - 0, Abstentions - O.
3.
REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS
3-A. Approve the Executive Director's Recommendation Regarding Disposition of the
Notices of Interest for the Homeless Accommodation/Public Benefit Conveyances for
the North Housing Parcel and Authorize the Executive Director to Negotiate the
Required Legally Binding Agreement
Debbie Potter, Base Reuse and Community Development Manager, gave a brief overview of the
item, stating that in November 2007, the Navy declared the North Housing Parcel, an additional
42 acre parcel, as surplus. The ARRA, as the Local Reuse Authority (LRA) is charged with
conducting the federal screening process, a mandated step before the Navy can dispose of
property. Three Notice of Interests (NOIs) and two requests for Public Benefit Conveyances
(PBC's) were reviewed in early September. The NOIs were analyzed against a number of criteria
including what project was being proposed, how well the project met unidentified needs of
homeless needs assessment, financial feasibility, and the organization's capacity to carry out the
project. One NOI from the East Bay Asian Local Development Corporation (EBALDC), didn't
meet the threshold requirement and was notified that they did not meet screening process. Of the
remaining two NOIs, the evaluation committee does not recommend moving forward with the
NOI received form Alameda Point Collaborative (APC) and Building Futures with Women and
Children (BFWC), to provide location for the Midway Shelter, in the event it loses it's lease
where currently located. There is a path forward to working with Navy on the existing location
of the shelter, which the Navy has committed to in writing to retain midway shelter in current
location. Also, the 42-acre site was not an appropriate location for a multi-service center, which
should be in central location accessible by public transit.
The committee is recommending the NOI received from the City Housing Authority, APC, and
BFWC for 120 units of permanent supportive housing for formerly homeless people, with the
recommendation to move forward at 90 units rather than 120 units.",AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2008-10-01.pdf
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority,2008-10-01,2,"The two PBCs received were from the City's Recreation and Park department and from Habitat
for Humanity for self-help housing. We are recommending the PBC from Rec and Park, and will
indicate our support for Habitat for Humanity for 20 to 30 units of self-help housing. The Habitat
for Humanity PBC is approved by the federal housing agency, HUD; and the Department of
Interior would approve the Rec and Park PBC.
The next step is to begin negotiating a Legally Binding Agreement (LBA). The LBA is an
agreement document that goes forward to HUD, along with our amendment to the Community
Reuse Plan (Reuse Plan), HUD reviews the Reuse Plan and makes the ultimate determination of
how well it meets the needs of homeless accommodation. We are scheduling two community
meetings in November, on the 3rd with the Planning Board, and on Nov. 24th on the amendment
to the Reuse Plan, and draft LBA at its Dec. 3 meeting. The statutory requirement is to get
everything to HUD in December.
Member Matarrese asked how HUD weighs different factors during their evaluation of the
proposals. Ms. Potter explained that typically, the screening process regulations are broadly
drafted in order to give local jurisdictions a lot of leeway and opportunity for the Reuse Plan to
meet their needs. What they are looking for is a balance of homeless accommodation, and what
they call ""other community goals"", in terms of job generation, economic development, housing,
and open space. Member Matarrese asked if there is a previous process which we were involved
in. Ms. Potter replied that the 1996 Community Reuse Plan was the last time we were involved
in that process. Member Matarrese informed staff and the Board that he just received a letter
from the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) regarding the remediation of site
where the Midway Shelter is located. The letter informed of DTSC's plan to evaluate the impact
of removing viscous material and widespread contaminated material from that site. Staff will
follow-up.
Chair Johnson called public speakers. Doug Biggs, Interim Executive Director of the APC spoke
in support of the city's recommendation. He discussed the homelessness crisis in today's
economy. Liz Varela, Executive Director of the BFWC, supports Doug Bigg's comments, and
appreciates the City's recommendation on the BFWC NOI and its efforts of relocating the
Midway Shelter.
Member deHaan asked staff to give a background on the remediation requirements and how the
Navy is going to address that. Ms. Potter explained that the south east corner of the North
Housing parcel, there is a plume which extends to that area and will be remediated. The Navy
has started remediation of the plume, and we made it clear when we put out the request that there
is an environmental issue. None of the proposals we received asked for property anywhere near
that site. There has been prior time-critical removal that has all been completed. Ms. Potter
added that there was no removal under hardscapes or roads, so anyone who will develop that site
has to take that in consideration.
Member Matarrese expressed concern that we should not move forward where uncalculated
liability for any unremediated land is passed on to any future to non-profit.
Member Matarrese motioned to provide direction that in the Community Reuse Plan and
in the negotiations of the LBA we include disclosure of significant liability of
uncharacterized contamination under hardscape and contamination beyond two feet, and
that we have these LBAs come back to ARRA. The motion was seconded by Member
deHaan and passed by the following voice votes: Ayes - 5, Noes - 0, Abstentions - 0.",AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2008-10-01.pdf
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority,2008-10-01,3,"3-B. Report on Restoration Advisory Board Comment Letter on Installation Restoration
Site 1.
Ms. Potter summarized that at the ARRA meeting on September 10, the Board received several
letters regarding Site 1. Staff was directed to work with the environmental consultant, Dr. Peter
Russell, to prepare a response to RAB letters. The ARRA's position is that land fill should be
dug up and hauled off, this position has been consistent during the public comment process,
which is not concluded. A final draft Record of Decision (ROD) is due on Oct. 28th, which will
give us further opportunity to provide comments on the final draft ROD. However, as all of this
work has been going on, the results of the additional trenching did not reveal waste, so the sense
is that there is no longer a landfill at Site 1. We would like to send a letter to the Navy
requesting they do a little more work to determine whether a land fill is still present at Site 1.
The Navy began remediation on groundwater contamination.
Member Matarrese reminded staff that the original concern expressed was, not that there was a
landfill, but that it was uncharacterized and unknown. He wants to make sure all contaminated
materials are removed, and inert ones remain in place. Ms. Potter stated that we must go through
the CERCLA process, and that the time-critical removal was for the material down to two feet.
Member Matarrese asked how Site 1 could be closed if there is still objectionable material there.
Ms. Potter responded by stating that the work effort and investigation as part of IR Site 32 work
includes going further than two feet, and the moving of the materials allows the changing of the
boundaries of the IR sites and what they are studying. Member Matarrese would like a risk
assessment provided to the City with anticipated development in mind - to build a case for the
ultimate price tag for the property, i.e., if the property goes to auction, the contamination status
would affect the price.
There were two speakers on this item. James Leach, RAB member for 9 years, is there
voluntarily because they are experts and have done clean-up and provide oversight to a high
degree. George Humphreys, Co-Chair of the RAB, commented on Dr. Russell's evaluation of
the Site 1 issue.
Member Matarrese motioned to accept the report with future reports to include a risk
assessment of the significant issues being discussed from a technical standpoint. The
motion was seconded my Member deHaan and passed by the following voice votes: Ayes -
5, Noes - 0, Abstentions - 0.
Ms. Potter discussed two additional recommendations included in the staff report; first was the
request for authorization to request that the Navy further explore issue of whether there is still a
landfill, and second, that staff be given authorization to prepare and send a letter on the draft
final ROD. Since there is no opportunity to provide back to ARRA before it's sent, Member
Matarrese suggested it come back to the Board at a the second Council meeting in November
(November 18).
Member Matarrese motioned to approve the two additional recommendations, seconded by
Member deHaan and passed by the following voice votes: Ayes - 5, Noes - 0, Abstentions -
0.
4.
ORAL REPORTS
4-A. Oral report from Member Matarrese, Restoration Advisory Board (RAB)
representative.
- Highlights of September 4 Alameda Point RAB Meeting.",AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2008-10-01.pdf
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority,2008-10-01,4,"Member Matarrese stated that the next RAB meeting is tomorrow night and the minutes from the
last meeting have been presented.
5.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (PUBLIC COMMENT)
(Any person may address the governing body in regard to any matter over which the
governing body has jurisdiction that is not on the agenda.)
There was one speaker, Bill Smith, who spoke about various topics.
6.
COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE GOVERNING BODY
Member deHaan asked if there was an update on the GSA property behind Foster Freeze. Ms.
Potter informed him that staff will get and update and provide it to the City Manager as an Off-
Agenda item.
Member Matarrese stated that the Board has received a stack of documents from SunCal, but has
not seen a document that fits the description of a Business Plan. He requested that staff ask
SunCal for a business plan. David Brandt, Deputy Executive Director, affirmed Member
Matarrese's request.
7. ADJOURNMENT
Meeting was adjourned at 9:12 p.m. by Chair Johnson.
Respectfully submitted,
Airan Glidden
Irma Glidden
ARRA Secretary",AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2008-10-01.pdf
CityCouncil,2008-10-01,1,"MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
WEDNESDAY- - -OCTOBER 1, 2008- -6:00 p.m.
Mayor Johnson convened the Special Meeting at 6:00 p.m.
ROLL CALL -
Present : Councilmember deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese,
Tam, and Mayor Johnson - 5.
Absent :
None.
The Special Meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider :
(08-408) Conference with Labor Negotiators; Agency Negotiators:
Craig Jory and Human Resources Director; Employee Organizations :
All Bargaining Units.
(08-409) Public Employee Performance Evaluation; Title: City
Manager.
Following the Closed Session, the Special Meeting was reconvened
and Mayor Johnson announced that regarding Labor, Council received
a briefing regarding negotiations with various City bargaining
units; no action was taken; regarding Performance Evaluation, the
matter was not heard.
Adjournment
There being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the
Special Meeting at 7:20 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
October 1, 2008",CityCouncil/2008-10-01.pdf
CivilServiceBoard,2008-10-01,1,"OF
TERKA
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING
OF THE
CIVIL SERVICE BOARD OF THE CITY OF ALAMEDA
WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 1st, 2008
1.
The meeting was called to order at 5:09 p.m.
2.
ROLL CALL: Board Members Avonnet Peeler, Linda McHugh, and Peter Horikoshi
ABSENT:
Board President Michael Rich, Member Roberto Rocha and Executive Secretary Karen
Willis
STAFF PRESENT: Jill Kovacs, Senior Management Analyst, Emily Hung, Administrative Management
Analyst and Stacey Meier, Administrative Technician I, Human Resources
OTHERS IN ATTENDANCE: Alan Elnick and Linda Justus
3.
MINUTES:
The minutes of the regular meeting of July 2, 2008 were presented for Board approval.
Member McHugh inquired as to what the status of the Ordinance going to City Council
was. Jill Kovacs explained that Council agendas are extremely full lately and that the
date
keeps getting pushed back. Member Peeler asked whether or not the RFP for
leasing out
the golf course was done. Jill Kovacs stated that the City has received some
proposals
and has gotten some interest. Alan Elnick stated that consideration for
proposals at the
October 7th City Council Meeting has been removed.
Member McHugh moved to accept, Member Horikoshi seconded, and
the motion carried by a 3-0 vote.
4.
CONSENT CALENDAR:
SUMMARY REPORT FOR EXAMINATION ELIGIBLE LISTS AND CLASSIFICATIONS FOR THE
MONTHS OF JULY, AUGUST, SEPTEMBER 2008.
4A. ELIGIBLE LIST ESTABLISHED
DATE ESTABLISHED
EXAM NO.
Development Manager (Housing)
8/27/2008
208-23
Journey Lineworker
7/15/2008
208-051
Line Working Supervisor
6/17/2008
208-15
Plans Examiner/Plan Check Engineer
9/22/2008
208-24
Public Safety Dispatcher (Entry)
9/4/2008
208-18
Public Works Superintendent
8/21/2008
208-16
Traffic Signal Maintenance Tech
7/30/2008
207-67
4B.
ELIGIBLE LIST EXTENDED
DATE ESTABLISHED
EXAM NO.
Division Chief
10/3/2007
207-16PR
Fire Captain
5/2/2008
208-09PR
Fleet Mechanic
5/4/2007
207-15
Intermediate Clerk
10/23/2007
207-50
Junior Engineer
2/12/2008
207-68
Maintenance Worker I
7/25/2007
207-26",CivilServiceBoard/2008-10-01.pdf
CivilServiceBoard,2008-10-01,2,"City of Alameda
Page 2 of 4
Civil Service Board Agenda
Regular Meeting of October 1, 2008
Police Lieutenant
9/5/2007
207-51PR
Police Officer (Academy Grad/Attendee)
2/2/2008
207-06
Jamie Bolin
Police Officer (Lateral)
2/2/2008
208-07
Eric Stegman
Jeffrey Ung
Police Officer (Recruit)
3/5/2007
206-76
Police Officer (Recruit)
2/2/2008
208-08
Program Specialist I/II
1/25/2007
206-63
(Integrated Waste Mgmt Program)
PW Maintenance Team Leader
2/7/2008
207-69
4C.
ELIGIBLE LIST EXPIREDICANCELLEDI
DATE ESTABLISHED
EXAM NO.
EXHAUSTED
Administrative Management Analyst
10/9/2007
207-47
Combination Building Inspector
8/22/2007
207-42
Customer Service Representative
7/20/2006
206-09
Fire Apparatus Operator
9/20/2006
206-08PR
Fire/Building Code Compliance Officer
3/12/2007
207-17
Housing Authority Maintenance Team Leader
12/17/2007
207-73PR
Permit Technician I
6/26/2008
208-17PR
Planner I
7/18/2006
206-38
Police Officer (Attendee/Graduate)
9/15/2007
207-52
Police Officer (Lateral)
11/10/2007
207-53
Program Specialist II (Clean Water Program)
11/2/2006
206-48
Public Works Supervisor
2/11/2008
207-70
Member Horikoshi moved to accept the consent calendar, Member McHugh seconded, and the
motion carried by a 3-0 vote.
5.
REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS
5-A Activity Report - Period of June 1, 2008 - August 31, 2008
Board Member Horikoshi asked what the City's outlook is with regard to the State budget situation. Jill
Kovacs stated that sales tax revenue will decrease due to the closing of Goode Chevrolet and that things
are bleak.
5-B Reclassification from Combination Building Inspector to Senior Combination Building Inspector
Board Member McHugh asked what the history behind the reclassification is. Jill Kovacs stated that the
employee in the Planning and Building department has been acting as a Senior Combination Building
Inspector since July of 2006. Member Horikoshi asked if there are any other Combination Building
Inspectors who might be interested in the position. Jill Kovacs stated that there is only one individual
who meets the qualifications and has the certifications that are required. Member Horikoshi asked if the
City ever rotates acting assignments if there is more then one qualified individual. Jill Kovacs stated that
some departments such as the Police Department will occasionally rotate assignments. In this situation,
however, there is only one person qualified. Member McHugh asked why people are in acting roles for
such a long period of time. Jill Kovacs stated that sometimes it fills an immediate need and the
department doesn't want to make a permanent change until they know for certain if it is necessary. She
also stated that sometimes it takes a while for a position upgrade or new position to be approved, which
is often through the budget process.",CivilServiceBoard/2008-10-01.pdf
CivilServiceBoard,2008-10-01,3,"City of Alameda
Page 3 of 4
Civil Service Board Agenda
Regular Meeting of October 1, 2008
6.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (PUBLIC COMMENT)
Alan Elnick, Business Representative, Operating Engineers Local No. 3 stated that ACEA has been in
discussions with the City regarding the leasing of the Golf Course and its effects on ACEA members. He
stated that the City's plan was to displace golf course employees and replace, by seniority, people in the
Parks Department. He explained that there is a difference between golf course maintenance workers
and parks maintenance workers and asked how golf workers are going to replace people in other job
titles. He also shared that some employees have already been told they would be losing their jobs. He
went on to question how the City determines who has seniority over who. Member Peeler stated that the
Civil Service Board does not know what is happening at the Golf Course and that they will not know until
a final decision has been made.
Jill Kovacs stated that managers have met with employees to give them a heads up as to what could
happen and that no official notice has gone out. Alan Elnick stated that the seniority structure has been
shared with employees. He also stated that he does not understand who bumping rights apply to and
how or why there is only one seniority list for three job titles. Jill Kovacs stated that all of the working
titles fall under classification code 5260 Golf and Park Maintenance Worker and that is the commonality
between them. She further explained that all of these employees were hired into and paid according to
class 5260 Golf and Park Maintenance Worker as established consistently over the years by Council on
the ACEA Salary Schedule.
Linda Justus, ACEA President, stated that when a recruitment is done for a parks maintenance worker
the flyer specifically states parks, and when a recruitment is done for golf the flyer says golf. She stated
that each recruitment that is done forms a separate eligible list and depending on the department, people
are hired from separate lists. She stated that she does not understand how someone can have bumping
rights when they are not hired for the same duties.
Board Member Horikoshi stated that it is not the role of the Civil Service Board to get involved in
negotiations. He stated that they would have staff report on what happens in negotiations. Alan Elnick
stated that it is a Civil Service issue and that it may be brought back to the Board eventually.
Member Peeler stated that the Board needs to see a report on the issues, i.e. seniority, bumping rights,
job titles and when they were lumped together, as well as chronology, etc. She also suggested that
since there was not another Civil Service Board Meeting soon, a special meeting should be scheduled.
Member Horikoshi asked why a person would be hired to maintain the Golf Course and not the parks
and how they plan to execute seniority. Member Peeler stated that the displacement of one or the other
may not be appropriate. Jill Kovacs explained that the minimum qualifications are the same for all of the
titles, and they are certified as to possessing the minimum qualifications for the job. Linda Justus stated
that she recalled a similar situation where an administrative position was posted for three different
departments and then three different lists were certified.
Member Peeler asked how soon the Civil Board can expect to see a report. Jill Kovacs stated that she is
unsure. Member McHugh stated that she would like to see an example of how the City handled a similar
situation. Alan Elnick stated that a legal process is already underway and that ACEA may need to
involve the Board. He suggested that staff advise the Board what classes will be affected.
7.
CIVIL SERVICE BOARD COMMUNICATIONS (COMMUNICATIONS FROM BOARD)
Board Member Horikoshi stated that he received the letter regarding ethics training and that he would
complete it online as soon as possible.
8.
CIVIL SERVICE BOARD COMMUNICATIONS (COMMUNICATIONS FROM STAFF)
Jill Kovacs stated that staff will provide the Board with communication regarding the golf issue this week
and that the City Attorney has been involved.",CivilServiceBoard/2008-10-01.pdf
CivilServiceBoard,2008-10-01,4,"City of Alameda
Page 4 of 4
Civil Service Board Agenda
Regular Meeting of October 1, 2008
9.
There being no further business to come before the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 5:45 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Karen Willis
Human Resources Director &
Executive Secretary to the Civil Service Board",CivilServiceBoard/2008-10-01.pdf