body,date,page,text,path
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority,2009-05-19,1,"APPROVED
MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL MEETING OF THE
ALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
Tuesday, May 19, 2009
The meeting convened at 7:47 p.m. with Chair Johnson presiding.
2-A
1.
ROLL CALL
Present: Chair Beverly Johnson
Boardmember Lena Tam
Boardmember Frank Matarrese
Boardmember Marie Gilmore
Vice Chair Doug deHaan
2.
CONSENT CALENDAR
2-A. Approve the minutes of the Regular Meeting of April 1, 2009.
2-B. Authorize Negotiation and Execution of a Sublease Extension for General Services
Administration at Alameda Point.
2-C. Accept the Interim Executive Director's Statement of Emergency Regarding Expenditures
for the Fire at the Fleet Industrial Supply Center and Approve the Project Budget
Item 2-C was pulled by Member Tam for discussion. The balance of the Consent Calendar
was motioned for approval by Member Tam, seconded by Member Matarrese and passed
by the following voice votes: 5 ayes, 0 Noes, 0 Abstentions.
Item 2-C - Member Tam asked for clarification on whether or not the debris retrieved was
tested. Leslie Little, Development Services Director, explained that the debris was tested by
quarter, and not tested individually, because the intent is to haul everything off. Member Tam
also asked what kind of thresholds should be met to determine whether it was cleaned
accurately. Ms. Little stated that the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) set
the standards for the cleanup.
Vice Chair deHaan and Member Matarrese expressed concerns that the ARRA is now footing
the $1.6M bill for the demo of the burned building. They discussed Catellus' DA which obligates
them to do demolition, which included this building. Ms. Little explained that they're not
obligated to do the demo because they have not moved forward with any initial phase. She
further explained that an issue such as this is an unanticipated cost which clearly demonstrates
what these do to the fund balance.
Member Matarrese requested that the cost be transferred to the project and that Catellus
remain obligated to reimburse the ARRA. He requested the City Attorney provide feedback on
the proper legal options we have so that the project becomes encumbered. Terri Highsmith,
City Attorney, understood the direction and will provide the information requested.
Member Matarrese motioned for approval of Item 2-C with the provision of receiving
feedback from legal counsel on the possibilities of encumbering the cost to the project.
Member Tam seconded the motion and it was passed by the following voice votes: 5
ayes, 0 Noes, 0 Abstentions.",AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2009-05-19.pdf
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority,2009-05-19,2,"3.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (PUBLIC COMMENT)
There were no speakers.
4.
COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE GOVERNING BODY
Vice Chair deHaan and Member Matarrese attended the last RAB meeting and had
concerns about the Navy's cleanup direction - whether it is predicated on the PDC, or if
the Navy is remediating according to SunCal's concept plan. Member Matarrese
requested clarification of their method and also requested this item be agendized and
brought back to the ARRA at its next regular meeting.
5.
ADJOURNMENT
Meeting was adjourned at 8:04 p.m. by Chair Johnson.
Respectfully submitted,
Irma Glidden
ARRA Secretary",AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2009-05-19.pdf
CityCouncil,2009-05-19,1,"MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
TUESDAY- - -MAY 19, 2009- - -7:30 P.M.
Mayor Johnson convened the Regular Meeting at 8:04 p.m.
ROLL CALL - Present : Councilmembers
deHaan,
Gilmore,
Matarrese, Tam, and Mayor Johnson - 5.
Absent :
None.
AGENDA CHANGES
None.
PROCLAMATIONS, SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY AND ANNOUNCEMENTS
(09-193A) Presentation on Water Emergency Transit Authority
Transition Plan and Emergency Management Plan.
The Public Works Director gave a brief presentation.
John Sindzinski, Water Emergency Transit Authority (WETA) Planning
Manager, gave a Power Point presentation.
Councilmember Matarrese inquired what WETA'S plans are once
development starts at the Former Naval Air Station; further
inquired whether the ferry serving Alameda and Oakland would move
to said location.
Mr. Sindzinki responded that WETA anticipates a close working
relationship with the City to potentially reconfigure service or
consider changes that would make the most sense given the proposed
development at the Former Naval Air Station as well as ensuring
that existing riders do not get short changed in the processi
stated hopefully, the economy will improve by the time improvements
are completed; additional ferry services are in demand.
The Public Works Director stated the Transition Plan mentions the
Alameda Point location; the Alameda/Oakland Ferry Service would be
transferred over to the sea plain lagoon and would link up to the
Harbor Bay ferry service; staff has applied for a discretional
ferryboat grant.
Councilmember Matarrese inquired what would happen to the riders in
Oakland.
Mr. Sindzinski responded plans are to keep the same level of
service out of Oakland and Alameda.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
1
May 19, 2009",CityCouncil/2009-05-19.pdf
CityCouncil,2009-05-19,2,"Mayor Johnson stated a ferry service from Jack London Square to San
Francisco has been discussed.
Mr. Sindzinski stated the model is to operate the service directly
from Oakland but is based on ridership estimates done five or six
years agoi now is the time to be creative; the role is to make the
ferry service work for as many people as possible.
Councilmember Matarrese stated nothing is set in stone.
Mr. Sindzinski stated making services work for as many people as
possible is set in stone.
Mayor Johnson stated the WETA Board discussed the obligation to
ensure that attention would be given existing service levels before
expanding.
Mr. Sindzinski stated the five-year plan addresses being able to
operate all existing services and bringing two new routes on line.
Vice Mayor deHaan commended WETA for looking at Alameda Point as
the maintenance operation; stated hopefully, the developer
understands the requirements; Alameda and Vallejo requested a
certain amount of Return on Investment (ROI) ; inquired whether the
matter has been addressed.
Mr. Sindzinski responded the Transition Plan shows that existing
services will be retained within the amount of funding available;
costs need to be identified; a lot of work needs to be done.
Vice Mayor deHaan stated that he recalls requesting a $2 million or
$3 million ROI.
The Public Works Director stated that he does not recall the
amount; the City would be compensated for money that could be used
for other purposes negotiations are still in progress.
Keith Stahnke, Water Emergency Transit Authority Operations
Manager, continued with the Power Point presentation.
Mr. Sindzinski stated WETA is very cognizant of the long tradition
and history that Alameda and Vallejo have in providing ferry
services WETA is committed to keeping services viable moving
forward; Alameda has very sensitive needs in the event of a
disaster.
The Public Works Director noted that Mayor Johnson sits on the WETA
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
2
May 19, 2009",CityCouncil/2009-05-19.pdf
CityCouncil,2009-05-19,3,"Board.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Mayor Johnson announced that the Quarterly Sales Tax Report
[paragraph no. 09-196] ; the Quarterly Treasury Report [paragraph
no. 09-197] i and the Resolution Authorizing the Interim City
Manager or Designee to Apply for a State Water Resources Control
Board Loan [paragraph no. 09-203 ] were removed from the Consent
Calendar for discussion.
Councilmember Tam moved approval of the remainder of the Consent
Calendar.
Vice Mayor deHaan seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous
voice vote - 5. [Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an
asterisk preceding the paragraph number. ]
(*09-194) - Minutes of the Regular and Special City Council Meetings
held on May 5, 2009. Approved.
( *09-195) - Ratified bills in the amount of $1,851,801.03.
(09-196) Recommendation to accept Quarterly Sales Tax Report for
the period ending December 31, 2008.
Councilmember Tam stated there is some good news in today's
economic times; Alameda is doing very well compared to the State in
terms of sales tax growth; the staff report is in depth and
provides good, detailed information; Harbor Bay Business Park shows
a positive change of 165.2% the City lost auto dealerships on Park
Street; inquired whether Harbor Bay Business could off set the
loss.
The Interim City Manager responded in the affirmative; stated the
City is fortunate to have a light industrial business park; the
Business Park creates jobs and also stabilizes the retail sales
which are very volatile in the economic recession; business-to
business is a very healthy category.
Mayor Johnson stated that she attended a new ribbon cutting at
Harbor Bay Business Park today hopefully a restaurant will be
included in the next phase; complaints have been received regarding
the are not having food.
The Interim City Manager stated the staff report covers the last
quarter of the last calendar year.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
3
May 19, 2009",CityCouncil/2009-05-19.pdf
CityCouncil,2009-05-19,4,"Mayor Johnson stated stable numbers are because of the efforts of
the Development Services Department.
Vice Mayor deHaan stated the business-to-business category took a
substantial drop between 2003 and 20041 the light industry segment
has had substantial growth within the last two years; the business-
to-business category has less impact on the General Fund; commended
the Development Services Department; stated the philosophy has
changed at the Harbor Bay Business Park; light industry has become
prominent.
Councilmember Tam moved approval of the staff recommendation.
Councilmember Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by
unanimous voice vote - 5.
(09-197) Recommendation to accept Quarterly Treasury Report for
the period ending March 31, 2009.
Councilmember Tam requested clarification of the City's cash assets
noted in the staff report.
The Interim City Manager stated cash-on-hand includes funds in
petty cash, change boxes, and the vault; cash-on-deposit includes
money in Certificates of Deposits, money markets, and investments;
cash-on-deposit funds are accessible fairly quickly; working
capital includes funds on deposit with the Local Agency Investment
Fund (LAIF) ; money is accessible within twenty-four hours; idle
cash includes funds under management by registered investment
advisors; bond proceeds include money left over from a debt
issuance that are kept in a trustee account. the City's total cash
assets were $127,373,871 as of March 31, 2009.
Councilmember Tam inquired whether working capital funds would be
used if the City has to deal with that State borrowing $2 to 3
million from the City's General Fund.
The Interim City Manager responded the State would give the City a
""net check;"" stated the State would take money before cash is
distributed; a ""net check"" might not be enough to pay all bills in
a ninety-day period.
In response to Vice Mayor deHaan's inquiry, the Interim City
Manager stated $127,373,871 is all cash together; approximately
$8.6 million is General Fund cash.
Councilmember Gilmore inquired whether the $127,373,871 is real
cash in the aggregate from everywhere in the City and could be used
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
4
May 19, 2009",CityCouncil/2009-05-19.pdf
CityCouncil,2009-05-19,5,"for spending.
The Interim City Manager responded the $127,373,871 cannot be used
for spending stated the amount is cash that the City is working
with to invest and pay bills.
Councilmember Tam moved approval of the staff recommendation.
Councilmember Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by
unanimous voice vote - 5.
(*09-198) - Recommendation to set June 2, 2009, for Public Hearing to
consider collection of delinquent business license fees. Accepted.
(*09-199) Recommendation to set the Public Hearing for delinquent
integrated Waste Management charges for June 16, 2009. Accepted.
(*09-200) Resolution No. 14329, ""To Preliminarily Approve the
Annual Report Declaring the City's Intention to Order the Levy and
Collection of Assessments and Providing for Notice of Public
Hearing on June 16, 2009 - Island City Landscaping and Light
District 84-2."" Adopted.
(*09-201) Resolution No. 14330, ""To Preliminarily Approve the
Annual Report Declaring the City's Intention to Order the Levy and
Collection of Assessments and Providing for Notice of Public
Hearing on June 16, 2009 - Maintenance Assessment District 01-01 -
(Marina Cove). Adopted.
(*09-202) Resolution No. 14331, ""Authorizing the Interim City
Manager to Apply for a Permit from Dredged Material Management
Office and Other Necessary Agencies for Dredging of the Harbor Bay
Ferry Channel. Adopted;
( 09-202A) - Resolution No. 14332, ""Authorizing CLE Engineering, Inc.
of Novato, California to Represent the City of Alameda on All
Matters Pertaining to Dredged Material Management Office Dredging
Permit Applications. Adopted; and
(*09-202B) Resolution No. 14333, ""Adopting California Environmental
Quality Act Class 4 Categorical Exemption (15304 (G) ) with Alameda
County of the Upcoming Dredging Episode. Adopted.
(09-203) Resolution No. 14334, ""Authorizing the Interim City
Manager or Designee to Apply for a State Water Resources Control
Board Loan in the Amount of $3,546,000 and Execute All Associated
Agreements, and Identify the Sewer Fund as the Source of Revenue
for Repayment of the Loan. "" Adopted.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
5
May 19, 2009",CityCouncil/2009-05-19.pdf
CityCouncil,2009-05-19,6,"Vice Mayor deHaan stated the Development Services Department was
recently loaned approximately $3 million for the Wilver ""Willie""
Stargel project; that he has concerns about borrowing money from
the State and using the Sewer Fund as the source of revenue for
repaying the loan; the process does not seem to be correct money
management.
The City Engineer stated staff planned on using economic recovery
funds when interest rates were not known; staff has been advised
that interest rates would be between zero and three percent; staff
will finalize the loan if the proposed interest rate for the Clean
Water State Revolving Fund are lower than interest rate received on
the Sewer Fund balance; money is available and has been earmarked
for the project staff is trying to take advantage of any economic
recovery monies available.
Vice Mayor deHaan stated that he has concerns with an internal
loan.
The Interim City Manager stated Council approved a loan from the
Sewer Fund to the CIC to complete the project and protect STIP
funds; the CIC is paying the Sewer Fund almost 3% in interest; the
Sewer Fund has the opportunity to borrow the money from the State
at less interest.
Vice Mayor deHaan inquired how much interest the City is getting
from the Sewer Fund to the CIC, to which the Interim City Manager
responded 3%
Vice Mayor deHaan stated the profit margin is very thin.
The Interim City Manager stated 2% is not too bad in this market.
Councilmember Tam moved adoption of the resolution.
Councilmember Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by
unanimous voice vote - 5.
(*09-204) Resolution No. 14335, ""Approving Amendment No. 1 to the
Long-Term - Power Purchase Agreement between Iberdrola Renewables,
Inc. and Alameda Municipal Power. "" Adopted.
(*09-205) Resolution No. 14336, ""Of Intention to Levy an Annual
Assessment on the Alameda Business Improvement Area of the City of
Alameda for Fiscal Year 2009-10 and Set a Public Hearing for June
2, 2009. "" Adopted.
CITY MANAGER COMMUNICATIONS
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
6
May 19, 2009",CityCouncil/2009-05-19.pdf
CityCouncil,2009-05-19,7,"(09-206) Financial ""State of the City""
The Interim City Manager gave a Power Point presentation.
Mayor Johnson inquired whether the League of California Cities has
taken a position regarding additional cuts threatened to cities if
State propositions do not pass.
Councilmember Tam responded the League of California Cities has
taken a very strong, strident position that the State should be
balancing its budget with State funds instead of counting on
cities the League has launched a campaign to garner support for
coalition partners that depend so heavily on cities to provide some
safety net programs cities can adopt a Resolution of Hardship if
payroll cannot be made without declaring bankruptcy.
The Interim City Manager stated forty cities within California have
stated they would experience financial hardship if the State
borrows money from them; many cities do not have cash reserves ; the
convoluted logic is that cities could borrow cash with interest
from the State for money that the State took from cities.
Councilmember Gilmore inquired whether the obligation to the State
would be discharged if a city filed bankruptcy, to which the City
Attorney responded in the negative.
Councilmember Gilmore stated bankruptcy is a creature of federal
law.
Mayor Johnson stated cities need to review the City of Vallejo's
[bankruptcy] case.
Councilmember Tam inquired whether the City could be eligible to
pass a Resolution of Hardship.
The Interim City Manager responded there is no criteria stating
that a city has to be in a certain dire state to pass a Resolution
of Hardship; stated the idea behind a Resolution of Hardship is
that every dime in the reserve cash balance has been spent and the
city is operating on negative cash.
Councilmember Tam stated cities would be penalized for prudent
financial management.
The Interim City Manager stated the City would have to stay frosty
for the next few weeks to see what happens with the propositions.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
7
May 19, 2009",CityCouncil/2009-05-19.pdf
CityCouncil,2009-05-19,8,"Mayor Johnson stated larger cities do not have a lot of cash
because obligations are so large; small cities do not have extra
cash; mid-sized cities are the easiest target.
The Interim City Manager stated that larger cities are self-insured
and cash is protected to pay claims larger cities are in a cash
strapped situation; Alameda can weather the storm if the situation
lasts for a year now the State is coming after larger revenues to
deal with structural deficits that have occurred over twelve years.
Mayor Johnson stated the public should know the amount of money
diverted by the State in the last seven years.
The Interim City Manager stated the State has taken approximately
$53 million from the City since the last recession.
Councilmember Tam stated cities were supposed to inundate the State
with a thousand calls after the Governor released the May revise.
The Deputy City Manager stated that she made her case outlining how
the Governor should look elsewhere for monies; that she requested
local realtors and the Chamber of Commerce to call; the Chamber of
Commerce alerted business associations to call; the Governor did
not restore the Vehicle License Fee.
Vice Mayor deHaan stated the Vehicle License Fee was paid back
quickly in the past; inquired how much is the AMP note.
The Interim City Manager responded the AMP note is the difference
between the 0.4% and 1% [ROI] for the last thirty-six months, which
is about $1. 2 million and does not include the loan to start the
telecom enterprise; a reasonable repayment schedule needs to be
reviewed.
Councilmember Tam stated an appropriate approach would be to give
direction to: 1) not pursue further workforce reductions; 2) review
creative ways to delay calling in AMP loans; and 3) review ways to
delay funding the internal service fund debts.
The Interim City Manager stated the City needs to stay very alert
and frosty; cities will need to speak louder than before.
Mayor Johnson stated there are a lot of unknowns; cities need to be
very careful.
The Interim City Manager continued the Power Point presentation.
Councilmember Tam inquired whether the City could make money by
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
8
May 19, 2009",CityCouncil/2009-05-19.pdf
CityCouncil,2009-05-19,9,"investing in Oakland's 9% tax-exempt bonds.
The Interim City Manager responded the City can buy somebody else's
taxable debt; departments paying debt service would not have to pay
as much if the City could make more money by investing reserve
funds and making a higher return for a year or two.
Councilmember Matarrese inquired whether staff knows if Oakland
would default; stated Oakland's deficit is extreme tonight's
election outcome could put Oakland's back up against the wall.
The Interim City Manager stated the City needs to review credit
ratings along with what assets back the debt.
Vice Mayor deHaan inquired what is the City's current bond rating,
to which the Interim City Manager respond AA-
Vice Mayor deHaan inquired what is Oakland's bond rating.
The Interim City Manager responded that she does not know; stated
the City could buy AMP's debt.
Vice Mayor deHaan inquired what is the life expectancy of the
various redevelopment projects.
The Development Services Director responded the Business and
Waterfront Improvement Project (BWIP) goes out to 2032; stated the
West End Community Improvement Project (WECIP) goes out to 2026;
Alameda Point Improvement Project (APIP) goes out to 2031.
In response to Vice Mayor deHaan's inquiry, the Development
Services Director responded terms were not changed when the areas
merged.
Vice Mayor deHaan inquired whether more bonding efforts are
anticipated.
The Development Services Director responded in the affirmative
stated there are limitations on when debt can be issued; debt can
only be issued within the first twenty years of a project area's
life; staff anticipates APIP'S project life will need to be
extended through an amendment process.
Vice Mayor deHaan inquired what terms are granted through the
amendment process.
The Development Services Director responded ten years would be
requested; the normal life of a project usually coincides with the
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
9
May 19, 2009",CityCouncil/2009-05-19.pdf
CityCouncil,2009-05-19,10,"time debt is issued, which would typically be between twenty-five
and thirty years.
Vice Mayor deHaan stated the APIP clock is rolling.
The Development Services Director stated APIP debt falls on lease
revenue and the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority;
currently, APIP does not have any debt.
REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS
(09-207) Public Hearing to consider introduction of an Ordinance
Amending the Alameda Municipal Code by Adding Section 30-60 (Bay-
Friendly Landscaping Requirements for New City Landscaping
Projects, City Renovation Projects, and Public-Private Partnership
Projects) to Article IV (Water: Conservation Landscaping) of
Chapter XXX (Development Regulations) .
The Planning Services Manager gave a brief presentation.
Teresa Eade, StopWaste.Org Senior Project Manager, gave a Power
Point presentation.
Vice Mayor deHaan inquired what type of grants are issued.
Ms. Eade responded that Bay-Friendly and Green Building Landscaping
grants are issued; stated project teams and cities need to notify
StopWaste.Org to receive technical assistance; grants range from
$5,000 to $35,000 for Bay-Friendly Landscaping and range from
$20,000 to $70,000 for Green Building Landscaping.
Mayor Johnson stated the City received a grant for the Library.
Ms. Eade stated the idea is to offset costs.
Vice Mayor deHaan inquired what size project could be funded
through a grant.
Ms. Eade responded the City's policy would be about 10,000 square
feet; stated grants require at least a 2,500 square foot irrigated
area.
Councilmember Tam moved introduction of the ordinance.
Councilmember Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by
unanimous voice vote - 5.
(09-208 - ) Appeal of December 17, 2008 Finance Director Decision and
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
10
May 19, 2009",CityCouncil/2009-05-19.pdf
CityCouncil,2009-05-19,11,"March 9, 2009 Bureau of Licenses Decision to revoke the Business
License of the ""Purple Elephant"" located at 1537 Webster Street,
Suite B, Alameda.
Mayor Johnson announced that she would recuse herself because she
was a hearing officer on the Bureau of Licenses appeal.
The Interim City Manager gave a brief presentation.
Vice Mayor deHaan opened the public portion of the hearing.
Proponents (In favor of appeal) : Edward Higginbotham, Appellant's
City Attorney; Robert Raich, Purple Elephant Collective, Inc.
Juliet Hopper, Richmond; Garland Lee Mahan, Alameda; Gary Lebitt,
Alameda; Ann Channin, Alameda.
Opponents (Not in favor of appeal) : Kathy Moehring, West Alameda
Business Association (WABA) ; Robb Ratto, Park Street Business
Association (PSBA)
.
There being no further speakers, Vice Mayor deHaan closed the
public portion of the hearing.
Following Mr. Higginbotham's comments, Councilmember Gilmore stated
the staff report notes that the substantive findings supporting the
decision of the Interim Finance Director and the Bureau of Licenses
were never challenged; the nature of the business was not described
fully and accurately because of the business owner's fear of
federal prosecution; the transcript notes that the business owner
stated that no one puts medical cannabis on anything because other
cities such as San Francisco, Oakland, and Berkeley have contracts
agreeing not to turn over information to the federal government ;
the business owner was not provided with the form so he did not put
anything down; inquired whether the business owner did not
accurately describe the nature of the business.
Mr. Higginbotham responded it depends upon how accurately and
completely is described; stated most businesses in the area have
similar details of the business; general retail is accurate.
Councilmember Gilmore stated the substantive findings were never
challenged.
Mr. Higginbotham stated the business owner has never been
untruthful.
Councilmember Tam inquired whether the Purple Elephant is still
operating after the two hearings, to which the Interim City Manager
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
11
May 19, 2009",CityCouncil/2009-05-19.pdf
CityCouncil,2009-05-19,12,"responded in the affirmative.
The City Attorney stated the Appellant is permitted to continue to
operate until the City reaches a final decision.
Vice Mayor deHaan inquired whether ongoing efforts have been made
to consider an ordinance.
The City Attorney responded in the affirmative; stated a moratorium
is currently in place on the particular land use in order to permit
a study of where appropriate use would be within the City and what
type of conditions would be necessary; the moratorium is in place
until June of next year; a report will come back to Council.
Councilmember Matarrese stated the first assertion states that the
Appellant only received eleven days notice on a hearing to show
cause; inquired whether the eleven days is in contradiction with
State or federal law.
The City Attorney responded in the negative.
Councilmember Matarrese stated the second assertion states that the
Interim Finance Director had a conflict of interest based upon the
fact of being a paid employee in the capacity of the hearing
officer.
The City Attorney stated that she interprets the Haas case very
differently than Mr. Higginbotham; the Haas case involved a paid
hearing officer; the court discussed the inappropriateness because
the hearing officer had interest in the ruling, which is not the
case of an employee of the City.
Councilmember Matarrese inquired whether the Interim Finance
Director's status as the hearing officer is any different than
Council's status as the ultimate Appeals Board as employees of the
City, to which the City Attorney responded in the negative.
Councilmember Gilmore stated that she did not see anything in the
record that indicated that the Appellant received any zoning
approval from the Planning and Building Department or that the
Planning and Building Department had any opportunity to weigh in on
the appropriateness for the City.
Councilmember Tam stated the transcript notes that the hearing
officer explicitly requested what was in the Appellant's mind when
stating miscellaneous retail in order to classify the type of
revenue and that there was a disclosure issue during the process;
that she wants to understand the classification of revenues.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
12
May 19, 2009",CityCouncil/2009-05-19.pdf
CityCouncil,2009-05-19,13,"The Interim City Manager stated miscellaneous retail is used when
there is no other identifiable source and the business does not fit
into the industrial code of index.
Councilmember Tam stated that staff should have some idea of the
type of merchandise sold by classifying revenues; staff would not
be able to understand whether revenues are on par with the industry
without said information.
The Interim City Manager stated indicating miscellaneous retail
cross checks against a certain tax rate.
Councilmember Tam stated the issue has come up in other
jurisdictions where applicants have put down miscellaneous retail;
the business license was challenged in court later; the court made
a ruling in the 4th Appellant District in the City of Corona; the
ruling states ""Where a particular use of land is not expressly
enumerated in a City's municipal code as constituting a permissible
use, it follows that such use is impermissible; inquired whether
the use is not permissible if the City does not have an explicit
permissible use for medical marijuana dispensaries.
The City Attorney responded in the affirmative; stated the Zoning
Administrator would need to determine whether the use is close
enough to a permissible use in a particular location; otherwise,
the use would not be permissible.
Councilmember Matarrese moved approval to uphold the decision of
the Bureau of Licenses to revoke the business license.
Councilmember Gilmore seconded the motion.
Under discussion, Councilmember Gilmore stated PSBA and WABA work
very hard to attract new businesses; many times PSBA, WABA and the
Development Services Department are aware of potential businesses
looking for space before a business license is pulled; that she is
not getting the sense that any dialogue occurred between the
Appellant and business associations; that she is uncomfortable
given the incomplete disclosure on the business license and lack of
contact with local business associations; the Appellant did not
solicit the opinions of the business associations. the process
seems to have been done under cover.
Councilmember Matarrese stated the business activity is illegal and
is in conflict with Proposition 215; the City is caught in the
middle; the findings of the two previous hearings merit upholding
the decisions of the Interim Finance Director and Bureau of
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
13
May 19, 2009",CityCouncil/2009-05-19.pdf
CityCouncil,2009-05-19,14,"Licenses ; what happens in the future will depend upon what happens
between now and June, 2010 when the issue will be addressed during
the course of the moratorium.
On the call for the question, the motion carried by the following
voice vote: Ayes: louncilmembers deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese, and
Tam - 4. Abstentions Mayor Johnson - 1.
(09-209) Resolution No. 14337, ""Authorizing the Interim City
Manager to Apply for Regional Measure 1 Bridge Toll Funds,
Including Five Percent Unrestricted State Funds and Two Percent
Bridge Toll Reserve Funds for the Operating Subsidy and Capital
Projects for the City of Alameda Ferry Services, and to Enter into
All Agreements Necessary to Secure These Funds for Fiscal Year
2009-10"". Adopted;
(09-209A) Recommendation to authorize the Interim City Manager to
execute a fourth amendment to the amended and restated Ferry
Services Agreement with the Port of Oakland to extend the term for
one additional year at a cost of $70,6491
(09-209B) Recommendation to authorize the Interim City Manager to
execute a one-year extension of the Sixth Amended and Restated
Operating Agreement for the Alameda Harbor Bay Ferry and adopt
associated budgets and
(09-209C) Recommendation to authorize the Interim City Manager to
execute an amendment to the Agreement to extend the term for one
additional year of the Blue & Gold Fleet Operating Agreement with
the Alameda/Oakland Ferry Service and adopted associated budgets.
The Public Works Director and Ferry Services Manager gave a brief
presentation.
Mayor Johnson inquired whether WETA has seen the proposed amendment
language, to which the Ferry Services Manager responded in the
affirmative.
Mayor Johnson inquired what is WETA's response.
The Ferry Services Manager stated WETA is interested in meeting
with the Port of Oakland to see what can be done in the event of
significant expenses. WETA is interested in the Port of Oakland's
timeline; the Port of Oakland will hire a consultant to perform a
thorough analysis of the barge and make recommendations about what
needs to be done; WETA is interested in knowing how the Gemini
would be impacted; the Alameda Main Street terminal is ready and
modified to handle the Gemini; the Gemini is being held back
because the Port of Oakland's Clay Street dock has not been
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
14
May 19, 2009",CityCouncil/2009-05-19.pdf
CityCouncil,2009-05-19,15,"repaired.
Mayor Johnson inquired whether the ferry would not stop at Jack
London Square if the Port of Oakland withdrew funding stated Jack
London Square passengers are a significant part of the fare
revenue.
The Ferry Services Manager responded the Port of Oakland
contributed approximately 49% percent of all tickets purchased in
2008; stated most riders are excursion riders and do not take
advantage of commuter discounts; more than 50% of fare box revenue
comes from Oakland; hopefully, the Port of Oakland will move
quickly.
Mayor Johnson inquired whether the entire ferry service would be in
jeopardy without the Jack London service, to which the Ferry
Services Manager responded in the affirmative.
Councilmember Matarrese stated that he is not willing to insert the
proposed paragraph because the jump from not finding money and
killing the service is very short; inquired whether tonight's
action could be delayed.
The Public Works Director responded the matter could come back to
Council; stated one option would be to allow the Interim City
Manager to negotiate and bring the matter back before finalization.
The Ferry Services Manager stated perhaps the Blue & Gold Fleet
Operating Agreement could be extended on a month-to-month basis;
that he has concerns because getting on the Port of Commissioners
calendar takes approximately two months; the Port of Oakland and
Blue & Gold Agreements expire June 30, 2009.
Mayor Johnson stated the Port of Oakland Agreement language needs
to be reflected in the Blue & Gold Agreement.
The Ferry Services Manager stated the Agreements already have
language stating that the City can suspend the Contract if funding
sources do not come through.
Councilmember Gilmore stated Oakland's ability to fund dock side
improvements is not technically the City's the funding source;
language needs to be clear that if the Port of Oakland pulls out,
it is tied to the existence of the ferry service in Oakland, not
the funding source.
Vice Mayor deHaan inquired where Oakland gets funding.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
15
May 19, 2009",CityCouncil/2009-05-19.pdf
CityCouncil,2009-05-19,16,"The Ferry Services Manager responded from the Port of Oakland's
General Fund.
Vice Mayor deHaan inquired whether the Port of Oakland is entitled
to Measure B revenue.
The Ferry Services Manager responded Measure B revenue is strictly
for Alameda's Ferry Services.
Mayor Johnson stated WETA has access to a lot of funding not
available to the City.
The Public Works Director stated that the City Attorney is saying
that Council could extend the Port of Oakland and Blue & Gold
Agreements on a month-to-montl basis.
The City Attorney stated Council could authorize the Interim City
Manager to negotiate a fourth amendment with the understanding that
the new paragraph proposed would not be included.
Vice Mayor deHaan inquired what is WETA'S position on taking over
the Ferry Service.
The Ferry Services Manager responded the tentative transfer date is
January 1, 2010; stated WETA has discussed using Measure 1B
Preparation Funds for the Port of Oakland barge; WETA would need to
negotiate with the Port of Oakland.
Mayor Johnson stated that maintaining Oakland's ferry service is
important because of the Oak Street to Ninth Street development.
Councilmember Matarrese moved approval of the staff recommendation
to apply for Regional Measure 1 Funds.
Councilmember Tam seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous
voice vote - 5.
Councilmember Matarrese moved approval of a month-to-month
extension to the existing terms for the Blue & Gold and Port of
Oakland Agreements.
Councilmember Gilmore seconded the motion, which carried by
unanimous voice vote - 5.
Councilmember Matarrese moved approval of authorizing the Interim
City Manager to execute the amendment to the Harbor Bay Ferry
Service Agreement.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
16
May 19, 2009",CityCouncil/2009-05-19.pdf
CityCouncil,2009-05-19,17,"Councilmember Gilmore seconded the motion, which carried by
unanimous voice vote - 5.
The City Attorney stated Council may want to authorize the Interim
City Manager to negotiate a fourth amendment to the Port of Oakland
Ferry Service Agreement.
Councilmember Matarrese moved approval of authorizing the Interim
City Manager to negotiate a fourth amendment to the Port of Oakland
Ferry Service Agreement.
Councilmember Gilmore seconded the motion, which carried by
unanimous voice vote - 5.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA
None.
COUNCIL REFERRALS
None.
COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS
(09-210 - ) Mayor Johnson requested that consideration of appointment
to the Youth Commission be placed on the next City Council agenda.
( 09-211) Vice Mayor deHaan stated that the Mif Albright Golf Course
is reopening Friday.
(09-212) Vice Mayor deHaan stated an application has been submitted
for a Flea Market at the College of Alameda; there were major
concerns with the Antique Fair at Alameda Point; the community has
concerns with re-establishing a Flea Market in the West End
hopefully, outreach has been done within the community and business
associations regarding the matter.
(09-213) - Vice Mayor deHaan stated transmitting the last City
Council meeting was problematic; inquired whether there is a backup
system.
Mayor Johnson inquired whether the problem was with Comcast or the
City.
The Public Works Director responded the problem was a Public Works
problem; stated there was a staff mix up; staff corrected the
problem as soon as they were aware.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
17
May 19, 2009",CityCouncil/2009-05-19.pdf
CityCouncil,2009-05-19,18,"ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the
Regular Meeting at 11:15 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Lana Stoker
Acting City Clerk
The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown
Act.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
18
May 19, 2009",CityCouncil/2009-05-19.pdf
CityCouncil,2009-05-19,19,"MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL JOINT CITY COUNCIL,
ALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (ARRA)
AND COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION (CIC) MEETING
TUESDAY- - -MAY 19, 2009- -6:45 P.M.
Mayor/Chair Johnson convened the Special Meeting at 6:50 p.m.
ROLL CALL -
Present : Councilmembers/Board Members/Commissioners
deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese, Tam, and
Mayor/Chair Johnson - 5.
Absent :
None.
Public Comment : Jean Sweeney, Alameda, stated that development
agreements are enforceable by law even if the development does not
materialize as long as there is public benefit; SunCal has already
sold their interest to D. E. Shaw; the Alameda Point Master Plan
has twenty pages of parks that may or not happen and contains big
promises about saving the historic buildings; the SunCal initiative
has a different story; demolishing three hundred buildings to make
way for six thousand homes on toxic land in a flood plain; to rip
off Alameda citizens is unconscionable.
The Special Meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider:
(09-192 CC/ARRA/09-17 CIC) Conference with Real Property
Negotiators (54956.8) i Property: Alameda Point Negotiating
parties : City Council / AARRA / CIC / SunCal; Under negotiations :
Price and terms.
Following the Closed Session, the Special Meeting was reconvened
and Mayor/Chair Johnson announced that the City Council, ARRA, and
CIC received a briefing on the status of negotiations with SunCal;
no action was taken.
Adjournment
There being no further business, the Special Joint meeting was
adjourned at 7:40 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Lana Stoker, Acting City Clerk
Acting Secretary, CIC
The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown
Act.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
19
May 19, 2009",CityCouncil/2009-05-19.pdf
CityCouncil,2009-05-19,20,"MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL JOINT CITY COUNCIL AND
COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION (CIC) MEETING
TUESDAY- - -MAY 19, 2009- -7:27 P.M.
Mayor/Chair Johnson convened the Joint Meeting at 7:46 p.m.
ROLL CALL - Present : Councilmembers/Commissioners
deHaan,
Gilmore, Matarrese, Tam, and Mayor/Chair
Johnson - 5.
Absent :
None.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Councilmember/Commissioner Matarrese moved approval of the Consent
Calendar.
Councilmember/Commissioner 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. ]
(*09-18 CIC) Minutes of the Special Community Improvement
Commission Meeting held on April 7, 2009, and the Special Joint
City Council/Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority/Community
Improvement Commission Meeting held on April 14, 2009. Approved.
(*09-193 CC) Resolution No. 14328, ""Approving and Adopting the
Report to the City Council on the Proposed Amendments to the
Community Improvement Plans for the Business and Waterfront
Improvement Project and the West End Community Improvement Project,
Submitting the Report and Proposed Amendments to the City Council,
and Consenting to and Requesting the City Council to Call a Joint
Public Hearing on the Proposed Amendments. Adopted; and
( *09-019 CIC) Resolution No. 09-195, ""Consenting to and Calling
Joint Public Hearings on the Proposed Amendments to the Community
Improvement Plans for the Business and Waterfront Improvement
Project and the West End Community Improvement Project. "" Adopted.
AGENDA ITEMS
None.
Special Joint Meeting
Alameda City Council and
20
Community Improvement Commission
May 19, 2009",CityCouncil/2009-05-19.pdf
CityCouncil,2009-05-19,21,"ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, Mayor/Chair Johnson adjourned the
Special Joint Meeting at 7:47 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Lana Stoker, Acting City Clerk
Acting
Secretary,
Community
Improvement Commission
The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown
Act.
Special Joint Meeting
Alameda City Council and
21
Community Improvement Commission
May 19, 2009",CityCouncil/2009-05-19.pdf