body,date,page,text,path
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority,2010-10-06,1,"APPROVED
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE
ALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
Wednesday, October 6, 2010
The meeting convened at 7:10 p.m. with Chair Johnson presiding.
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 September 1, 2010.
2-B. Authorize Negotiation and Execution of a Sublease for Jim Bustos Plumbing, Inc., Building
612, at Alameda Point.
2-C. Authorize the Executive Director to Execute an Amendment to an Agreement with Russell
Resources for Environmental Consulting Services for Alameda Point Extending the Term
for 12 Months and Adding $140,000 to the Budget.
2-D. Authorize Negotiation and Execution of a Sublease for NRC Environmental Services, Inc.
Building 616 and Yard D-13, at Alameda Point.
Vice Chair deHaan moved for approval of the Consent Calendar. Member Tam seconded
the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5
3.
REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS
None.
4.
ORAL REPORTS
4-A. Oral report from Member Matarrese, Restoration Advisory Board (RAB) representative
- Highlights of September 2 Alameda Point RAB Meeting.
Member Matarrese was not able to attend the Sept. 2 meeting but received materials regarding
remediation activity in progress with a new technology, and a brief report on the University of
Florida study of the remediation technique.
5.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (PUBLIC COMMENT)
There were no speakers.
6.
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR COMMUNICATIONS
6-A. Presentation on ""Going Forward"" Community Forums for Alameda Point",AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2010-10-06.pdf
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority,2010-10-06,2,"The Planning Services Manager gave an oral presentation on the schedule of the Alameda
Point Community Forums, an initial eight month public outreach effort of the first phase of
planning, which would end in June 2011 and restart the environmental review process. The
Planning Services Manager explained that while the City of Alameda is doing a CEQA
document EIR, the Navy will be doing a NEPA document. The Navy process won't start until
there is a project description or general description of the City's plan. The goal is eight months.
The eight-month schedule starts with a series of community outreach efforts, including
community workshops and internet outreach. The tentative schedule of the first three meetings
is: November 9 at the Grand Pavilion, November 18 at Mastick, and December 8 in west
Alameda. These workshops and key components of each meeting will be consistent from
meeting to meeting.
The Planning Services Manager summarized the six key areas as noted in the staff report: 1)
Community Facilities, 2) Land Use Mix, 3) Streets, Parks, and Open Space, 4) Transportation
Access, 5) Architectural Character and Building Types, and 6) Historic Character and Adaptive
Reuse.
There are plans for a Tenant Forum in the spring focused on economic development strategy, a
Developer and Business Forum, and discussions with each of the Boards and Commissions. A
summary will be presented to the ARRA Board in March 2011, and a project description in June
2011.
Member Gilmore requested an overview of where Alameda and the Bay Area stand in the
commercial and industrial real estate market. The Interim City Manager discussed the
application of a citywide real estate management policy which will include the information
Member Gilmore requested about comparable leases.
Member Tam requested an evaluation of internal competition, i.e., Marina Village VS. Alameda
Point.
Member Matarrese discussed the commercialization and industrialization approach to
development at Alameda Point, stating that the markets already out there are not the typical
suburban business park, not the type of businesses that would go into Marina Village, i.e., NRC
and supporting industries, Spirits Alley, the maritime industry. Member Matarrese also
discussed the jobs housing, and that job creation should drive it, stating that Alameda Point will
never be the rest of Alameda and probably shouldn't be, because it is industrial. Alameda Point
should reflect what it was and people will look at it in a different way.
Vice Chair deHaan concurred with Member Matarrese, stating that Alameda Point has a
different architectural design and that the development should maximize the unique venue out
there, and that folks should not get caught up in that it has to look like the rest of Alameda.
Member Gilmore recommended evaluating and targeting the types of businesses and industries
that would value the asset of Alameda's own electric utility.
Member Tam inquired a status report on communications with the Navy and if they were aware
of the ""Going Forward"" plan, to which the Deputy City Manager - Development Services
responded in the affirmative, stating that staff met with the Navy last week. The Navy produced
conveyance objectives and stated that they want to help facilitate conveyance and interim
economic development. The Interim City Manager stated that she will meet with the Navy's top
management every 90 days for a status update.",AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2010-10-06.pdf
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority,2010-10-06,3,"Member Tam inquired if there was opportunity for Alameda to get funding for the EIR process.
The Deputy City Manager - Development Services responded in the affirmative, stating that
staff has discussed funding possibilities with the Navy. There are some technical issues as the
Navy has a contract for their NEPA process, and the City has a CEQA contract, but it may be
possible to combine the processes so that it is cost efficient.
Member Tam inquired if there are synergies between the sister federal agencies (Lawrence
Berkeley Lab is with the Dept. of Energy, and the Veterans Administration has close ties with
Navy). The Deputy City Manager - Development Services explained that, regarding the VA, the
Navy understands that there has to be coordination to the extent that City staff can work with
the VA to leverage their infrastructure and develop that relationship, not just in terms of
regulatory process, but also with actual physical improvements and infrastructure. With regards
to the Lawrence Berkeley Lab's requests for proposals for land to host their second campus, the
City is prepared to submit a proposal in coordination with the Navy.
The Interim City Manager added that the City is prepared to respond to the Lawrence Berkeley
Lab RFP process with a very competitive proposal. There are opportunities to have strategic
alliances as a result of the DOE and the Navy that makes Alameda Point uniquely competitive.
The Deputy City Manager - Development Services stated that staff will be providing the Board
with updates at the monthly ARRA meetings.
Vice Chair deHaan inquired if the Navy is willing to do phased conveyance. The Deputy City
Manager - Development Services explained that the Navy is exploring the boundaries, the pros
and cons of phased conveyance, and that the Navy is open and listening to ideas.
There was discussion from the Board about the management of the utilities at Alameda Point
and whether there was a formal decision made about it. The Assistant General Counsel -
ARRA stated that there has never been a plan that the City would operate any of the utilities at
Alameda Point other than the electric utility.
Member Matarrese requested that the facts of this matter be brought back to the Board.
7.
REFERRALS FROM THE GOVERNING BODY
None.
8.
COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE GOVERNING BODY
Member Matarrese attended the liaison committee meeting between AC Transit and the City
and discussed the series of cuts, including reduction of services for Lines O, Line 51A, and Line
21, and the discontinuation of Line 851. He was most concerned about Line 31 (the only bus
service to the Alameda Point Collaborative and to west of Main St) which will be discontinued on
weekends. Member Matarrese requested that the City insist that Line 31 be continued on
weekends.
There was discussion by the Board of SunCal's involvement in the political arena.
Boardmembers expressed their dissatisfaction and displeasure, denouncing SunCal's efforts,
stating that the personal attacks on staff members and elected officials to influence any political
debate or election should not be tolerated.",AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2010-10-06.pdf
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority,2010-10-06,4,"9. ADJOURNMENT
Meeting was adjourned at 8:09 p.m. by Chair Johnson.
Respectfully submitted,
Itema Glidden
Irma Glidden
ARRA Secretary",AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2010-10-06.pdf
CityCouncil,2010-10-06,1,"MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL JOINT CITY COUNCIL AND
COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION (CIC) MEETING
WEDNESDAY--OCTOBER 6, 2010- -7:01 P.M.
Mayor/Chair Johnson convened the meeting at 8:09 p.m.
ROLL CALL -
Present:
Councilmembers/ Commissioners deHaan, Gilmore,
Matarrese, Tam and Mayor/Chair Johnson - 5.
Absent:
None.
CITY MANAGER COMMUNICATIONS
(10-491 CC/ 10-72 CIC) Update on Alameda Unified School District Assistance: Toddler
and After School Child Care (Woodstock Child Development Center)
The Interim City Manager gave a brief presentation.
Mayor/Chair Johnson inquired how the State restored the funding and if it was through
special legislation.
The Deputy City Manager - Administrative Services responded the Big Five, which is
the Governor and the Leaders of the Assembly and Senate, came up with a package of
cuts and revenue enhancements, including creative accounting and federal dollars that
are not yet secured; as part of that package, the legislature churned over the summer
for more than 100 days and the program has been put back in through the Big Five
Conference; the budget conference committee met on October 6th and it is unlikely that
the money will be taken back out; the matter will be confirmed after the October 7th
vote.
Councilmember/ Commissioner Matarrese requested the method of helping remain
ready in hopes of being able to restore adult education and recreation programs.
The Interim City Manager agreed; stated even though there is a respite this year, future
action is uncertain; when impacts to the School District and City are known, staff will
report back to the Council/ Commission.
Councilmember/ Commissioner Gilmore inquired if, and how much, the deficit was
closed.
The Deputy City Manager - Administrative Services stated the State claims to have
closed the approximately $19 billion deficit with creative maneuvers and federal money,
which still has to be secured.
Special Joint Meeting
Alameda City Council and
Community Improvement Commission
October 6, 2010",CityCouncil/2010-10-06.pdf
CityCouncil,2010-10-06,2,"In response to Vice Mayor/ Commissioner deHaan's inquiry about how the City will stay
out of the budget, the Interim City Manager stated the budget is strategic and responds
to a lot of heavy press criticizing the Legislature; after a new Governor is elected, there
will be a surprise package.
The Deputy City Manager - Administrative Services stated the State is starting to issue
IOU's this month.
The Interim City Manager stated none of the budget deficit reflects the 2012 - 13 State
hit of PERS costs.
Mayor/Chair Johnson inquired whether the Government has 35,000 more employees
now than 5 years ago, to which staff said information is unknown at this time.
Councilmember/Commissioner Matarrese requested an Off Agenda report be posted on
the website summarizing the comments of the Deputy City Manager - Administrative
Services.
Councilmember/Commissioner Tam requested clarification on whether the City has
provided some of the CDBG funding; inquired whether the funding would affect the
School District's loss in State funding.
The Interim City Manager responded the School District can only use the money for
certain things; the only way the School District would not get a dollar-for-dollar take
[from the State] is if the City gives a grant, or eliminates or offsets a School District
General Fund expense; the funding was a one-time, 90-day solution and is not a long
term solution for the program.
Vice Mayor/Commissioner deHaan stated that he attended a workshop at Lincoln
School; the City needs to be at the table during discussions to understand impacts.
Councilmember/Commissioner Matarrese stated the next Subcommittee meeting needs
to be scheduled; that he would not support consolidating grades 7-12 into one school;
the City should weigh in on all the issues so that the boards can talk about the direction
that will be given based on the impacts.
Vice Mayor/Commission deHaan concurred; stated decisions cannot be made in a
vacuum.
Councilmember/ Commissioner Gilmore stated the City definitely needs to work with the
School District and raise concerns, but it is ultimately the School District's budget; the
School District is the expert regarding its budget and the product that needs to be
delivered; the City should not tell the District how to manage its budget.
Special Joint Meeting
Alameda City Council, Alameda Reuse and
Redevelopment Authority, and Community
Improvement Commission
October 5, 2010",CityCouncil/2010-10-06.pdf
CityCouncil,2010-10-06,3,"Mayor/Chair Johnson concurred.
Councilmember/ Commissioner Tam stated that she wants to convey some businesses
comments to the Subcommittee with respect to the school closures; there are some
concerns that if Alameda High School becomes a middle school with a closed campus,
a lot of stores, restaurants, and businesses that depend upon a non-closed campus
would have serious revenue impacts.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, Mayor/Chair Johnson adjourned the meeting at 8:27
p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Lara Weisiger, City Clerk
Secretary, CIC
The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act.
Special Joint Meeting
Alameda City Council and
Community Improvement Commission
October 6, 2010",CityCouncil/2010-10-06.pdf
CivilServiceBoard,2010-10-06,1,"any
OF
FERKA
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING
OF THE
CIVIL SERVICE BOARD OF THE CITY OF ALAMEDA
WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 6, 2010
1.
The meeting was called to order at 5:12 p.m. by Board President Avonnet Peeler
2.
ROLL CALL: President Avonnet Peeler, Board Members Dean Batchelor, Linda McHugh,
and Jose Villaflor
ABSENT: Vice President Peter Horikoshi
STAFF PRESENT: Chris Low and Jill Kovacs, Senior Management Analysts
3.
MINUTES: The minutes of the regular meeting of July 7, 2010 were presented for Board
approval. Board Member McHugh moved to accept the minutes. Board
Member Batchelor seconded, and the motion was carried by a 4-0 vote.
4.
CONSENT CALENDAR:
SUMMARY REPORT FOR EXAMINATION ELIGIBLE LISTS AND CLASSIFICATIONS FOR
THE MONTHS OF JULY, AUGUST, SEPTEMBER 2010.
4-A ELIGIBLE LIST ESTABLISHED
DATE ESTABLISHED
EXAM NO.
AGM-Energy Resource Planning
9/13/2010
2010-20(1)
Office Assistant
8/11/2010
2010-24
Police Officer - Recruit
7/30/2010
2010-18
Police Officer - Academy Graduate
7/30/2010
2010-19
Police Officer - Lateral
7/1/2010
2010-21
Senior Clerk
8/19/2010
2010-26PR
Utility Info Systems Network Analyst
9/15/2010
2010-25
4-B ELIGIBLE LIST EXTENDED
DATE ESTABLISHED
EXAM NO.
Deputy Fire Chief
11/20/2009
209-35PR
Police Lieutenant
12/3/2009
209-29PR
Police Sergeant
10/14/2009
209-04PR
Property & Evidence Technician
3/3/2010
2010-04
Public Works Superintendent
4/21/2010
2010-09
Senior Account Clerk
4/20/2010
2010-11
Senior Management Analyst
4/7/2010
2010-08PR
4-C ELIGIBLE LIST EXPIREDICANCELLEDI
DATE ESTABLISHED
EXAM NO.
EXHAUSTED
Controller
3/10/2010
2010-01
Jailer
3/24/2010
2010-03
Meter Reader Collector
6/3/2010
2010-15PR
Office Assistant
6/9/2010
2010-10PR",CivilServiceBoard/2010-10-06.pdf
CivilServiceBoard,2010-10-06,2,"City of Alameda
Page 2 of 4
Civil Service Board Minutes
Regular Meeting of October 6, 2010
Police Officer (Academy Graduate or Lateral)
12/10/2009
209-33
Utility Information Systems Supervisor
4/22/2010
2010-12
4-D LIST OF SPECIFICATIONS:
Existing Classification Specification Revision:
Community Development Program Manager
Equipment Operator
Utility Information Systems Network Analyst
Member Batchelor asked what class of driver's license was required for the
Equipment Operator position as the job specification stated that the operation of
equipment such as a Water Truck was listed under job duties. Mr. Low responded
that the weight of the equipment is what determines the class of the driver's license
and not necessarily the type of vehicle. Member Batchelor stated that the City may
want to review this qualification in light of this job specification to make that
determination. Member McHugh pointed out that the job specification calls for
routine maintenance and the operation of heavy equipment. Executive Secretary
Willis stated that the City will check into the class of driver's license needed and
report back to the Board.
Member Batchelor moved to accept the consent calendar. Member McHugh
seconded and the motion passed by a 4-0 vote.
5.
REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS
5-A Activity Report - Period of June 1, 2010 - August 31, 2010
Member Batchelor asked about the two transfers to other departments and if these
positions had been posted. Executive Secretary Willis stated that these were not
posted as they involved moving the entire position and incumbent from one
department to another department. Thus, the Finance Department lost two positions
while the Fire Department and the City Manager's Office each gained a position.
The net effect on total City positions is the same.
Linda McHugh asked if any of the Police Officers that were hired were displaced
from other organizations. Executive Secretary Willis responded that two or three had
been laid off from the Oakland Police Department.
5-B Concurrent Eligible Lists
Executive Secretary Willis introduced Chris Low, Senior Management Analyst who
provided the overview on this item.
Chris Low stated that the Human Resources Department is bringing this issue to the
Civil Service Board to see if the Board has any questions or concerns regarding
utilizing concurrent eligible lists for the same classification. Mr. Low cited the
example from the letter presented in the Board packets of Record and
Communication Manager. Mr. Low stated that because this is such a specialized job
and the City found it difficult to find suitable candidates, it was split into two separate
positions under the classification of Administrative Management Analyst. The City
wants to be able to recruit for the specializations that are necessary for these
positions without having to close an existing Administrative Management Analyst",CivilServiceBoard/2010-10-06.pdf
CivilServiceBoard,2010-10-06,3,"City of Alameda
Page 3 of 4
Civil Service Board Minutes
Regular Meeting of October 6, 2010
eligible list. Executive Secretary Willis explained that absent being able to have
concurrent lists, the City would need to interview everyone on the current list of
eligibles, disqualify each of those on the list and then cancel the list before the City
could recruit for the specialized skills. Having concurrent lists would allow for the
current candidates to still be considered for openings that may occur without having
the need to reapply. The City does not want to have to cancel the list and start a
new one each time this happens. The City would prefer to keep the current list
active and recruit separately for the specialized skills.
President Peeler asked what the job title would be for this new recruitment. Mr. Low
responded that it would be Police Records Supervisor. However, it was pointed out
that this is a working title for the classification of Administrative Management Analyst
which would be reflected on the recruitment notice. Member McHugh asked about
bargaining unit rights and bumping rights issues. Executive Secretary Willis stated
that bumping rights are based upon classification and that a laid off employee must
be able to do the job they are bumping into.
Executive Secretary Willis stated that she would like the Board's concurrence that
having more than one active eligible list for the same classification under these
circumstances would be acceptable. Member McHugh asked if those on the current
list would be notified of the new recruitment and offered the opportunity to apply.
Executive Secretary Willis stated that the City could notify the applicants. It was
agreed that the candidates on the existing list would be notified of any concurrent
recruitments once they began.
5-C SAFER Grant - Fire Department
Executive Secretary Willis informed the Board that the Fire Department was awarded
a federally funded grant in the amount of $1.7 million which will provide the Fire
Department with the opportunity to hire up to six experienced firefighters. These
firefighter positions are for a maximum duration of two years and, due to the fact that
they are grant funded positions, are not covered by civil service. Executive Secretary
Willis explained to the Board that the City utilized virtually the same testing and
selection process for this recruitment as it has always used for firefighter
recruitments. Thus, the City would like to be able to utilize the names from this non-
Civil Service recruitment to be able to certify names to a Civil Service list should a
regular firefighter vacancy occur within the two years of this grant. This will allow the
City to be able to hire these firefighters into regular full time civil service positions
without them having to go through the testing process again.
Member McHugh stated that she did not have a problem with the City certifying these
names as long as they had gone through the same process as a civil service
position. Mr. Low assured the Board that the process was the same to include a full
background check.
Member McHugh asked what section of the Civil Service Ordinance spoke to non-
civil service positions. Executive Secretary Willis told the Board that the reference
was in Section 4 - Scope of the Civil Service Program, which reads, ""The Civil
Service of the City of Alameda shall consist of all positions of employment and
offices (hereinafter designated as position) of or under jurisdiction of the City of
Alameda, except: (f) All personnel hired in conjunction with a State or Federally
funded program or other specially funded projects.""",CivilServiceBoard/2010-10-06.pdf
CivilServiceBoard,2010-10-06,4,"City of Alameda
Page 4 of 4
Civil Service Board Minutes
Regular Meeting of October 6, 2010
5-D AB 1234 Ethics Training
Executive Secretary Willis reminded the Board about Ethics Training required under
AB 1234. She stated that each Board member should have received a letter
regarding the options available for them to receive this training and strongly
encouraged each Board member to take the Ethics training.
Member Linda McHugh moved to accept the Regular Agenda Items.
Member
Batchelor seconded and the motion passed by a 4-0 vote.
6.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (PUBLIC COMMENT)
There was no one present from the public.
7.
CIVIL SERVICE BOARD COMMUNICATIONS (COMMUNICATIONS FROM BOARD)
President Peeler welcomed new Board member Jose Villaflor.
8.
CIVIL SERVICE BOARD COMMUNICATIONS (COMMUNICATIONS FROM STAFF)
There was discussion that the next meeting of the Civil Service Board will be held on
Wednesday, January 5, 2011 beginning at 5:00 p.m.
9.
President Peeler asked for a motion to adjourn the meeting. Board Member McHugh
moved to adjourn and Member Batchelor seconded the motion. The motion passed 4-0
and the meeting was adjourned by President Peeler at 5:52 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Karen Willis
Human Resources Director &
Executive Secretary to the Civil Service Board",CivilServiceBoard/2010-10-06.pdf