body,date,page,text,path
CityCouncil,2012-10-02,1,"MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
TUESDAY--OCTOBER - 2, 2012--7:00 P.M.
Mayor Gilmore convened the meeting at 7:08 p.m. Councilmember Johnson led the
Pledge of Allegiance.
ROLL CALL -
Present:
Councilmembers Bonta, deHaan, Johnson, Tam and
Mayor Gilmore - 5.
Absent:
None.
AGENDA CHANGES
(12-471) Mayor Gilmore announced that the Public Hearing regarding final passage of
the ordinance [paragraph no. 12-487 was continued to October 16, 2012.
PROCLAMATIONS, SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY & ANNOUNCEMENTS
(12-472) Mayor Gilmore announced that she and the City Manager having been working
to address the extensive noise at the Coliseum in Oakland the past Saturday night.
(12-473) Proclamation Declaring October 7 through 13, 2012 as Public Power Week.
Mayor Gilmore read and presented the Proclamation to Greg Hamm, Public Utilities
Board, and Girish Balachandran, Alameda Municipal Power Executive Director.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA
(12-474) Michael John Torrey, Alameda, announced that the Alameda Democratic Club
would be showing the Presidential debates.
(12-475) Bill Garvine, Alameda, gave background information about Matt Hussain.
(12-476) Matt Hussain, Alameda, made an announcement regarding an Aga Khan
Development Network event in Fremont and submitted information.
(12-477) Ken Peterson, Alameda, discussed pension costs and employee salaries.
(12-478) Jon Spangler, Alameda, urged signage be posted regarding the Smoking
Ordinance.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Mayor Gilmore announced that the recommendation to authorize the City Manager or
His Designee to enter into Purchase Agreements for the Replacement of Ten Police
Department Vehicles [paragraph no. 12-481 was removed from the Consent Calendar
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
1
October 2, 2012",CityCouncil/2012-10-02.pdf
CityCouncil,2012-10-02,2,"for discussion.
Councilmember Tam moved approval of the remainder of the Consent Calendar.
Councilmember Johnson seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote
- 5. [Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk preceding the paragraph
number.]
(*12-479) Minutes of the Special and Regular City Council Meetings Held on September
4, 2012. Approved.
(*12-480) Ratified bills in the amount of $3,118,682.23.
(12-481) Recommendation to Authorize the City Manager or His Designee to Enter into
Purchase Agreements Not to Exceed $302,000 for the Replacement of Ten Police
Department Vehicles and not to Exceed $174,000 for One Special Response/Rescue
Vehicle.
Councilmember Tam requested staff to explain the thought process in financing an
outright purchase as opposed to leasing.
The Police Lieutenant gave a brief presentation.
In response to Councilmember Tam's inquiry about the armed response specialty
vehicle, the Acting Police Chief stated having the vehicle specifically assigned to
Alameda would be better because of response times; Hayward, Fremont, Union City,
and Oakland have armed specialty vehicles; sharing with San Leandro would make the
most sense geographically; however, the San Leandro Police Department wants its own
vehicle; Alameda has had an armored vehicle since 1998; the engine froze last year
and could not be repaired due to costs; armored vehicles are used on high risk search
warrants and Critical Incident Response Team calls, allow officers to go into dangerous
environments and set up command in an area under fire or can be used to rescue a
downed officer or a citizen when other rescue options are not available.
Councilmember deHaan inquired if the purchase would put the City on the regular
replacement schedule; stated the City's vehicle replacement schedule is five to six
vehicles per year.
The Acting Police Chief responded the average replacement of patrol vehicles alone
has been about three and a half vehicles per year; stated staff cars and detective cars
are usually in the fleet longer; the Department replaces patrol cars first and falls behind
on replacement of the other vehicles which are equally necessary; the Department is
trying to rectify the situation now.
Councilmember deHaan inquired how many vehicles the City anticipates replacing next
year, to which the Acting Police Chief responded the budget calls for replacement of
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
2
October 2, 2012",CityCouncil/2012-10-02.pdf
CityCouncil,2012-10-02,3,"seven vehicles.
Councilmember deHaan stated that he was surprised the armored vehicle was not
noted as a requirement as part of Measure C.
The Acting Police Chief stated the armored vehicle was on the priority list for Measure
C, however, the fleet needed to be replaced first.
The City Manager noted the Measure C list was the subject of a tremendous amount of
staff debate.
Suggested all items that involve spending money should include finance department
projections that the City will be broke in three years: Ken Peterson, Alameda.
Mayor Gilmore stated the City always balances the budget every year; the City has a
24% balance in the General Fund.
Councilmember deHaan inquired whether the City would go forward with depreciation.
The City Manager responded in the negative; stated that he did not want to debate
Measure C tonight; stated, in response to Mr. Peterson, the expense is not additional;
the money is already budgeted; further stated hopefully the City will be in a position to
start doing depreciation in three years.
Councilmember deHaan inquired whether the City put money into the reserves to
procure and replace vehicles during the last budget cycle.
The City Manager responded money was placed in the General Fund reserve, not the
vehicle replacement fund; the Council's policy is a 20% reserve; the City is at 24%;
discussions about a two-year budget will occur in the next two months to produce the
sound budgetary planning.
Councilmember deHaan stated that he is concerned about the City substantially eroding
the $3.1 million.
The City Manager stated the next budget would include an item to replenish the vehicle
fund and the proposed depreciation process.
Councilmember Tam moved approval of the staff recommendation; reiterated Measure
C was supported by the City Auditor and the City Treasurer precisely because it
provided means to provide funding for depreciation; the vehicle replacements have
been budgeted, approved, and the 24% reserve is still retained.
Vice Mayor Bonta seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.
(*12-482) Recommendation to Accept $375,000 from the US Department of Homeland
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
3
October 2, 2012",CityCouncil/2012-10-02.pdf
CityCouncil,2012-10-02,4,"Security's Port Security Grant Program to Purchase a Fire Boat, and Authorize the City
Manager or His Designee to Enter into Purchase Agreements for an Amount not to
Exceed $500,000 for a Fully-Equipped Fire Boat. Accepted.
(*12-483) Recommendation to Appropriate $160,000 in Gas Tax Funds and Award a
Contract in the Amount of $860,000 Including Contingencies, to West Coast Arborist for
Urban Forest Maintenance Services (Citywide), No. P.W. 06-11-16. Accepted.
(*12-484) Resolution No. 14732, ""Authorizing the Mayor to Execute a Grant Deed to the
State of California, Department of Transportation, for Conveyance of the Right-of-Way
Along Webster Street and Stargell Avenue, and Authorizing the Mayor to Execute an
Accommodation Recording Agreement with First American Title Company."" Adopted.
(*12-485) Ordinance No. 3055, ""Approving A Lease and Authorizing the City Manager to
Execute Documents Necessary to Implement The Terms Of The Lease with Faction
Brewing Company LLC for Five Years with Two Five-Year Options in a Portion of
Building 22 at Alameda Point, 2501 Monarch Street."" Finally passed.
REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS
(12-486) Public Hearing to Consider Resolution No. 14733, ""Approving Tentative Map
PLN11-0223 to Develop an 11-Lot Subdivision on a 1.29-Acre Property Located at 2001
Versailles Avenue Between Fernside Boulevard and Tilden Way."" Adopted.
The Acting City Planner gave a brief presentation and provided a handout.
Councilmember deHaan inquired how parcels 9 and 10 would be accessed, to which
the Acting City Planner responded Parcel 9, 10 and 11 are accessed through a central
common driveway.
Councilmember deHaan inquired whether the road comes back to Versailles and is a
cul-de-sac, to which the Acting City Planner responded in the affirmative.
Urged the removal of Condition 9 of the Tentative Map requiring opening a path: Bill
Garvine, Alameda; Robert Bathiany, Alameda (submitted information); Colleen Arnerich,
Alameda; Rich Bennett, Alameda (submitted original petition); Lester Cabral, Alameda;
Kim Hammond, Alameda; Gregg Dillenbeck, Alameda; Nelton Joe, Alameda; Jamie
Shauvin, Alameda; Tracie Klein, Alameda; and Nick Cote, Alameda.
Urged the subdivision be rezoned from R2 to R1: Lester Cabral, Alameda
Urged the removal of Condition 9 of the Tentative Map requiring opening a path and
revision to Condition 7 regarding affordable housing: Evan Schwimmer, Alameda.
Expressed concern about noticing: Ken Peterson, Alameda.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
4
October 2, 2012",CityCouncil/2012-10-02.pdf
CityCouncil,2012-10-02,5,"Urged keeping the easement for a path as a future option: Jon Spangler, Alameda.
Councilmember Johnson stated that she was concerned about the process complying
with the Brown Act; stated significant change after the close of public comment should
be noticed.
The City Attorney stated the Brown Act was not violated; the Brown Act only requires
adequate notice of the topic of the item being discussed, not the individual pieces.
Mayor Gilmore stated often times matters come up in the course of discussion that
could not have been noticed in advance.
Councilmember Johnson stated that she agrees with Mayor Gilmore but disagrees
about the significance of the change.
Councilmember Tam questioned how the public is being deprived of access to
information.
Councilmember Johnson stated the Planning Board should have re-noticed the matter
to include opening the gate.
The City Manager noted that noticing every possible outcome curbs open deliberations.
Vice Mayor Bonta inquired if the Police Department could provide a history and analysis
about the public safety components of the potential access point.
The City Manager responded the analysis would not be meaningful because the gate
was opened 20 years ago.
Mayor Gilmore stated the City does not have money to do Americans with Disabilities
Act access; questioned whether the access would be desired 20 years from now; stated
the issue is preserving possibilities.
Councilmember Johnson stated that she would like to separate the motion and address
the subdivision map application, then Condition 9.
Councilmember Tam inquired whether Councilmember Johnson is proposing approval
of the tentative map without the condition, to which Councilmember Johnson responded
in the affirmative.
Councilmember deHaan inquired whether the fencing adjacent to Tilden Way would be
six feet and whether the adequacy of the height was ever discussed.
The Acting City Planner responded that the height of the fencing was not discussed;
condition of approval requires submittal of a plan as to how that edge is treated so the
entrance is attractive.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
5
October 2, 2012",CityCouncil/2012-10-02.pdf
CityCouncil,2012-10-02,6,"Councilmember deHaan inquired whether the fencing could be raised, to which the
Acting City Planner replied in the affirmative.
In response to Councilmember deHaan's inquiry regarding affordable housing, the
Acting City Planner stated affordable housing requirements were discussed in the staff
report and Planning Board meeting; an 11-14 unit project needs to provide two
affordable homes; the property owner also owns two adjacent units that are already
built; the property owner has two options: dedicate the two lots from the subdivision for
affordable housing or dedicate the two existing homes for affordable housing.
Councilmember deHaan inquired whether the zoning was discussed.
The Acting City Planner responded the site has been zoned R-2-PD for a long time; the
Planning Board did not take action on the zoning.
Mayor Gilmore inquired whether the Council could approve the subdivision map and
take Condition 9 separately.
The City Attorney recommended that the Council address Condition 9 first and then
take action on the tentative map.
Councilmember Johnson moved approval of taking Condition 9 out of the tentative
subdivision map.
Councilmember deHaan seconded the motion.
Councilmember Tam stated that she would abstain from voting on the motion because
of the need to preserve future land use possibilities consistent with the General Plan
requirement to provide pedestrian and bicycle access; she has no understanding
whether future flexibility is being eliminated; there should be a fuller community
discussion about the security issues; she does not have enough information to support
or oppose the motion.
Mayor Gilmore stated if the Council removes Condition 9, a future Council could want
the easement to put in a path; the only real difference is that the easement would
probably cost money whereas now it is free.
The Acting City Planner stated the land would have to be purchased from the property
owner in the future, but right now the land would be included in the project.
Vice Mayor Bonta stated leaving Condition 9 is not voting for a public right-of-way,
rather the option is left open for the future and would require a public hearing before any
decision is made to actually have the public right of way; questioned what the costs
might be to purchase the land later.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
6
October 2, 2012",CityCouncil/2012-10-02.pdf
CityCouncil,2012-10-02,7,"Mayor Gilmore stated the underlying concern is if the Council removes the condition,
sometime in the future Council will be talking about putting in the path and opening the
gate; Condition 9 could be retained and another condition could be added that 80% of
the lots have to be occupied before the access is considered, which would relieve the
anxiety of the gate being opened immediately and give future property owners an
opportunity to weigh in on the matter.
Vice Mayor Bonta stated details should be flushed out; filling in blind spots would benefit
the discussion.
The City Manager stated data points are not going to be predictive of what the crime
would be; urged the Council to make a decision.
Mayor Gilmore inquired whether the access point would be for pedestrians and
bicyclists to get to the Fruitvale BART station, to which the Acting City Planner
responded in the affirmative, stated hopefully, there would be more points of interest in
the future.
Mayor Gilmore inquired whether staff is aware of Oakland's development plans.
The Acting City Planner stated there are plans for new residential development across
the Park Street Bridge, including improvements for bicycle and pedestrian access;
noted the Planning Board knew the residents did not like the idea of opening the gate,
which is why additional language was added to the condition about the opportunity just
being preserved for the future.
Councilmember deHaan stated that he does not think there would be a future need for
access; the Tilden Way walkway could be made wider and more accessible.
Mayor Gilmore stated the Council should be fiscally responsible and proactive in
planning the future; what development will occur across the estuary is not known, which
is why Condition 9 should remain, however, she also understands homeowners wanting
to feel secure; hopefully the decision is not regretted in the future; she would vote to
pass it.
On the call for the question, the motion carried by the following voice votes:
Councilmembers deHaan, Johnson and Mayor Gilmore - 3. Abstentions: Vice Mayor
Bonta and Councilmember Tam - 2.
Councilmember Johnson inquired whether the Planning Board focused on bicycles and
why attention was not given to the sidewalk on Tilden Way.
The Acting City Planner responded Public Works looked at Tilden Way before the
matter went to the Planning Board; the City is looking into funding to rebuild Fruitvale
Bridge as the lifeline bridge; widening Tilden Way and getting better access for
pedestrians and bicyclists is definitely a priority in the General Plan; taking land away
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
7
October 2, 2012",CityCouncil/2012-10-02.pdf
CityCouncil,2012-10-02,8,"from plots 8, 9 and 10 for widening would require backyards of existing homes be
purchased.
Councilmember Johnson moved adoption of the resolution approving the tentative map.
Vice Mayor Bonta seconded the motion.
Councilmember deHaan stated Condition 7 and 10 should be discussed.
In response to Mayor Gilmore's request for clarification, the Acting City Planner stated
the property owner is okay with providing the two affordable units in the existing
structures.
Mayor Gilmore stated the condition gives the property owner an option, but the Council
does not want to give the property owner an option and instead would make the two
affordable units technically off-site.
Councilmember deHaan stated language should be added to Condition 10 regarding
noise impacts and the fence.
The City Attorney stated Condition 10 would read: ""improvement plan for the subdivision
shall include a plan for the construction of an attractive fence or other feature along the
Tilden frontage of lots 8, 9 and 10 to minimize noise and security impacts on the
neighborhood.'
Councilmember deHaan stated the condition could say the height of the fence would be
increased.
Mayor Gilmore stated the fence design would go through design review so that it is
attractive and considers security and noise.
The Acting City Planner stated the new language would state the fencing would be
attractive, address neighborhood security concerns, and come back for a future
Planning Board public hearing.
In response to Councilmember Johnson's concern, the Acting City Planner stated the
property owner would have to come back for design review.
Councilmember Johnson stated the language should read: ""may consider;"" walls might
echo and be louder.
The Acting City Planner stated the condition would be structured so it is clear there will
be discussion at the community level about the edge of the fencing.
Mayor Gilmore inquired what would happen to the rest of the fencing as lots are
developed.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
8
October 2, 2012",CityCouncil/2012-10-02.pdf
CityCouncil,2012-10-02,9,"The Acting City Planner responded a development plan for the entire property is
required; the City would review project issues up front.
On the call for the question, the motion carried by unanimous vote with modifications to
Conditions 7 and 10. Councilmember Johnson and Vice Mayor Bonta agreed to amend
the motion.
(12-487) Public Hearing to Consider Final Passage of Ordinance Amending Section 30-
4.9A of the Alameda Municipal Code Related to the C-C, Community Commercial Zone.
Continued to October 16, 2012.
CITY MANAGER COMMUNICATIONS
(12-488) The City Manager announced there is a special meeting of the City Council on
October 30 to receive the report from the pension reform task force and receive input
from the public regarding the City's future labor negotiations with Public Safety
bargaining groups.
Mayor Gilmore requested a press release be issued.
Councilmember Tam inquired whether the Task Force report addresses implications of
the State pension legislation, to which the city Manager responded in the affirmative.
Vice Mayor Bonta inquired if there would be a unanimously supported recommendation
or multiple voices with different options.
The City Manager responded a menu of options would be presented; the group reached
consensus on the scope and depth of the financial gap.
Councilmember Johnson stated having a summary of the new pension reform impacts
would be helpful.
The City Manager stated said information would be included in the report.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA
None.
COUNCIL REFERRALS
None.
COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS
(12-489) Councilmember Johnson discussed a pension system she heard about
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
9
October 2, 2012",CityCouncil/2012-10-02.pdf
CityCouncil,2012-10-02,10,"recently.
(12-490) Councilmember deHaan announced Walk and Roll would be tomorrow.
(12-491) Consideration of Mayor's Nomination for Appointment to the Golf Commission,
the Public Art Commission, the Social Service Human Relations Board and the Youth
Advisory Commission.
Mayor Gilmore nominated Ray Gaul, Bill Schmitz, Timothy Scates, Jane Sullwold, and
Jefferey Wood for appointment to the Golf Commission; Sherman Lewis for
appointment to the Public Art Commission; Jennifer Williams and Jennifer Watkinson for
appointment to the Social Service Human Relations Board; and Kimberly N. Walter for
appointment to the Youth Advisory Commission.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, Mayor Gilmore adjourned the meeting at 9:33 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Lara Weisiger
City Clerk
The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Sunshine Ordinance.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
10
October 2, 2012",CityCouncil/2012-10-02.pdf
CityCouncil,2012-10-02,11,"MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING
TUESDAY--OCTOBER: 2, 2012--6:00 P.M.
Mayor Gilmore convened the meeting at 6:02 p.m.
Roll Call - Present:
Councilmembers Bonta, deHaan, Johnson, Tam and Mayor
Gilmore - 5.
Note: Councilmember Johnson arrived at 6:05 p.m. and Vice Mayor Bonta
arrived at 6:17 p.m.
Absent:
None.
The meeting was adjourned to closed session to consider:
(12-468) Conference with Legal Counsel - Existing Litigation (54956.9) Name of Case:
Kapler V. City of Alameda, et al.; Superior Court Case No. HG11570933; Court of
Appeal, 1st Appellate District Case No. A133001
(12-469) Conference with Legal Counsel - Existing Litigation (54956.9) Name
of
Case: Gallant V. City of Alameda, et al.; Superior Court Case No. RG11590505; Court
of Appeal, 1st Appellate District Case No. A133777
(12-470) Conference with Legal Counsel - Existing Litigation (54956.9) Name
of
Case: Doherty V. City of Alameda, et al.; United States District Court Case No. C-09-
04961 EDL
Following the closed session, the meeting was reconvened and Mayor Gilmore
announced that regarding Kapler V. City of Alameda, direction was given to staff;
regarding Gallant V. City of Alameda, direction was given to staff; and regarding Doherty
V. City of Alameda, direction was given to staff.
Adjournment
There being no further business, Mayor Gilmore adjourned the meeting at 7:00 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Lara Weisiger
City Clerk
The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Sunshine Ordinance.
Special Meeting
Alameda City Council
October 2, 2012",CityCouncil/2012-10-02.pdf