body,date,page,text,path
CityCouncil,2014-07-29,1,"MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL JOINT CITY COUNCIL AND
CITY OF ALAMEDA FINANCING AUTHORITY MEETING
TUESDAY- -JULY 29, 2014- -7:00 P.M.
Mayor/Chair Gilmore convened the meeting at 7:00 p.m. Councilmember/Authority
Member Chen led the Pledge of Allegiance.
ROLL CALL -
Present:
Councilmembers/Authority Members Chen, Daysog,
Ezzy Ashcraft, Tam and Mayor/Chair Gilmore - 5.
Absent:
None.
PROCLAMATIONS, SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY AND ANNOUNCEMENTS
(14-332 CC) Presentation by the Tomorrow Youth Repertory: Shrek - The Musical.
Tyler Null and Amy Marie Haven, Tomorrow Youth Reparatory, gave a brief
presentation; invited everyone to attend the performance; presented the City Council
with tickets and a magnet.
(14-333 CC) Alameda Free Library Teen Mural Project.
The Teen Librarian and Devon Yee gave a Power Point presentation.
(14-334 CC) Proclamation Declaring August 7, 2014, as Muscular Dystrophy
Association Fill the Boot Day in Alameda.
Mayor Gilmore read and presented the Proclamation to Firefighters Eric LeBlanc and
Axel Araquistain.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA
(14-335 CC) Maria Dominguez, Friends of Crown Beach, discussed the City Manager
addressing speakers at the July 15, 2014 meeting.
Councilmember Daysog expressed his support for the City Manager.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Councilmember Tam moved approval of the Consent Calendar.
Councilmember Daysog and Vice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft noted that they would vote
against the item on the Consent Calendar.
Councilmember Chen seconded the motion, which carried by the following voice vote:
Joint Meeting
Alameda City Council and City of Alameda
Financing Authority
July 29, 2014",CityCouncil/2014-07-29.pdf
CityCouncil,2014-07-29,2,"Ayes: Councilmembers Chen, Tam and Mayor Gilmore - 3. Noes: Councilmembers
Daysog and Ezzy Ashcraft - 2. [Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an
asterisk preceding the paragraph number.]
(*14-336 CC) Ordinance No. 3103, ""Alameda Open Space Fiscal Responsibility
Ordinance Pertaining to the Initiative Measure to Amend City of Alameda General Plan
Including the 2007 2014 Housing Element and the Zoning Ordinance to Classify
Approximately 3.899 Acres of Land Adjacent to McKay Avenue to Open Space.' Finally
passed.
REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS
(14-337 CC) Recommendation to Approve an Exclusive Negotiation Agreement (ENA)
between the City of Alameda and Alameda United Commercial LLC for the Bachelors
Enlisted Quarters (BEQ).
[Note: The ENA for the 5.5 acre site on the taxiway [paragraph no. 14-306 was
discussed as part of this agenda item.]
The Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point gave a brief presentation.
Mayor Gilmore requested staff to explain what would be done during the initial 30 day
period to determine whether the developer is qualified.
The Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point responded what staff would be looking for
is included in the Statement of Qualification (SOQ) requirements; listed the
requirements.
Mayor Gilmore noted that she requested the explanation to inform the public.
Councilmember Chen inquired whether developers going through the Request for
Proposals (RFQ) process would face the same requirements, to which the Chief
Operating Officer - Alameda Point responded in the affirmative; stated the SOQ
requirements would be the same.
Councilmember Chen inquired whether 30 days would be enough time to submit
qualification information.
The Chief Operating Officer responded developers responding to the RFQ had six
weeks; stated 30 days is less time, which is more restrictive; a competitive process has
not been used; that she is comfortable with the amount of time; the developer has been
aware of the requirements for some time and could have already started.
The City Manager stated the situation is different because it is not the result of an RFQ
process and needs to be handled more promptly in the event the property needs to be
Joint Meeting
Alameda City Council and City of Alameda
Financing Authority
July 29, 2014",CityCouncil/2014-07-29.pdf
CityCouncil,2014-07-29,3,"restored back into the market place.
Councilmember Chen inquired about the condition of the three BEQ buildings; stated
that he was informed a waiver must be signed to enter parts of the buildings.
The Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point responded one wing was restored and
used for office space; stated the rest is in very bad shape and in need of significant
investment.
Councilmember Chen stated a $250,000 deposit is being requested for each ENA;
inquired whether senior and student housing would be subject to the 25% affordable
housing requirement, to which the Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point responded
staff would have to review the proposed housing; stated assisted living is typically
considered a commercial use since there is not a full kitchen.
The City Manager stated said issues are precisely what would be worked out during the
ENA process.
Councilmember Tam stated the six month ENA period is a two way street; the
developer would be investigating the sites liabilities and challenges as the City does its
due diligence; the project is not a done deal; the development plan has to go through a
public process involving the Planning Board and Council; a Disposition and
Development Agreement (DDA) would also have to be vetted through boards and
Council; inquired whether said process is correct.
The Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point responded in the affirmative; stated there
is a public process; the DDA would be a Council-oriented process with staff checking in
with Council in closed sessions and the final DDA being approved by the City Council;
the development plan is a more Planning Board-oriented process; Council is ultimately
approving the project because the DDA is the business transaction that does so; the
Planning Board would approve the development plan before staff would bring the DDA
to Council; the process would include numerous hearings; the Historical Advisory Board
(HAB) would also be involved since BEQ is a historic structure.
Vice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she is interested in the juxtaposition of the
proposed uses for the BEQ; there is a huge need for assisted and independent senior
housing; that she would like affordable senior housing to be constructed in Alameda;
inquired whether the student housing would be overflow for somewhere else, such as
Berkeley or Peralta schools, or if it would include a campus.
Mayor Gilmore stated the development plan has to go to the Planning Board for
approval; inquired whether staff indicated the DDA would not come to Council until the
development plan has been approved, to which the Chief Operating Officer Alameda -
Point responded in the affirmative; stated staff would keep everyone informed if the
process changes during negotiations.
Joint Meeting
Alameda City Council and City of Alameda
Financing Authority
July 29, 2014",CityCouncil/2014-07-29.pdf
CityCouncil,2014-07-29,4,"Mayor Gilmore stated the entire process for the taxiway has to be completed within six
months; the BEQ process could be completed in six months unless the two
administrative extensions are exercised by the City Manager; the timeframe to
determine whether the project has legs is very tight.
In response to Vice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft's inquiry, Salvatore Caruso, Alameda United
Commercial (AUC), stated that he worked with AUC for several years; one of the main
things AUC does is set up international schools; having an international school as part
of the BEQ is desired; the idea is to create a community environment.
Vice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired what grade levels are proposed, to which Mr. Caruso
responded pre-school through high school and, potentially, college level; stated that he
has worked on projects which were solely assisted senior living and has paired students
from nearby high schools and colleges with seniors.
In response to Vice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft's inquiry regarding precedent, Mr. Caruso
stated that he has done the pairing within the same distance, but not on the same
property.
Vice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired about the location of said project, to which Mr.
Caruso responded San Jose.
In response to Vice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft's inquiry regarding the name of the project, Mr.
Caruso agreed to provide the information to staff.
Vice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the school would be a boarding school, to
which Mr. Caruso responded in the affirmative.
Vice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether office uses are also proposed for the site, to
which Mr. Caruso responded in the affirmative.
Vice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether a 250 hotel room and 250 condominiums
are proposed for the sea plane lagoon, to which Mr. Caruso responded in the
affirmative.
In response to Vice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft's inquiry whether separate entities would
operate the facilities, Mr. Caruso stated the project would be split into four buildings as
required by the Town Center plan.
Councilmember Daysog stated the matter comes down to staff review of the SOQ for
the BEQ; assisted living requires an understanding of regulatory issues; that he looks to
staff to fully vet any developer; inquired whether staff would will keep Council informed
on whether SOQ benchmarks are being met.
Joint Meeting
Alameda City Council and City of Alameda
Financing Authority
July 29, 2014",CityCouncil/2014-07-29.pdf
CityCouncil,2014-07-29,5,"The City Manager responded the matter falls under real estate negotiations; stated staff
would return to Council in closed session at some point during the negotiations.
The Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point stated the evaluation criteria that would be
used to evaluate the submittal have been included in the meeting materials to inform
AUC and the public; there are going to be numerous opportunities for staff to return to
Council.
Councilmember Daysog stated the sea plane lagoon project presupposes the City will
go above the housing cap; that he is not ready to go above the cap at this point in time.
Vice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired how many times the matter would be before the
Planning Board and whether one or more workshops would be held, to which the Chief
Operating Officer - Alameda Point responded that she does not know how many
meetings would be held; stated more than one Planning Board meeting has been held
for all past Alameda Point issues; a Planning Board subcommittee was formed to work
on the Town Center Plan; the plan being approved in one night would be highly unlikely;
the BEQ would also have to go to the HAB.
Vice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated the ENA provides the City Manager a 30 day review
period; inquired whether there would be an opportunity to cure and additional time
would be given if needed.
The Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point responded the idea was not contemplated;
stated the ENA would have to be reviewed; that she believes the ENA requires the City
to provide an insufficiency notice within 30 days; staff would try to conduct the review to
address concerns before the 30 day period ends.
Vice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated the development team has seen the criteria and has
had time; inquired whether a determination about whether the development plan is
consistent with the Town Center Plan would be made when the matter goes to the
Planning Board, to which the Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point responded in the
affirmative.
In response to Vice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft's inquiry about wildlife concerns on the
taxiway, the Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point stated the biological opinion
applies to all projects and would be reviewed; each Alameda Point area has its own
restrictions; that she believes the area has fewer restrictions than other areas closer to
the least terns.
Vice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the price includes infrastructure.
The Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point responded the amount is strictly land
price; the development impact fee is separate and would be in addition to the land price.
Joint Meeting
Alameda City Council and City of Alameda
Financing Authority
July 29, 2014",CityCouncil/2014-07-29.pdf
CityCouncil,2014-07-29,6,"Vice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether AUC has any prior experience with former
base redevelopment, to which Mr. Caruso responded that his experience is
predominantly with the standard of the State Architect; stated AUC has worked on
numerous historic landmarks over the last 26 years, including the headquarters of the
American Institute of Architects, the Hicks Mansion, and the Saint Claire Hotel.
Vice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether AUC does not have specific experience with
closed military bases, to which Mr. Caruso responded AUC does not have direct
experience with military bases, but does have experience with sites with environmental
and biological sensitivities; stated AUC constructed a master planned resort in Napa on
a former garbage dump, which involved Indian archeological remains, the Army Corps
of Engineers, a superfund site, and relocation of historical structures.
In response to Vice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft's further inquiry, Mr. Caruso stated the
property is across the river from the Copia Center; the project was purchased by the
Ritz Carlton after the entitlement process was complete; however, the purchaser
passed away and the project is tied up in estate issues.
Mayor Gilmore stated if both proposals proceed down the line, the two projects will be
very different and will have two different teams working on them; qualifications should
address how AUC can handle two very different large projects at the same time.
Councilmember Chen moved approval of the ENA between the City AUC for the BEQ.
Councilmember Tam seconded the motion.
Under discussion, Vice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she appreciates the opportunity
to hear from Mr. Caruso; the ENA is the first being entered into for Alameda Point and
sets a standard; there is no competition because there was not an RFQ; she is
concerned because very little information has been provided on the development team;
that she would like more information before going forward with proposals that did not go
through a competitive process; if the City goes forward with very little prior knowledge
about the team, it would have to do so with every successive developer; the RFQ for
two other sites has required developers to jump through many hoops; although there
has not been prior interest in the BEQ, the real estate market is heating up; she is less
persuaded with the 5 acre parcels site because any number of developers could do
something with the site; she has not seen enough to be comfortable with having the
developer do two projects at the same time.
Councilmember Chen stated the City tried to give the BEQ to the Veterans
Administration (VA) a couple of years ago; now, the City has a developer willing to pay
a deposit and spend millions of dollars; the action tonight is the beginning of an arduous
process; Mr. Caruso, as an experienced architect, should understand Alameda is very
concerned about impacts; the project will be vetted; the City Manager has to determine
whether the developer is qualified; that he welcomes the investment.
Joint Meeting
Alameda City Council and City of Alameda
Financing Authority
July 29, 2014",CityCouncil/2014-07-29.pdf
CityCouncil,2014-07-29,7,"Councilmember Daysog stated that he is open to working with staff to carefully review
the developer's qualifications; the bar is extremely high; the City has worked with major
developers in the past and has received RFQ responses from major developers who
have known projects; that he is interested in how staff will score the developer's
qualifications; the City should welcome anyone interested in the BEQ; however, that
does not mean the City will let down its guard on who it works with; noted four votes are
needed for the project to work.
On the call for the question, the motion carried by the following voice vote: Ayes:
Councilmembers Chen, Daysog, Tam and Mayor Gilmore - 4. Noes: Vice Mayor Ezzy
Ashcraft - 1.
(14-338 CC) Recommendation to Approve an Exclusive Negotiation Agreement
between the City of Alameda and Alameda United Commercial LLC for an Approximate
5.5 Acre Site on the Taxiways along the Seaplane Lagoon.
[Note: Refer to the ENA for BEQ [paragraph no. 14-305 for the discussion.]
Councilmember Chen moved approval of the ENA between the City and AUC for an
approximately 5.5 acre site on the taxiways along the Seaplane Lagoon.
Councilmember Tam seconded the motion.
Under discussion, Councilmember Daysog stated that he is concerned with how close
the site is to the Waterfront/Town Center for which the City has started an RFQ process;
he wants developers to set the tone for the area; he does not know how the proposal
would work with the RFQ projects; he made a commitment to stick to the 1,425 housing
unit cap; the proposal assumes the cap will be exceeded; he is not prepared to exceed
the cap at this point and cannot support a residential project.
Vice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she is concerned with the way the development is
playing out; the City is talking to potential developers who responded to the RFQ; she
would like to see what comes back from the RFQs; she wants an overall plan with how
Alameda Point will be developed and does not want piecemeal development; the
development of the 5.5 acre site does not need to be rushed; the site is more of a blank
slate; the Council approved moving forward with the BEQ, which gives the developer an
opportunity; she will vote against the ENA.
Councilmember Tam stated that she does not believe the proposal pushes against the
residential unit cap; the value of moving forward with the six month ENA is the
information the City will get, particularly pertaining to land value; negotiating land value
with the School District and Housing Authority was difficult; the amount offered in the
transaction often defines the property value; the process will help the City provide more
definition on the land value.
Joint Meeting
Alameda City Council and City of Alameda
Financing Authority
July 29, 2014",CityCouncil/2014-07-29.pdf
CityCouncil,2014-07-29,8,"Councilmember Chen stated that he concurs with Councilmember Tam; the proximity of
the taxiways site to the RFQ site is critical to establishing a base rate for the rest of the
land at Alameda Point; moving forward to set the tone is imperative; the City wants to
know how much to ask future developers; the City is not encroaching on the residential
unit cap; there will be close to 1,000 units between the RFQ site and this project;
discussed density; stated the community will weigh in on the project; the ENA is the first
step; questioned what message is being sent to developers if the City does not move
forward.
Councilmember Daysog stated Carlsbad issued an RFQ for hotel developers; that he is
not convinced the developer has built a hotel; the developer might want to get the
entitlement and then sell the land; the cap would be reached from 800 units at the Town
Center and 600 units in the historic district; eliminating 200 units at the Town Center
and/or historic district is not being discussed; the $50,000 fee for units above the cap is
being added, which indicates the cap is being exceeded; there are issues with
qualifications and scale.
Vice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated there are also 200 homes at the Alameda Point
Collaborative, which should not be forgotten; stated that she is concerned about issuing
an RFQ at some sites, while the developer found the City for this site; other developers
might be interested in the site.
Mayor Gilmore stated that she concurs with Councilmember Tam; the exercise is
valuable for setting the land value; that she is not convinced about Councilmember
Daysog's comments about the housing cap; the ENA is a process; staff will return to
Council in closed session to discuss negotiations; the number of housing units can be
addressed in negotiations; hotel proprietors have informed her that they plan on building
hotels at the Harbor Bay Business Park; having hotels at Alameda Point would be an
amenity to support the rest of the development and would be useful; the ENA is the
beginning of the process; the Council could decide not to move forward with a DDA.
In response to Councilmember Daysog's inquiry regarding the land sale requiring four
affirmative votes and requirements for the Planning Board's vote on the entitlements,
the City Attorney stated a land sale requires a supermajority vote of the City Council;
the ENA only requires three votes; the DDA would require four votes; entitlements done
at the Planning Board level do not require a Council vote.
On the call for question, the motion carried by the following voice vote: Ayes:
Councilmembers Chen, Tam and Mayor Gilmore - 3. Noes: Councilmembers Daysog
and Ezzy Ashcraft - 2.
(14-339 CC/14-01 CAFA) SUMMARY: Approve External and Internal Financing Not to
Exceed $5 Million for the Construction of a New Fire Station 3
Recommendation to Approve External Financing Not to Exceed $3 Million for the
Joint Meeting
Alameda City Council and City of Alameda
Financing Authority
July 29, 2014",CityCouncil/2014-07-29.pdf
CityCouncil,2014-07-29,9,"Construction of a New Fire Station 3 and Authorize the City Manager or His Designee to
Negotiate and Execute All Related Financial Documents on Behalf of the City
Consistent with the Terms Described in the Staff Report with I Bank or Another
Financial Institution;
(14-339 A CC) Resolution No. 14958, ""Authorizing the Submission of the Application to
the California Infrastructure and Economic Development Bank (I Bank) for Financing of
the Construction of Fire Station 3, Declaration of Official Intent to Reimburse Certain
Expenditures from Proceeds of Obligation, and Approving Certain Other Matters in
Connection Therewith, Including the Authorization for the City Manager or His Designee
to Execute All Related Financial Documents on Behalf of the City."" Adopted;
(14-02 A CAFA) Resolution No. 14-04, ""Authorizing the Commencement of Proceedings
in Connection with the External Lease Financing of a New Fire Station 3 and
Authorizing the Executive Director to Negotiate, Execute and Deliver All Appropriate
Financing Documents within Specified Parameters."" Adopted;
(14-339 B CC) Resolution No. 14959, ""Authorizing the Commencement of Proceedings
in Connection with the External Lease Financing of a New Fire Station 3 and
Authorizing the City Manager to Negotiate, Execute and Deliver All Appropriate
Financing Documents within Specified Parameters."" Adopted;
(14-339 C CC) Approve an Interfund Loan for the Financing of a New Fire Station 3;
(14-339 D CC) Authorize the Sale of the Property at 1703 Grand Street (Existing Fire
Station 3); and
(14-339 E CC) Appropriate $400,000 from City Funds for the Financing of a New Fire
Station 3.
The Finance Director gave a brief presentation.
***
Councilmember/Authority Member Tam left the dais at 8:23 p.m. and returned at 8:25
p.m.
Mayor/Chair Gilmore inquired whether there would not be any penalty for early payment
of the external financing, to which the Finance Director responded that staff would
include no penalty for early payment when the documents are executed; stated
typically, a blend is done for bonds; for example, full payment might be allowed after ten
years because it makes selling the bonds easier; if the City is able to use I Bank, it
differs; I Bank is more competitive and offers incentives to cities; Alameda benefits from
having a lower per capita income; 4.5% is the current rate in the private market and I
Bank would be lower.
Mayor/Chair Gilmore inquired whether four votes are needed since the Council would
just be approving the concept of selling property.
Joint Meeting
Alameda City Council and City of Alameda
Financing Authority
July 29, 2014",CityCouncil/2014-07-29.pdf
CityCouncil,2014-07-29,10,"The City Attorney responded staff would have to come back to Council to actually
authorize the sale of the property; stated the action tonight authorizes staff to look for a
potential buyer; noted all actions are City Council actions, except the CAFA resolution.
Vice Mayor/Authority Member Ezzy Ashcraft requested an explanation of
a
lease/leaseback and what would be put up for collateral.
The Finance Director responded a bond requires voter approval; stated a lease does
not require a vote; Certificates of Participation (COPs) are leases; CAFA leases the
facility back to the City; the City would be entering into a lease with I Bank; any
available assets could be considered collateral and the City would identify another Fire
Station as collateral.
Councilmember/Authority Member Tam stated the need for a seismically safe fire
station has been discussed for years; great effort has been made to seek funding,
include a sales tax measure that needed a supermajority vote and did not pass, and
grant funding; inquired why the City was not successful in in obtaining grant funding.
The Fire Chief responded there are no construction grants available for this type of
project; seismic remodeling grants were available in the past, but no longer exist.
Councilmember/Authority Member Tam inquired whether the same is true for the
Emergency Operation Center (EOC), to which the Fire Chief responded in the
affirmative.
Councilmember/Authority Member Tam inquired whether State grants were no longer
available because of the recession, to which the Fire Chief responded in the affirmative;
stated State and Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) grants dried up
around 2010.
Stated Station 3 protects some of Alameda's most expensive real estate and responds
to every structure fire and full response in the City; the engine is not used only for the
safety of citizens, but is also used for the safety of the Firefighters; response time is
delayed compared to other stations; urged approval: Jeff DelBono, Alameda
Firefighters.
Vice Mayor/Authority Member Ezzy Ashcraft stated all citizens are seen as equal; that
she was hoping the sale price of the existing station would have been higher; a new
station is a necessity.
Councilmember/Authority Member Daysog stated the residents of Alameda deserve a
modern fire station; that he supports the project.
Councilmember/Authority Member Chen stated that he is prepared to make a motion.
Joint Meeting
Alameda City Council and City of Alameda
Financing Authority
July 29, 2014",CityCouncil/2014-07-29.pdf
CityCouncil,2014-07-29,11,"Mayor/Chair Gilmore inquired whether the actions should be done separately, to which
the City Attorney responded separate actions would make the record clear; one action
could be taken for the CAFA resolution and one action for the Council items.
Councilmember/Authority Member Tam inquired whether all City Council items would be
done separately from the CAFA resolution, to which Mayor/Chair Gilmore responded in
the affirmative.
The Finance Director read the title of the CAFA resolution.
Authority Member Tam moved adoption of CAFA the resolution.
Authority Member Chen seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote -
5.
Councilmember Chen moved approval of the balance of staff recommendation,
including adoption of the Council resolutions.
Councilmember Tam seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.
(14-340 CC) Recommendation to Authorize the Fire Department's Participation in a
State of California Community Paramedicine Pilot Project Funded by Alameda County
by Delegating Authority to the City Manager to Negotiate and Enter, Upon Terms
Acceptable to the City Attorney, into a Funding Agreement with the County of Alameda,
and Upon Receipt of Funds for the Pilot Project; Add an Additional Division Chief and
Two Community Paramedic Firefighter Positions; and to Backfill Regular Fire Staff,
including the Hiring of Three Limited Term Firefighters.
The Deputy Fire Chief gave a brief presentation.
Mayor Gilmore inquired how the County would measure outcomes.
The Deputy Fire Chief responded the City would be responsible for generating, collating
and analyzing data, and looking for a decrease in hospital readmissions.
Mayor Gilmore inquired whether there is an established baseline for frequent callers
and patients being readmitted, to which the Deputy Fire Chief responded in the
affirmative; stated the Fire Department has frequent caller data and Alameda Hospital
would provide information to the Fire Department when patients are released; a lot of
the training the paramedics would receive would be social services; provided an
example scenario.
Vice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated the intent of the program is good; inquired how the City
would fund the new hires after County funding is gone.
Joint Meeting
Alameda City Council and City of Alameda
Financing Authority
July 29, 2014",CityCouncil/2014-07-29.pdf
CityCouncil,2014-07-29,12,"however, preventing Emergency Room (ER) clogging might be beyond the scope of
public safety services.
The Deputy Fire Chief responded it is a pilot program; stated Alameda County is paying
for everything.
Vice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she would be interested in the funding stream
going forward.
Councilmember Chen inquired whether the training would be diverting patients from the
ER, not increasing the scope of practice, to which the Deputy Fire Chief responded the
Firefighter's scope of practice would remain the same; liability would not be increased;
additional training would most be in social services; follow up care with discharged
patients would include how to recognize symptoms; training would include working in
preventive care clinics.
Councilmember Chen stated having paramedics with increased ability to diagnose
patients is a win-win.
Councilmember Tam stated participating in the pilot program is ideal for the City of
Alameda; that she is glad the City was chosen; she actively advocated for Alameda to
be selected; ER treatment is the most expensive care; addressing issues early on will
be a cost savings for the health care system; commended the Fire Department.
Mayor Gilmore stated the process was competitive; many departments wanted to be
selected.
Stated people who do not necessarily need to go to the ER are taken to the ER;
provided an example; stated other States receive pass down money from hospitals;
hopefully, insurance companies and hospitals will partner in the program; the
nationwide International Association of Firefighters supports the program: Jeff DelBono,
Alameda Firefighters.
Councilmember Tam moved approval of the staff recommendation.
Joint Meeting
Alameda City Council and City of Alameda
Financing Authority
July 29, 2014",CityCouncil/2014-07-29.pdf
CityCouncil,2014-07-29,13,"Councilmember Chen seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.
(14-341 CC) Public Hearing to Consider Resolution No. 14960, ""Amending Master Fee
Resolution No. 12191 to Add and Revise Fees."" Adopted.
The Finance Director provided a handout and gave a brief presentation.
Councilmember Daysog moved adoption of the resolution.
Councilmember Chen seconded the motion.
Under discussion, Vice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she voted against the
development impact fee because she would have liked more notice; however, she will
vote for the entire fee schedule.
On the call for the question, the motion carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.
CITY MANAGER COMMUNICATIONS
None.
COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS
(14-342 CC) Vice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft announced that she and Councilmember Tam
attended the Splashdown 45 Celebration on the USS Hornet.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, Mayor/Chair Gilmore adjourned the meeting at 9:07
p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Lara Weisiger, City Clerk
Secretary, CAFA
The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Sunshine Ordinance.
Joint Meeting
Alameda City Council and City of Alameda
Financing Authority
July 29, 2014",CityCouncil/2014-07-29.pdf