body,date,page,text,path
CityCouncil,2015-04-01,1,"MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING
WEDNESDAY- - -APRIL 1, 2015- 6:30 P.M.
Mayor Spencer convened the meeting at 6:31 p.m. and led the Pledge of Allegiance.
ROLL CALL -
Present:
Councilmembers Daysog, Ezzy Ashcraft, Matarrese,
Oddie and Mayor Spencer - 5.
Absent:
None.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA
None.
WORKSHOP
(15-202) Presentation on Recommended Approach to Citywide Transportation Plan.
The Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point gave a Power Point presentation during
which Council questions which were answered by the Chief Operating Officer -
Alameda Point, the Transportation Engineer, Linda Morris, AC Transit, and Nate
Conable, Fehr and Peers.
During the presentation, Councilmember Daysog requested that Council be provided a
status report on Measure BB funding and Mayor Spencer requested future reports
indicate which shuttles can be used by the public and include statistics.
Following the presentation, Councilmember Oddie inquired about the shelf life of the
Plan, to which the Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point responded trends change;
stated, for example, the Bicycle Master Plan was updated in 2010; when the Bicycle
Plan was used for the Alameda Point Master Infrastructure Plan in 2013, the Plan
already seemed out of date; an update is being done; elements which are very specific
might be outdated faster than long term policies.
In response to Councilmember Oddie's inquiry regarding the assumption regarding
development, the Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point stated the Transportation
Element (TE) provides some guidance and requires new developments to have
Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Plans which include a 30% reduction for
commercial and a 10% reduction for residential; Environmental Impact Reports (EIR)
and California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) are different; State law bases how
much analysis is required on the size of the project.
Councilmember Oddie inquired about the specific number of homes assumed for
various sites, to which the Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point responded
assumptions will be included to make some determinations, such as pooling resources
from development; stated other objectives and policies are not tied to the exact number
Special Meeting
Alameda City Council
April 1, 2015",CityCouncil/2015-04-01.pdf
CityCouncil,2015-04-01,2,"of units; if a goal is to minimize or have zero net new trips at crossings, tools can be
created and implemented by new development.
Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the City can do something to coordinate
the shuttles, to which the Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point responded
coordinating the shuttles should be part of the Transit Plan.
In response to Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft's inquiry regarding centralizing certain
aspects of TDM plans, the Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point stated staff has
discussed exploring centralizing funds.
Mr. Morris made brief comments on AC Transit's current studies, outreach and shuttles.
Urged the inter-City shuttle issue be fast tracked; expressed concern over having a
designated bicycle lane on Clement Avenue, which is a truck route; suggested creating
an automobile master plan to better move automobiles and using car pools; stated the
City should be leery about following national trends: Robb Ratto, Park Street Business
Association.
Urged a public opinion survey be done; stated Alameda has a jobs/housing balance
issue; expressed concern over TDM plans being considered a cure all: Darcy Morrison,
Alameda.
Stated the Plan is encouraging; expressed support for the approach of getting residents
out of cars; stated goals should focus on trip times, not capacity; there should be an
informed, data driven debate: William Smith, Alameda.
Inquired about shuttle ridership; discussed the disabled and paratransit services:
suggested outreaching to the Commission on Disability Issues regarding paratransit:
Carol Gottstein, Alameda.
Councilmember Daysog discussed Tube traffic; stated the City has to begin
implementing a series of strategies; there is not one silver bullet; the emphasis needs to
be on implementation; information has been gathered and needs to be tied together;
people need to see and feel solutions; the process outlined by staff regarding reduction
of Single Occupancy Vehicles (SOV) rates is right on; increasing High Occupancy
Vehicle (HOV) rates is not just about shuttles or the AC Transit system; fixed systems,
which require investment, should be reviewed; however, distributed systems from new
applications and technology should also be reviewed; cities are not utilizing Uber and
point-to-point car share to deal with traffic; he would like to see the reduction in SOV
relative to shuttle uses; implementation steps have to address how targets will be
achieved and be a quasi-business plan; outlined how options should be provided; stated
the pieces need to be pulled together into a implementable plan.
Councilmember Oddie stated that he is a little concerned about the cost; however, he is
willing to spend the funds if the Plan helps the City move towards goals and does not
Special Meeting
Alameda City Council
April 1, 2015",CityCouncil/2015-04-01.pdf
CityCouncil,2015-04-01,3,"expire; questioned if SOV versus HOV is a goal, solution or symptom; stated the goal
should be minimizing trip time, which needs to be predictable; decisions are based on
how long travel will take; transportation needs to be seamless, such as riding the bus to
connect to the ferry; that he is concerned about future projects; the number of units
would impact the Plan; the inter-City shuttle should be addressed sooner rather than
later; discussed technological advancements, which might need to be taken into
account in the Plan; stated parking has to be reviewed for ferries and neighborhood
developments; the Plan should address how TDMs will be enforced, include historic
information on shuttle ridership, and provide costs for achieving different standards.
Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft concurred that there needs to be a series of strategies
and implementation; stated drivers would appreciate fewer cars on the road; giving
people alternatives results in less cars on the road; sidewalk conditions should be
improved for pedestrians; that she would like to see the repair of sidewalks and streets
accelerated; she endorses moving forward with the consultant; she assumes the City
will start with the deliverables in mind; the goals set forth in the report and raised tonight
are good, including an on-Island shuttle; the City should take credit for what has already
been done, such as the Shoreline Drive cycle track; discussed how ridership of new
modes starts slow; stated decisions should be data driven; the Council needs to be
forward thinking; Council representatives on regional bodies which provide funding,
such as the Alameda County Transportation Commission, need to ensure that the City
is aggressively pursuing funding opportunities; read a quote about Oakland's Mayor
being inspired by bicycle improvements in Portland, Oregon.
Vice Mayor Matarrese stated outreach needs to verify and prioritize the goals, such as
commute reduction, cross Island traffic reduction or moving between schools, before
being provided to the consultant; that he is not surprised by the cost; the Plan is
necessary to make decisions and set policies and standards; businesses have a right to
set up shuttles; noted AC Transit's line in Emeryville was drastically reduced when the
Emery Go Round was established; stated if a shuttle system is used, the City needs to
review whether it is sustainable and should be contracted with AC Transit; the
consultant should be given the assumptions that a 25 mile per hour speed limit should
be retained and there will be no new crossing or BART station; a BART station would be
30 to 50 years down the road; the consultant should be directed to not start from scratch
and should use the bicycle and pedestrian plans; not enough emphasis has been
placed on economic development and job creation at the former Base; putting more
people to work in Alameda would improve the crossings; the economic development
plan goes hand in hand with the transportation plan; data is needed on how and why
people travel, which should start soon; given the complexity, he believes the timeframe
will be 18 months.
Mayor Spencer stated that she agrees that the inter City shuttle needs to be fast
tracked; if the City spends 12 to 18 months on the Plan, it will be 12 to 18 more months
until anything is done; that she would be happy to work with AC Transit if AC Transit is
selected to do the shuttle; that she has seen a reduction in AC Transit lines; the City
should reach out to AC Transit to see if they would be a viable option; otherwise, the
Special Meeting
Alameda City Council
April 1, 2015",CityCouncil/2015-04-01.pdf
CityCouncil,2015-04-01,4,"City needs to work with other partners and look at other funding sources to make the
shuttle happen; a deadline, such as one year, should be established; the shuttle service
does not have to be perfect and can be modified, which is what AC Transit does when
they correct routes; that she is concerned about any suggestion that the City will end up
with a net increase for any bridges, especially the Tube; traffic needs to be decreased
during commute hours; she is concerned about improving anything that would increase
traffic in the Tube; the City has to figure out something, such as buses or shuttles, which
provide an alternative to vehicles; an automobile plan should work together with the
bicycle plan; the City needs to have the big picture for all modes of transportation; every
street cannot accommodate all modes of transportation; expressed support for
increasing car pools, utilizing technology and applications, and conducting a survey;
stated someone could be hired to create applications; suggested survey questions;
stated that she agrees with working on the jobs housing balance; higher paying jobs are
needed; the City should have trip time data, which should be included in reports or start
to be gathered; discussed disabled needs and sidewalk improvements; inquired the
year of the TE attached to the staff report.
The Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point responded 2009.
Mayor Spencer stated the year should be included; inquired whether questions in the
TE have been answered.
The Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point responded that she does not know.
Mayor Spencer stated that she is not comfortable hiring a consultant; a consultant was
probably hired to complete the TE; inquired whether a baseline was established in
2009.
The Transportation Engineer responded the 2009 TE includes the baseline data; stated
Association of Bay Area Government (ABAG) data was used.
Mayor Spencer stated the TE questions should be answered; if the City is not going to
utilize work done by a consultant, she would prefer to hire an employee to do the work;
that she would like to hire someone who commutes and uses the system; an employee
could work with regional partners and look into funding and implementation, such as the
shuttle; people will not get out of cars with limited public transportation; access to the
two ferries is needed; that she is not convinced a third ferry is needed; having public
transportation better connect homes and stores to BART, existing ferries and Amtrak
would be marvelous; if connections are made and the City focuses on shuttles or buses,
the rest will take care of itself; the City cannot continue to build and have so many cars
going through the Tube and across the bridges; if a survey asks how people would get
out of cars, she expects the response would be by providing public transportation that
connects the City, which the City should make the focus and hire an employee.
Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she would not favor hiring an employee,
which has implications; stated $250,000 to $400,000 would not just pay the consultant,
Special Meeting
Alameda City Council
April 1, 2015",CityCouncil/2015-04-01.pdf
CityCouncil,2015-04-01,5,"it includes the cost of studies and services; inquired whether the consultant could be
directed to conduct a public opinion survey at the outset to help shape the course.
The Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point responded in the affirmative.
Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated data driven emphasis is really important; stating
more shuttles would take care of the problem and a third ferry is not needed should be
recognized as anecdotal; discussed Oakland.
The Assistant City Manager stated the update process would provide data on whether
the 2009 TE goals have been met and would provide a new baseline.
In response to Mayor Spencer's inquiry regarding Oakland's Mayor hiring staff,
Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she was addressing Oakland's Mayor
recognizing the policy of getting people out of cars and not just riding bikes for
recreation; that she does not know Oakland's budget or what studies might have
proceeded hiring staff; her point was leadership from the top.
Councilmember Daysog stated that he supports hiring a consultant; the City would be
hiring a firm with certain expertise; the firm has a range of individuals with different
expertise to address the wide range of questions; issuing a Request for Proposals
(RFP) for a consultant firm would be a better course of action; if an individual were
hired, one person could not know everything about transportation and traffic planning;
regarding the 2009 TE, tracking should be done when the City generates plans and sets
goals; that he hears consensus in the desire to improve traffic congestion, not just to
have no net increase but to reduce SOV usage; that he sees tremendous potential with
just the shuttles the City has to today; marketing, coordination and implementable
strategies are needed; that he would be happy to move staff's recommendation.
Mayor Spencer inquired whether the City has staff to do marketing or if someone would
need to be hired, and whether a consultant would work with the business districts to
start a shuttle or if that would be handled internally.
The Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point responded if enhancing multi-modal
transportation in the City is a goal, the transit plan would look at what are the [specifics].
Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated just because it has been discussed does not
mean it is ready to be implemented; that she would like additional information, such as
route, frequency, cost, and ridership; information could be gained from the public
opinion survey; Emery Go Round is very successful; there might be differences
between Emeryville and Alameda; the idea should be reviewed by the consultant team.
The Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point stated the study would review the inter
City shuttle cost, possible funding and route; the consultant might have other distributive
ideas other than a shuttle; the planning process would flush out whether it is feasible.
Special Meeting
Alameda City Council
April 1, 2015",CityCouncil/2015-04-01.pdf
CityCouncil,2015-04-01,6,"Mayor Spencer inquired how long it will take to hire a consultant and receive the report.
The Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point responded the RFP would take 4 to 6
months and the report will take 18 months.
Mayor Spencer inquired how long before the City would start to work on implementing a
shuttle, to which the Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point responded the business
associations should be doing a grassroots effort at the same time, including identifying
funding sources; stated the shuttle may not even be feasible if there is not funding.
Mayor Spencer inquired how much was spent to create the 2009 TE, to which the Chief
Operating Officer - Alameda Point responded that she does not know.
Councilmember Daysog stated that he would propose moving forward with the process
being discussed tonight; the City owns a shuttle; a separate discussion could be held on
using the shuttle on an interim basis.
Vice Mayor Matarrese inquired whether the City owns a vehicle, to which
Councilmember Daysog responded in the affirmative.
The Assistant City Manager stated the Recreation and Parks Department has a van.
Councilmember Daysog stated the staff recommendation could move forward and there
could be a discussion on having a shuttle move forward as soon as possible to address
the Mayor's concern.
Mayor Spencer stated that her concern is greater than that; the City conducted a study
and hired a consultant in 2009 which has 42 pages of questions that have not been
answered; the City is going to spend another 22 months to get another study; the City
needs a response sooner than 2 years; that she is not sure doing another study is going
to make any difference; expressed concern over not having answers to the questions
raised in the previous study; stated that she is not sure the City has staff to handle
marketing; hiring someone to focus on transportation makes sense.
The Assistant City Manager stated the City does not have someone for marketing;
marketing could be rolled into the Public Information Officer position, which will be filled
shortly; the Emery Go Round shuttle was successful because it was funded by
redevelopment; the shuttle is in crisis because there is not funding; Emeryville is looking
at setting up a business improvement district to fund the Emery Go Round; Alameda
does not have money for a shuttle.
Mayor Spencer stated that is not something the consultant would provide.
The Assistant City Manager stated the consultant could help staff determine different
ways to fund something.
Special Meeting
Alameda City Council
April 1, 2015",CityCouncil/2015-04-01.pdf
CityCouncil,2015-04-01,7,"Mayor Spencer stated that is something an employee could do.
The Assistant City Manager stated that is not something an employee would typically
do; the City does not have said type of expertise on staff; consultants are hired to
conduct analysis for all of the City's landscaping and lighting districts.
Mayor Spencer noted the Recreation and Parks Director works on grants.
The Assistant City Manager stated grants are different; the funding would not be a
grant; staff was not aware of Mayor Spencer's questions about the 2009 document; staff
would be happy to bring back answers.
Mayor Spencer stated the questions are internal in the document itself; provided an
example.
The Assistant City Manager stated staff might have the data, but does not have it
tonight.
Mayor Spencer stated the City would be asking another consultant to create the same
data.
Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated Council asking staff substantive questions ahead
of the meeting is helpful; the information would have been interesting, informative
material for the public, which could be provided at another time; Council's intent is not to
make staff look bad, it is to be informed and inform the public.
Mayor Spencer stated the Council's task is to not waste tax payer dollars and get the
job done; the document was an attachment to the report, so she expect comments; her
concern goes to trying to get the job done; the 2009 document speaks to many of the
same things, which the City will be hiring another consultant to do; the City needs to
figure out a way to get it done sooner rather than later; it is time to implement
something.
Councilmember Daysog stated one way to move forward would be to start the RFP
process; the RFP should return to Council to ensure Council is happy with the
deliverables, which should be implementable; the Council could exclude analytic
deliverables which seem repetitive; his suggestion might be a way to move forward.
Vice Mayor Matarrese stated if that is a motion he would second it.
Councilmember Daysog agreed to have his suggestion be the motion.
Vice Mayor Matarrese stated direction can be given in the RFP to make it a reality
based scope of work that would encompass the comments tonight with the realities of
the budget and no new crossings; the staff report can include the difference in cost
between using a consultant and hiring an employee.
Special Meeting
Alameda City Council
April 1, 2015",CityCouncil/2015-04-01.pdf
CityCouncil,2015-04-01,8,"Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft requested staff to address the Mayor's question about
the questions raised in the TE when the matter returns; stated everyone wants to start
to solve the problem; that she does not believe there is sufficient information to indicate
that shuttles are the magic bullet that will solve everything; as Councilmember Daysog
explained, consultant firms are hired due to having a wide array of expertise.
Councilmember Oddie inquired whether an employee would be hired permanently or as
a consultant; whether the employee would need costly software; stated that he is leery
about going down the path of evaluating the option of hiring an employee; a finite
contract for a finite period of time that gives a deliverable is probably a better way to
spend resources; time is of the essence; people are concerned about traffic; the staff
recommendation is for a consultant; he is reassured by the Vice Mayor's comments
regarding the cost; everyone likes the shuttle idea; interesting points have been raised,
such as sustainability; he is concerned about having well paid shuttle drivers;
questioned if that might require partnering with AC Transit; stated AC Transit has
historically made cuts in Alameda; Emeryville's shuttle is having financial difficulties
without redevelopment funding; the study is looking at all of the transit goals and
options; he is not quite as sold on going forward with an immediate shuttle plan after
hearing concerns; questioned the comment about not being in favor of any plan which
increases traffic through the Tube.
Mayor Spencer stated that she has serious concerns; the Council is being told there
would be another 22 months of consultants working before implementing any changes;
it needs to be sooner rather than later.
Councilmember Daysog stated that he interpreted Vice Mayor Matarrese's comment as
asking for analysis.
Vice Mayor Matarrese stated that he was asking for the staff report to include the cost of
a fully burdened employee versus a consultant.
Councilmember Oddie inquired whether completing said analysis would lengthen the
process.
The Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point responded staff needs clear direction;
stated the motion is to come back with a RFP, which differs from the staff
recommendation; the staff recommendation was to go forward with the RFP without
returning to Council and return to Council with a contract; if Council would like to review
the RFP, the process would be lengthened.
Councilmember Oddie stated that he shares the Mayor's concern about lengthening the
process.
Councilmember Daysog stated the RFP should come back to Council.
Special Meeting
Alameda City Council
April 1, 2015",CityCouncil/2015-04-01.pdf
CityCouncil,2015-04-01,9,"conducting a survey, which could cost around $30,000.
Councilmember Oddie stated knowing where people are going would be good.
Vice Mayor Matarrese stated it is critical.
Councilmember Daysog stated the survey questions are critical; the Mayor's questions
about what would get someone out of their car could only be answered by a survey;
data sets should be available about where people work; expressed support for the
survey.
The Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point inquired whether an economic
Special Meeting
Alameda City Council
April 1, 2015",CityCouncil/2015-04-01.pdf
CityCouncil,2015-04-01,10,"development plan should be included, to which Vice Mayor Matarrese responded in the
negative.
The Chief Operating Officer - Alameda stated Point that she heard a lot of consistent
comments which will be incorporated in the draft RFP; staff will also answer as many TE
questions as possible and address why the staff recommendation is to use a consultant,
including providing employee costs and pros and cons; addressed trip time analysis,
which would also be included in the report.
Vice Mayor Matarrese stated the question of using trip time analysis should be
addressed as part of the scope of work, not tonight.
Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated the survey should include other questions the
consultant believes are germane.
On the call for question, the motion carried by the following voice vote: Ayes:
Councilmembers Daysog, Ezzy Ashcraft, Matarrese and Oddie - 4. Noes: Mayor
Spencer - 1.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, Mayor Spencer adjourned the meeting at 10:06 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
April 1, 2015",CityCouncil/2015-04-01.pdf
CivilServiceBoard,2015-04-01,1,"CHT
OF
of
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING
OF THE
CIVIL SERVICE BOARD OF THE CITY OF ALAMEDA
WEDNESDAY, April 1, 2015
1.
CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order at 5:05 p.m. by Board President Peter Horikoshi.
2.
ROLL CALL:
PRESENT: President Peter Horikoshi, Members Linda McHugh, Marguerite Malloy, Zara
Santos (late)
STAFF PRESENT: Jill Kovacs, Acting Human Resources Director and Executive Secretary
to the Board
Stephanie Garrabrant-Sierra, Administrative Services Director
Glenn Steiger, AMP General Manager
Beth Fritz, Administrative Assistant Il
Michael Roush, Attorney - Civil Service Board Legal Counsel
Chris Low, Senior Human Resources Analyst-AMP
Robin Young, Senior Human Resources Analyst
Tiffany llacqua, Human Resources Analyst I
Monica Selles, Human Resources Analyst Il
Sharlene Shikhmuradova, Administrative Technician II
Bill Garvine, EUPA Representative
Terry Flippo, ACEA Representative
ABSENT:
Vice President Dean Batchelor
3.
MINUTES:
A.
Approval of Minutes of the Regular meeting of January 7, 2015.
Board Member Malloy moved that the January 7, 2015 Minutes be approved with the following
corrections:
On page 3, of January 7, 2015 Civil Service Board Minutes, paragraph five, ""you cannot""
be deleted. The second sentence in paragraph five should read: ""Under the law you
have an obligation to go through the reasonable accommodation process.'
Motion was seconded by Board Member McHugh which was passed by a 3-0 vote (Batchelor-
absent, Santos-late).",CivilServiceBoard/2015-04-01.pdf
CivilServiceBoard,2015-04-01,2,"City of Alameda Page 2
Civil Service Board Minutes
Regular Meeting April 1, 2015
Draft
4.
CONSENT CALENDAR:
SUMMARY REPORT FOR EXAMINATION ELIGIBLE LISTS AND CLASSIFICATIONS FOR
APRIL 1, 2015.
4-A-i.
ELIGIBLE LIST ESTABLISHED
DATE ESTABLISHED
EXAM NO.
(Dec. 1, 2014 - Feb. 28, 2015)
Administrative Services Coordinator -
12/30/2014
2014-49
(Community Development & Resiliency Coordinator)
Deputy Public Works Director
01/22/2015
2015-04PR
Financial Services Supervisor
12/18/2014
2014-45
Fire/Building Code Compliance Officer
01/07/2015
2014-50PR
Fire Administrative Services Supervisor
01/06/2015
2014-41
(Designed from Senior Human Resources Analyst)
Maintenance Worker Il
03/04/2015
2014-51
Meter Reader
01/12/2015
2014-42
Paralegal
03/04/2015
2015-03
Public Information Officer
02/19/2015
2015-02
Senior Human Resources Analyst
12/17/2014
2014-41
Storekeeper
02/03/2015
2014-47
Support Services Supervisor
03/03/2015
2015-01
(Utility Procurement Administrator)
Utility Information Systems Billing Specialist
12/22/2014
2014-46
Utility Information Systems Billing Technician
01/22/2015
2014-46
(Designated from Utility Information Systems Billing Specialist)
4-A-ii. ELIGIBLE LIST EXTENDED
DATE ESTABLISHED
EXAM NO.
Police Lieutenant
02/06/2014
2013-40PR
Public Safety Communications Supervisor
08/12/2014
2014-30PR
4-A-iii. ELIGIBLE LIST EXPIRED/
DATE ESTABLISHED
EXAM NO.
CANCELLED/EXHAUSTED
Assistant General Manager -
Energy Resources Planning
09/02/2014
2014-23
Deputy Public Works Director
01/22/2015
2015-04PR
Division Chief
02/04/2014
2013-39PR
Fire Administrative Services Supervisor
01/06/2015
2014-41
(Designed from Senior Human Resources Analyst)
Fire/Building Code Compliance Officer
01/07/2015
2014-50PR
Permit Technician
I
09/04/2014
2014-28
Planner I
03/06/2014
2014-02
Police Officer
02/19/2013
2013-05
Police Officer
12/09/2013
2013-05
Police Officer
07/08/2014
2013-05
Police Sergeant
03/05/2013
2013-03PR
Recreation Services Specialist
09/03/2014
2014-25
Senior Utility Accountant
09/02/2014
2014-32PR
Technology Services Coordinator
08/19/2014
2014-24
(CAD/RMS/MDT Specialist)
4-A-iv. LIST OF SPECIFICATIONS
Existing Classification Specification Revisions:
G:\Personnel\CSB\All Minutes/2015 Minutes)2015-04-01 CSB Minutes-Final w-signature.doc",CivilServiceBoard/2015-04-01.pdf
CivilServiceBoard,2015-04-01,3,"City of Alameda Page 3
Civil Service Board Minutes
Regular Meeting April 1, 2015
Draft
-
Senior Utility Accountant (re-presented delayed until July 1, 2015)
-
Customer Service Representative
-
Financial Services Manager
-
Fleet Mechanic
-
Park Maintenance Equipment Operator
-
Stock Clerk
New Class Specifications:
-
Computer Services Technician - AMP
-
Utility Database Analyst
-
Utility Geographic Information Systems Analyst
-
Utility Information Technology Business Analyst
-
Utility Information Technology Manager
Board Member Malloy made a motion to approve the Consent Calendar items. Board Member
McHugh seconded the motion. Motion was approved 3-0 (Batchelor-absent, Santos-late).
5.
REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS:
5-A.
Designation
of
Eligible
List
-
Senior
Human
Resources
Analyst,
2014-41 for Fire Administrative Services Supervisor Vacancy, FD.4605.001
Executive Secretary Kovacs stated that this report is an advisory/informational report and there is no
action to be taken by the Civil Service Board. The Senior Human Resources Analyst Eligible List has
been designated to fill the Fire Administrative Services Supervisor vacancy in the Fire Department.
Before the specialized classifications were created, these two positions were both in the Senior
Management Analyst classification. There was a short list with a very viable candidate for the Fire
Department position.
5-B. Designation of Eligible List - Utility Information Systems Billing Specialist,
2014-46 for Utility Information Systems Billing Technician Vacancy, AP.7311.002
Executive Secretary Kovacs stated that this report is an advisory/informational report and there is no
action to be taken by the Civil Service Board. The Utility Information Systems Billing Specialist has
been designated to fill the Utility Information Systems Billing Technician vacancy. This is an example
of a higher level classification Eligible List being used to fill a lower level vacancy in a similar career
chain.
5-C. Activity Report - Period of December 1, 2014 through February 28, 2015.
FULL-TIME HIRES
DATE
DEPARTMENT
JOB CLASSIFICATION
01/06/15
Police
Technology Services Coordinator
01/12/15
Police
Public Safety Dispatcher
01/13/15
Library
Supervising Librarian
01/13/15
Alameda Municipal Power
Financial Services Supervisor
01/26/15
Alameda Municipal Power
Meter Reader
G:\Personnel\CSB\All Minutes/201 Minutes)2015-04-01 CSB Minutes-Final w-signature.doc",CivilServiceBoard/2015-04-01.pdf
CivilServiceBoard,2015-04-01,4,"City of Alameda Page 4
Civil Service Board Minutes
Regular Meeting April 1, 2015
Draft
01/26/15
Community Development
Administrative Services Coordinator
02/02/15
Public Works
Maintenance Worker I
02/09/15
Fire
Fire Administrative Services Supervisor
02/09/15
Human Resources
Senior Human Resources Analyst
02/09/15
Library
Library Technician
02/23/15
Finance
Finance Director
PROMOTIONS
DATE
DEPARTMENT
JOB CLASSIFICATION
12/14/14
Fire
Fire Apparatus Operator
01/25/15
Fire
Fire Apparatus Operator
01/25/15
Fire
Division Chief
01/25/15
Community Development
Fire/Bldg Code Compliance Officer
02/08/15
Alameda Municipal Power
Utility Information Systems Billing Technician
02/08/15
Public Works
Deputy Public Works Director
02/08/15
Fire
Fire Captain (2)
02/22/15
Alameda Municipal Power
Storekeeper
02/22/15
Police
Police Sergeant
02/22/15
Police
Police Lieutenant
RETIREMENTS
DATE
DEPARTMENT
JOB CLASSIFICATION
12/02/14
Library
Supervising Librarian
12/13/14
Fire
Division Chief
12/25/14
Fire
Division Chief
12/26/14
Fire
Fire Chief
12/26/14
Fire
Fire Apparatus Operator
12/26/14
Alameda Municipal Power
Storekeeper
12/27/14
Alameda Municipal Power
Utility Information Systems Billing Specialist
12/30/14
Recreation/Parks
Equipment Operator
SEPARATIONS
DATE
DEPARTMENT
JOB CLASSIFICATION
12/06/14
Community Development
Administrative Technician I
12/07/14
Recreation/Parks
Park Maintenance Worker
01/06/15
Community Development
Planner I
01/07/15
Alameda Municipal Power
Support Services Supervisor
01/08/15
Public Works
Assistant Engineer
01/14/15
Fire
Fire Administrative Services Supervisor
01/20/15
Alameda Municipal Power
Distribution Engineer
01/31/15
Alameda Municipal Power
System Dispatcher
02/13/15
Fire
Firefighter
Board Member Malloy asked the reasons for separation. Executive Secretary Kovacs stated that the
reasons for separation were as follows:
G:\Personnel\CSB\All Minutes/2015 Minutes)2015-04 CSB Minutes-Final w-signature.doc",CivilServiceBoard/2015-04-01.pdf
CivilServiceBoard,2015-04-01,5,"City of Alameda Page 5
Civil Service Board Minutes
Regular Meeting April 1, 2015
Draft
-
Administrative Technician I (Community Development) - Resignation
-
Park Maintenance Worker (Recreation/Parks) - Death
-
Planner I (Community Development) - Resigned
-
Support Services Supervisor (AMP) - Released from Probation
-
Assistant Engineer (Public Works) - Resigned
-
Fire Administrative Services Supervisor - Resigned
-
Distribution Engineer - Resigned
-
System Dispatcher - Retirement (should be moved to Retirement list)
-
Firefighter - Resigned
Board Member McHugh stated that there were a lot of resignations this time. Executive Secretary
Kovacs stated that Human Resources staff were aware of the following resignation reasons:
-
Firefighter left to take a position in Contra Costa County.
-
Distribution Engineer resigned to be closer to family in southern California.
-
Fire Administrative Services Supervisor resigned to take a position with the Federal
Reserve Board in San Francisco.
-
Assistant Engineer resigned to take a position in Roseville.
-
Support Services Supervisor (AMP) was released from probation.
-
Planner I resigned due to a family situation.
-
Administrative Technician I resigned to work for a property management company.
Executive Secretary Kovacs welcomed Board Member Santos (late) to the meeting.
5-D. Elections of Civil Service Board President and Vice President.
President Horikoshi invited Executive Secretary Kovacs to conduct the elections and she opened
nominations for President and Vice President.
Board Member McHugh made a motion that Vice President Dean Batchelor be elected
President of the Civil Service Board. Board Member Santos seconded the motion. Motion
passed 4-0 (Batchelor-absent).
Board Member Santos made a motion that Board Member Malloy be elected Vice President of
the Civil Service Board. Board Member Horikoshi seconded the motion. Motion passed 4-0
(Batchelor-absent).
Vice President Malloy took over duties of conducting the meeting.
6.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (PUBLIC COMMENT)
(Any person may address the Civil Service Board in regard to any matter over which the Civil
Service Board has jurisdiction or of which it may take cognizance that is not on the agenda)
Bill Garvine, EUPA representative, congratulated Marguerite Malloy on being elected as the Civil
Service Board Vice President and Dean Batchelor on being elected President.
7.
CIVIL SERVICE BOARD COMMUNICATIONS (COMMUNICATIONS FROM BOARD)
Board Member Horikoshi welcomed the City of Alameda's new Mayor, Trish Herrera-Spencer, to the
G:\Personnel\CSB\All Minutes)201 Minutes\2015-04 CSB Minutes-Final w-signature.doc",CivilServiceBoard/2015-04-01.pdf
CivilServiceBoard,2015-04-01,6,"City of Alameda Page 6
Civil Service Board Minutes
Regular Meeting April 1, 2015
Draft
Civil Service Board Meeting.
Board Member McHugh thanked the Human Resources staff for their hard work over the years and
stated that it had been a very collaborative experience.
Vice President Malloy thanked Board Members Peter Horikoshi and Linda McHugh for their service
on the Civil Service Board.
8.
CIVIL SERVICE BOARD COMMUNICATIONS (COMMUNICATIONS FROM STAFF)
Executive Secretary Kovacs thanked both Peter Horikoshi and Linda McHugh for their many years
serving on the Civil Service Board and presented them with going away souvenirs.
9.
CONFIRMATION OF NEXT CIVIL SERVICE BOARD MEETING
Wednesday, July 1, 2015.
10. ADJOURNMENT
Meeting was adjourned at 5:17 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
stifts
Jill Kovacs
Acting Human Resources Director and
Executive Secretary to the Civil Service Board
G:\Personnel\CSB\All Minutes/2015 Minutes\2015-04 CSB Minutes-Final w-signature.doc",CivilServiceBoard/2015-04-01.pdf