body,date,page,text,path
CityCouncil,2015-10-06,1,"MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
TUESDAY--OCTOBER - 6, 2015- -7:00 P.M.
Mayor Spencer convened the meeting at 7:01 p.m. Lena Clem led the Pledge of
Allegiance.
ROLL CALL -
Present:
Councilmembers Daysog, Ezzy Ashcraft, Matarrese,
Oddie and Mayor Spencer - 5.
Absent:
None.
AGENDA CHANGES
(15-572) Mayor Spencer announced that City Manager communications would be heard
before Special Orders of the Day.
CITY MANAGER COMMUNICATIONS
(15-573) The Interim City Manager announced the Rent Review Advisory Committee
(RRAC) Ordinance went into effect on October 1st; stated all rent increases have to be
accompanied by notice informing tenant of the RRAC and property owner participation
is mandatory; City Attorney staff are receiving RRAC complaints in Room 360 tonight;
announced a Special City Council meeting would be held on Wednesday, November
4th at 7:00 p.m. to address the housing affordability crisis; a Job Fair sponsored by the
City is scheduled on Wednesday, October 14th from 10 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. at South
Shore Center.
PROCLAMATIONS, SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY AND ANNOUNCEMENTS
(15-574) Mayor Spencer made an announcement regarding noise associated with Fleet
Week.
(15-575) Presentation of Certificates of Service to Peter Horikoshi and Linda McHugh,
Civil Service Board; Steve Fort, Kelly Harp and Audrey Lord-Hausman, Commission on
Disability Issues; Jeffrey Wood, Golf Commission; Mike Hartigan and Gail Wetzork,
Library Board; Dania Alvarez and Stanley Tang, Planning Board; Gregory Hamm, Public
Utilities Board; Lola Brown and Ann Cooke, Recreation and Park Commission; Karen
Miller, Rent Review Advisory Committee; and Henry Villareal, Social Service Human
Relations Board.
Mayor Spencer presented the certificates to Mr. Horikoshi, Ms. McHugh, Mr. Fort, Mr.
Wetzork, Mr. Tang, Mr. Hamm, and Ms. Cooke.
(15-576) Proclamation Recognizing Public Power Week, October 4 through 10, 2015: A
Week-Long Celebration of Alameda Municipal Power's Year-Round Service to the City
of Alameda.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
1
October 6, 2015",CityCouncil/2015-10-06.pdf
CityCouncil,2015-10-06,2,"Mayor Spencer read and presented the proclamation to Mary Sutter, Pubic Utilities
Board President.
Ms. Sutter made brief comments.
(15-577) Proclamation Declaring October 7, 2015 as Walk and Roll to School Day.
Dr. Shirley Clem and Erin Ashworth-Breidinger from Otis School made brief comments.
Mayor Spencer read and presented the proclamation to Dr. Clem.
Mayor Spencer stated that she wanted to emphasize Walk and Roll to School Day is an
international event.
Councilmember Oddie stated that he will be participating at Bay Farm School.
Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she would love the event to be longer than
just a day; the community would be healthier and have less traffic; she will be
participating at Lum Elementary and Wood Middle Schools.
Dr. Clem stated Walk and Roll activities continue throughout the school year.
Councilmember Daysog stated that he will be participating at Paden Elementary School.
Mayor Spencer stated that she will participate at Maya Lin Elementary School.
(15-578) Presentation on Green Certifications for City of Alameda Buildings.
The Interim Public Works Director, Pam Evans, Alameda County, and the Public Works
Program Specialist gave a brief presentation.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA
(15-579) Annette Zielinski, Alameda Renters Coalition (ARC), discussed her rental
increases; urged action be taken.
(15-580) Catherine Pauling, ARC, urged Council to take action on a moratorium on
notices to vacate and rent increases; expressed concern over the RRAC meeting not
being held last night; stated the longer the City delays, more cities are impacted; urged
the Council to take action.
(15-581) John Klein, ARC, stated California Apartment Association has indicated a 10%
increase is not reasonable; 10% is the RRAC's target; urged Council to be more open
and forthcoming; expressed concern over the Council having experience, yet not
enacting a moratorium.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
2
October 6, 2015",CityCouncil/2015-10-06.pdf
CityCouncil,2015-10-06,3,"(15-582) Nikki Poosh, Alameda, discussed her rental increases; stated something has
to be done; urged a moratorium be adopted.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Mayor Spencer announced that the minutes [paragraph no. 15-583 and the
recommendation to reject bids [paragraph no. 15-585 were removed from the Consent
Calendar for discussion.
Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft moved approval of the remainder of the Consent
Calendar.
Vice Mayor Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote -
5. [Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk preceding the paragraph
number.]
(15-583) Minutes of the Special and Regular City Council Meetings Held on September
1,2015.
The City Clerk noted Council was provided expanded language for a motion in the
September 1, 2015 regular meeting minutes.
Councilmember Oddie moved adoption of the minutes as corrected.
Vice Mayor Matarrese seconded the motion.
Under discussion, Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft requested task be pluralized in the
second paragraph.
On the call for the question, the motion carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.
(15-584) Bills ratified in the amount of $3,488,873.91.
(15-585) Recommendation to Reject All Bids and Authorize a Call for Rebid for the
Demolition and Clean-up of Vacant Apartment Buildings Located at Orion Street, West
Tower Avenue and Stardust Place at Alameda Point.
Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired what will be done differently in issuing the
request for proposal (RFP) to avoid non-responsive bids.
The Economic Development Division Manager responded the redrafted bid language
has more, clear detail on what would disqualify a bidder.
In response to Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft's inquiry, the Economic Development
Division Manager stated bids were deemed non-responsive because disposal costs
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
3
October 6, 2015",CityCouncil/2015-10-06.pdf
CityCouncil,2015-10-06,4,"demolition, to which the Economic Development Division Manager the buildings have all
been fenced; fencing will be taken down in phases when demolition takes place.
Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she does not want to make the demolition
areas an attractive nuisance; inquired how fast the demolition would be done and
whether higher fences or more patrol would be present.
The Economic Development Division Manager responded demolition sites have been
cleaned out a lot; debris has been removed and trash has not re-accumulated; stated
extra security patrol will be in place during demolition.
Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft moved approval of the staff recommendation.
Vice Mayor Matarrese seconded the motion.
Under discussion, Councilmember Oddie inquired whether spending $1 million on the
demolition is anticipated, to which the Economic Development Division Manager
responded bids will come back near $500,000.
In response to Councilmember Oddie's inquiry, the Economic Development Division
Manager stated staff will know whether the Alameda Point fund balance could cover the
demolition project when the contract is awarded and it comes to Council for approval.
On the call for the question, the motion carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.
(15-586) Recommendation to Award a Contract in the Amount of $2,350,385, Including
Contingency, to Mountain Cascade, Inc., for Construction of Group 2 - Sewer Pump
Station Renovations for Reliability and Safety Improvements Project, No. P.W.03-14-10.
Accepted.
(15-587) Resolution No. 15090, ""Authorizing the Interim City Manager to Submit a
Request to the Metropolitan Transportation Commission for the Allocation of $65,000 in
Fiscal Year 2015-16 per Transportation Development Act Article 3 for
Pedestrian/Bicycle Project Funding and to Execute All Necessary Documents.""
Adopted.
REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS
(15-588) Presentation of Alameda Free Library Fiscal Year 2014-15 Annual Report.
The Library Director gave a Power Point presentation.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
4
October 6, 2015",CityCouncil/2015-10-06.pdf
CityCouncil,2015-10-06,5,"(15-589) Recommendation to Accept $2,205,300 Grant from the Staffing for Adequate
Fire and Emergency Response (SAFER) Program and to Amend the Fire Grants Fund
Budget for Fiscal Year 2015-16.
The Fire Chief gave a brief presentation.
Vice Mayor Matarrese stated that he would like to approve acceptance of the grant; he
would also like to prepare for when Alameda does not receive the grant or the full
amount; there may be other more needy communities.
Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated the Fire Chief confirmed the savings are $500,000
annually; Firefighters work overtime; injuries and medical disabilities are also important
costs; she is prepared to support accepting the SAFER grant.
Mayor Spencer inquired whether the 2011 SAFER grant was for 2 years, to which the
Fire Chief responded in the affirmative; stated the grants are 2 years of funding; stated
the Fire Department has been able to extend the funds beyond 2 years because each
Fire Fighter only gets paid 40% while attending the five month Academy.
Mayor Spencer inquired whether the City applied in 2013 or 2014. The Fire Chief
responded the full time Fire Fighter positions were filled in 2013 and 2014; stated the
grant from 2009 and 2011 covered costs; SAFER grants expire and the City is short on
people; gaps are filled with overtime costs.
Mayor Spencer inquired whether the 2014 grant was denied, to which the Fire Chief
responded in the negative; stated staff has just been waiting to hear from the SAFER
program.
Councilmember Oddie moved approval of the staff recommendation to accept
$2,205,300 Grant from the SAFER Program and to amend the Fire Grants Fund Budget
for Fiscal Year 2015-16.
Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft seconded the motion.
Under discussion, Councilmember Daysog stated the City has 75,000 residents and is
growing slowly; demand for services continue; on the revenue side, things are not
always readily available; the City is always scrambling; he supports accepting the grant.
Vice Mayor Matarrese stated that he would like to amend motion to include direction for
staff to present a contingency plan to the Council if the grant is not renewed.
Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft requested input from staff on how to move forward with
Vice Mayor Matarrese's request.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
5
October 6, 2015",CityCouncil/2015-10-06.pdf
CityCouncil,2015-10-06,6,"The Interim City Manager stated she would discuss staffing and service level with the
Fire Chief.
Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she is concerned the motion should be
cleaner.
Mayor Spencer suggested bifurcating the issues and going forward with Councilmember
Oddie's motion.
Councilmember Oddie stated the proper time to discuss the issue would be during
budget review.
The Fire Chief stated evaluation of the Fire Department staffing plan in ongoing; that he
will draft a staffing plan with reduced personnel to show the impacts on service levels.
Mayor Spencer stated that she would like to proceed with Councilmember Oddie's
motion and circle back to Vice Mayor Matarrese's request.
Councilmember Daysog stated the Fire Department had to be subject to tough staffing
decisions when there is a shortfall in funding; Alameda will always need some level of
staffing to accommodate 75,000 people.
On the call for the question, the motion carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.
Mayor Spencer inquired whether Vice Mayor Matarrese wanted to make a motion.
Councilmember Oddie stated that he is concerned Council is discussing staffing issues
not on the agenda.
Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated Council could just give direction to staff instead of
making a motion.
Mayor Spencer stated she does not think Council is discussing staffing levels;
requested Vice Mayor Matarrese to clarify.
Vice Mayor Matarrese stated that he does not want to wait for the budget review; he
wants to be prepared with a strategy that could be analyzed in advance; he would like to
avoid having to make tough staffing decisions which is the problem that arises.
Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft concurred with Vice Mayor Matarrese; stated that she
would like the issue to return to Council; she would like to hear further discussion rather
than make a motion and vote on it tonight; she would support giving direction to staff.
The Interim City Manager stated a consensus is needed.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
6
October 6, 2015",CityCouncil/2015-10-06.pdf
CityCouncil,2015-10-06,7,"Councilmember Daysog stated staff should be able to take the time to let Council know
if different funding is being contemplated; discussion about a new approach is not
necessary; suggested Vice Mayor Matarrese work with staff on his idea and return to
the Council.
Vice Mayor Matarrese stated he is not the expert; Council hires experts to address the
issues; he just wants to be prepared.
Councilmember Daysog stated the approach would be the same in the event the Fire
Department does not get the SAFER grant in 2 years; special discussion on how to deal
with uncertainty is not needed.
Mayor Spencer concurred with Councilmembers Daysog and Oddie; stated there is
already a process; perhaps Council could hear from staff by 2017; it is premature to
prioritize the matter.
Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she did not mean to say prioritize the issue;
she just meant staff could look into the matter; celebration is in order for receiving the
grant; to Vice Mayor Matarrese's point, it is good to not be complacent.
Mayor Spencer stated there is no consensus to follow Vice Mayor Matarrese's request.
(15-590) Introduction of Ordinance Amending the Alameda Municipal Code by
Amending Various Sections of Article VIII (Sunshine Ordinance) in Chapter Il
(Administration) and Adding New Sections 2-90.3, 2-90.4 and 2-91.18 Concerning Local
Standards to Ensure Public Access to Public Meetings and Public Records. Not
introduced.
The Assistant City Attorney gave a Power Point presentation.
In response to Mayor Spencer's inquiry regarding Section 2-91.6(e), the Assistant City
Attorney stated no matter how information is characterized, it can be seen as being
more persuasive than other information and that member would not have the benefit of
hearing what other members or the public have to say about the item; it would be
premature to venture whether it is information or an opinion without being present or
able to digest and respond to the information.
Councilmember Oddie stated the member is not present and not voting, which is the
highest level of influence a policy body member has; inquired how it would be different
than any other member of the public.
The Assistant City Attorney responded the policy is more restrictive than what currently
exists; stated the concern is that it seems inappropriate for a board member to provide
information without having the benefit of hearing all the information; the information or
any additional information may have come to light may change members' opinion; the
information or opinion expressed by the non-present member may get more weight than
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
7
October 6, 2015",CityCouncil/2015-10-06.pdf
CityCouncil,2015-10-06,8,"a member of the public; it is up to the Council to decide which, if any, of the
amendments should be included.
Mayor Spencer inquired whom does a member of the policy body share information with
if they have information separate from an opinion and cannot attend the meeting.
The Assistant City Attorney responded under the proposal, the member may share
information or have conversation with someone other than the body which is
considering the matter; their information or conversation would not be part of the public
record upon which the decision would be presumably made.
The City Attorney stated the non-present member could call an employee who staffs the
policy body to share a factual situation; the staff member could provide the information
to the entire body.
In
response to Councilmember Oddie's inquiry, the City Attorney stated
Councilmembers do not have proxies; the problem is opening the door for confusion;
additional weight is given to a member of a body addressing fellow members than a
member of the public; a member's obligation is to present, listening and debating, not to
""phone it in.'
Mayor Spencer stated that she did not believe that was the question.
Councilmember Daysog inquired whether the policy refers specifically to information
being shared during meetings, to which the Assistant City Attorney responded in the
affirmative.
In response to Councilmember Oddie's inquiry, the Assistant City Attorney stated it is
certainly possible that a member who is not going to be present at a meeting could give
his or her comments to a third party without indicating the source of the information; the
third party could read the information at the podium before the body; the rest of the body
would not know the source of the information so it could be transmitted that way; the
concept is that the information would not be specifically from the absent member and
therefore would not carry the same weight.
Councilmember Oddie inquired whether the issue is an existing problem.
The City Attorney responded that she is aware of one problem when a Planning Board
member was told they could not submit comments if they were going to be absent from
the meeting.
The Assistant City Attorney stated his office advised the department that submitting
comments and being absent was not prohibited at the time; the City Attorney's office
broached the matter to the Open Government Commission (OGC) as to whether it is
a
good or bad policy, thus the issue is before Council tonight.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
8
October 6, 2015",CityCouncil/2015-10-06.pdf
CityCouncil,2015-10-06,9,"Councilmember Daysog inquired whether the policy regarding ""public comments by
policy body members"" is in the context of public meetings, to which the Assistant City
Attorney responded in the affirmative; stated the policy would prohibit XYZ advisory
body from adopting a resolution that contradicts a policy or position that the City Council
has adopted.
Councilmember Oddie inquired whether the issue has happened.
The Assistant City Attorney responded in the affirmative; stated the context behind the
policy is related to an incident involving an East Bay Regional Park District (EBRPD)
issue; the Council took a position on the issue and an advisory body felt that another
course of action was more appropriate; the advisory body submitted a letter that was in
direct contravention to the City Council position.
Vice Mayor Matarrese stated an advisory body cannot advise if they are not allowed to
disagree with, or advise, the Council.
The Assistant City Attorney stated the advisory body presenting recommendations and
advising the Council about why they disagree is different than the advisory body taking
action to directly contradict a Council action.
The City Attorney outlined the of Neptune Point example; stated Council had made a
decision regarding the issue and the City was in litigation with EBRPD; the Recreation
and Park Commission decided to opine on what Council should do differently.
Vice Mayor Matarrese stated the language in the ordinance prohibits any action by an
advisory board, including giving advice.
The Assistant City Attorney stated the language could be tailored to be more specific;
the intent was not to curtail advisory boards' abilities.
In response to Councilmember Oddie's inquiry, the City Attorney stated the Recreation
and Park Commission wrote a letter to the Council about the EBRPD issue.
Mayor Spencer inquired whether the policy regarding City employees and ""opinions of
public concern"" is included in the employee handbook, to which the Assistant City
Attorney responded in the negative; stated the policy is not strongly expressed in the
employee handbook but there may be some general language in the handbook or in
Memorandums of Understanding.
In response to Mayor Spencer's inquiry, the City Clerk stated anyone in the City's
conflict of interest code, including Councilmembers, employees and board and
commission members, are required to read the Sunshine Ordinance annually.
Councilmember Oddie stated public employees and advisory board members are
different; inquired who would be considered an advisory board member, to which the
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
9
October 6, 2015",CityCouncil/2015-10-06.pdf
CityCouncil,2015-10-06,10,"Assistant City Attorney responded an advisory board member is anyone the Council
appoints to the particular board.
Councilmember Oddie stated the point of being on an advisory board is to express
personal opinion on matters of public concern.
The Assistant City Attorney concurred with Councilmember Oddie; stated the difficulty
arises when the statements might be construed as the member representing the City, or
the advisory board's position, and not his or her own personal opinion.
Councilmember Daysog inquired whether an advisory board member should make a
declaration that his or her position is of a personal nature and not reflective of the board
on which they serve when speaking before Council, to which the Assistant City Attorney
responded in the affirmative; stated it would be ideal.
Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired how a provision regarding the expanded use of
electronic devices would be monitored and enforced.
The Assistant City Attorney responded the provision would be based on an honor
system; stated it would be assumed that the Council, and other governing bodies, would
honor the provision if the Council establishes it; policing the activity would be
unnecessary; complaints of violations could be filed with the OGC.
Mayor Spencer inquired whether a calculator could be used, to which the Assistant City
Attorney responded in the negative.
In response to Mayor Spencer's inquiry, the Assistant City Attorney stated Google Maps
could not be viewed if the map was not included in the agenda item.
Expressed concern over the 15 day timeline in Section 2-93.2 and timelines in general,
including RRAC timelines: John Klein, Alameda.
Stated that he was speaking on behalf of the OGC; outlined the two items where the
Commission differed from staff; expressed his personal position regarding use of
electronic devices; submitted information: Paul Foreman, OGC and Alameda resident.
Mayor Spencer suggested addressing each item separately.
Use of Electronic Devices at Meetings:
Vice Mayor Matarrese stated the prohibition of non-public communication and private
discussion should be clarified; he is fine with having limited to access to materials
already posted and distributed to the public.
Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft concurred with Vice Mayor Matarrese; stated that she is
not comfortable with the expansion of restricting the use of electronic devices at
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
10
October 6, 2015",CityCouncil/2015-10-06.pdf
CityCouncil,2015-10-06,11,"meetings; the public is entitled to know what Council bases votes on; she would not
support the ability to pull up information at the meeting with no advance notice to the
public; the Brown Act still governs what Council does.
Mayor Spencer stated her recollection was that the Commission did have a
recommendation that staff is now contradicting.
Councilmember Oddie stated page two of the staff report describes the Commission's
recommendation; that he is inclined to support the Commission's recommendation;
communicating with each other using devices is inappropriate, but Council should be
allowed to research information and keep phones on in case of family emergency.
Councilmember Daysog concurred with Councilmember Oddie; stated his main concern
is the inability to use calculators, an Excel spreadsheet is a calculator.
Mayor Spencer concurred with Councilmembers Oddie and Daysog; stated that she
disagrees with having to use notes in hardcopy which is contrary to being green;
Council should be able to access calculators, emails, and notes; she supports the
Commission's recommendation that communication with each other via devices should
be prohibited.
Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft concurred with Councilmember Daysog; inquired what
limitation language he was considering.
Councilmember Daysog responded that he does not have specific language but was
impressed with Mr. Foreman's letter because it satisfies Occam's Razor, the things that
are most parsimonious are probably better.
Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated texts from family about emergencies should be
allowed; she would like the City Attorney to weigh in on accessing information that the
public would not have access to on which the Council might be basing decisions.
Mayor Spencer inquired how retrieving information from a tablet differs from printing out
the same information in hard copy to reference during a meeting.
The Assistant City Attorney stated if there is Council consensus, that language needs to
be clarified, rather than wordsmithing tonight, Council can make comments, the matter
will return to the OGC.
Councilmember Oddie stated that he would like to incorporate Mr. Foreman's
suggestions.
The Assistant City Attorney stated staff could wordsmith the language to accomplish
what the Council would like to do.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
11
October 6, 2015",CityCouncil/2015-10-06.pdf
CityCouncil,2015-10-06,12,"Vice Mayor Matarrese stated that he would like the OGC to consider guiding language,
not prohibitive language; he would still like clarification that everyone is starting from a
common place.
Mayor Spencer stated that she and Vice Mayor Matarrese are referring to the same
thing; the starting point is the agenda and Council packet.
Policy body members submitting comments when not present at the meeting:
In response to Councilmember Oddie's inquiry, the Assistant City Attorney stated the
policy is for information only, the Commission is not recommending substantive
changes.
Councilmember Daysog stated that he likes the staff recommendation; if members want
to participate, they should be present at the meeting.
Councilmember Oddie stated that he has a problem with having people check their right
to speak at the door just because they are a member of a policy body.
Vice Mayor Matarrese stated it is a constitutional right to vote.
Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether case law speaks to the matter, to which
the Assistant City Attorney responded in the negative; stated it is just a policy issue.
Councilmember Daysog stated the policy is practical; members present at meetings
have the right to vote and express their opinion; if a member does not show up for a
controversial item, it is not fair to insert his or her opinion for the public record and not
vote.
Councilmember Oddie stated on the flip side, an opinion from a member with financial
conflict should not be heard; otherwise, it is a free speech issue; free speech rights
should not have to be checked at the door.
Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated a couple of concepts are being mixed into one
provision; a conflict is a conflict under any circumstances.
Mayor Spencer concurred with Councilmember Oddie and Vice Mayor Matarrese;
stated that she does not want to quash someone's first amendment right.
The Assistant City Attorney stated the explanation indicates that a person who has a
conflict of interest which would cause them to recuse themselves during a meeting has
an exception which allows the person to come off the dais and address the
Commission; the same exception would apply to a member in the same situation that
was not present.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
12
October 6, 2015",CityCouncil/2015-10-06.pdf
CityCouncil,2015-10-06,13,"Mayor Spencer stated staff should work on the language and bring it back; the majority
of Council agrees that assuming there is no conflict of interest and the person just
happens to not be able to attend the meeting, they can submit their comments to be
considered.
The Assistant City Attorney stated the current language creates an exception as to
when the person could submit comments; the question is whether Council feels it is
appropriate for a board member as a general principle, to be able to submit comments
even if that board member cannot attend; if it is ok to submit comments, then the
section does not need to be rewritten and can be deleted.
Mayor Spencer noted the consensus is to delete the section.
Public comment by policy body members:
Vice Mayor Matarrese stated the Council could remove any member of a board, and
staff could provide City policy to the member during deliberations; the OGC
recommendation should stand; he does not think there should be prohibition.
In response to Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft's inquiry, the City Attorney stated the
Recreation and Park letter to the Council regarding the EBRPD was publicly available;
the EBRPD had the ability to see the letter.
The Interim Assistant City Manager clarified that the letter went directly to the Council
and was not distributed to EBRPD individual members.
Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she is reluctant to craft a provision which
focuses on one instance that cannot be recalled clearly; in the case of litigation, things
that would undermine the Council's position should not be done; there will be a variety
of differing opinions; she concurred with Vice Mayor Matarrese that the Council always
has the prerogative to remove a board or Commission member; stated there should be
language clear enough for when the line is crossed.
Vice Mayor Matarrese stated the situation that was described was a legitimate
difference of opinion, the policy seems to be trying to squash that.
In response to Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft's inquiry, Vice Mayor Matarrese stated he
does not think the policy should be part of the Sunshine Ordinance; the policy is part of
the handbook for new Commissioners and should be removed.
Councilmember Oddie stated sending letters to outside organizations which undermine
the Council's policy or position in litigation is inappropriate, but advisory bodies should
be allowed to send letters directly to the Council with their opinions; the Council should
have the ultimate decision regarding policy making.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
13
October 6, 2015",CityCouncil/2015-10-06.pdf
CityCouncil,2015-10-06,14,"Councilmember Daysog stated language that sets ground rules is necessary; members
of policy bodies are there to vet a range of issues and submit recommendations to
Council; Council makes the final decision; Council direction cannot be undermined by
further contribution from the bodies that state otherwise; members should be clear
regarding what is their personal view and what is the official City position.
Mayor Spencer stated that she concurrs with Vice Mayor Matarrese; she is concerned
about limiting free speech and the body's ability to do their job; she would want to hear
from advisory boards; decisions get reviewed and changed when advisory bodies
provide input.
Councilmember Oddie stated that he does not want to restrict bodies from saying
something; the bodies should have the right to write a letter to Council.
In response to Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft's inquiry, Councilmember Daysog stated
an advisory board member who expresses an opinion to Council or another entity on a
subject ought to be clear as to the Council's position and if the person is expressing
a
personal opinion on the subject.
Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated the letter was written from the advisory body as a
whole.
Councilmember Daysog stated expression from the body as a whole countermands the
Council's position and should not be encouraged; individuals can express their personal
opinions separately, once Council has made a decision, it stands.
Councilmember Oddie stated anyone should be able to complain to the Council.
Vice Mayor Matarrese stated a body sending letters as representative of the City's
position should be prohibited.
Councilmember Daysog stated the simple test is determining whether the expressed
opinion is from an individual or from the body as a whole and the extent of representing
the City's position.
Mayor Spencer summarized the policy; inquired whether the Council agrees.
Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated the policy should go back to the drafters for
clarification.
Councilmember Oddie stated the Council should be open, and should not stifle any
criticism; letters that are on letterhead and seem to be representative of the City is
inappropriate.
The Interim City Manager stated internal dialogue is okay, external dialogue is
problematic.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
14
October 6, 2015",CityCouncil/2015-10-06.pdf
CityCouncil,2015-10-06,15,"Mayor Spencer stated the policy body could send a letter to Council as opposed to a
third party.
The City Attorney clarified it is not within the authority of the advisory body to critique
the final decisions of the City Council unless asked by Council; Council is the final policy
maker and the advisory body should not reagendize the item; there is a distinction
between individuals and the body as a whole.
Mayor Spencer stated staff will come back with revised language based on Council
comments.
Opinions of public concern:
In response to Mayor Spencer's inquiry, the City Attorney stated the issue is tied into
what was already discussed; unless there are additional thoughts, staff will return with
revised language.
Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired why public employees and appointed officials
are included in the same provision.
The Assistant City Attorney responded the section merged public employees and public
officials; staff's intent was to separate the two so different standards are applicable to
both; the OGC felt neither was necessary; the section is somewhat redundant to the
previous section which only addressed members of the policy body.
In response to Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft, the Assistant City Attorney stated there is
case law which attempts to define the line in terms of what a public employee can or
cannot do; the OGC recommends deleting the section regarding public employees to be
handled under disciplinary matters elsewhere.
Mayor Spencer stated the consensus is to delete the section.
Responsibilities of Staff:
In response to Mayor Spencer's inquiry, the Assistant City Attorney stated the language
in Subsection (d) of Section 2-92.2 would be revised to indicate the response does not
come from the elected official and would come from staff designated to respond to
public records requests.
In response to Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft's inquiry, the Assistant City Attorney
stated references to public officials in Subsection (d) would be removed and replaced
with a more appropriate person to respond to public records act requests.
Mayor Spencer stated the responsibility of the elected official is to forward the inquiry to
designated staff.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
15
October 6, 2015",CityCouncil/2015-10-06.pdf
CityCouncil,2015-10-06,16,"Vice Mayor Matarrese requested the OGC review timing to make sure a reasonable
amount of days is allowed; stated there is a requirement in Section 2-93.6 which almost
implies that there is constant monitoring of violations; he would the OGC's thoughts on
the annual report.
Training Requirements:
Mayor Spencer stated Council is okay with the recommendation on training
requirements.
Councilmember Oddie stated there should be a deadline regarding filing complaints.
Mayor Spencer inquired whether the 15 day deadline should be expanded.
Vice Mayor Matarrese stated he would like the Commissions' view; the 15 day deadline
is pretty tight; a longer period could be considered.
Councilmember Oddie stated reviewing the ordinance is the OGC's role; he would not
give direction that the ordinance should be changed.
Mayor Spencer stated she is comfortable with expanding the deadline.
Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she would like to hear what the OGC thinks;
the Council should try not to manage the OGC.
Mayor Spencer stated Council comments will be shared with the OGC and return with
recommendations.
Councilmember Daysog stated the Sunshine Ordinance was a game changer in
Alameda, improving public dialogue and input.
(15-591) Mayor Spencer stated a motion is required to consider the remaining items:
the wetlands mitigation bank [paragraph no. 15 -592 ], the development strategy for the
Enterprise District [paragraph no. 15 -593 ], a lease with CSI [paragraph no. 15 -594],
and a lease with Power Engineering [paragraph no. 15 -595]; inquired which items need
to be addressed tonight.
The Interim City Manager responded the leases with CSI and Power Engineering
[paragraph nos. 15-594 and 15-595] need to be done; staff would like to do the
development strategy for the Enterprise District [paragraph no. 15 -592]; the wetlands
mitigation bank [paragraph no. 15 -593) could be moved.
Mayor Spencer noted there is a speaker on the wetlands mitigation bank and the
speaker was already asked to return before.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
16
October 6, 2015",CityCouncil/2015-10-06.pdf
CityCouncil,2015-10-06,17,"Vice Mayor Matarrese stated that he was not going to vote for the matter, but he would
like to address the Enterprise District; moved approval of continuing past 10:30 p.m.
Mayor Spencer clarified the motion would be to consider the remaining items; inquired
whether Vice Mayor Matarrese's motion is to consider all remaining items, to which Vice
Mayor Matarrese responded in the affirmative.
Councilmember Daysog seconded the motion, which failed by the following voice vote:
Ayes: Councilmembers Daysog, Ezzy Ashcraft and Matarrese - 3. Noes:
Councilmember Oddie and Mayor Spencer - 2.
Mayor Spencer inquired whether a there is motion to consider fewer items.
Vice Mayor Matarrese moved approval of continuing the meeting to cover the items
expressed by the City Manager as having to be done.
Mayor Spencer clarified the items that need to be addressed tonight are the leases
[paragraph nos. 15-594 and 15-595].
The Interim City Manager stated that is correct.
Councilmember Oddie seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote -
5.
Council briefly discussed whether the Enterprise District would be addressed.
***
***
Mayor Spencer called a recess at 10:27 p.m. and reconvened the meeting at 10:34 p.m.
***
(15-592) Response to City Council Referral Regarding a Possible Wetlands Mitigation
Bank at Alameda Point. Not heard.
(15-593) Recommendation to Proceed with a New Development Strategy for the
Enterprise District (Formerly Site B) at Alameda Point. Not heard.
(15-594) Introduction of Ordinance Approving a Lease and Authorizing the City
Manager to Execute Documents Necessary to Implement the Terms of a 3-Year Lease
with CSI Mini-Storage, LLC., a California Limited Liability Company, for Buildings 338,
608, and 608A-C Collectively Located at 50 and 51 West Hornet Avenue at Alameda
Point. Introduced.
The Economic Development Division Manager gave a brief presentation.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
17
October 6, 2015",CityCouncil/2015-10-06.pdf
CityCouncil,2015-10-06,18,"Vice Mayor Matarrese moved introduction of the ordinance.
Vice Mayor Matarrese stated the Enterprise District discussion should address short
term leases.
Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice
vote - 5.
(15-595) Introduction of Ordinance Approving a Lease and Authorizing the City
Manager to Execute Documents Necessary to Implement the Terms of a 10-Year Lease
with Power Engineering Construction Company for Building 166 located at 1501 Viking
Street, Suite 200 at Alameda Point. Introduced.
The Economic Development Division Manager gave a brief presentation.
Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft noted Power Engineering has been on a month-to-month
lease due to the City's efforts around the Lawrence Livermore Labs.
Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft moved introduction of the ordinance.
Councilmember Daysog inquired whether the lease is within the Enterprise District, to
which the Economic Development Division Manager responded in the affirmative; stated
the City would work around Power Engineering, which is a great tenant and asset;
discussions initially included moving Power Engineering to Building 167 within the
Tidelands area; however, the proposal did not pencil out for Power Engineering to do all
of the building upgrades; since Power Engineering has upgraded Building 166, the
building would not be included in the Enterprise District.
In response to Councilmember Daysog's inquiry about the lease covering infrastructure
costs, the Economic Development Division Manager responded the lease would be
subject to all of the fees that will be assessed.
Vice Mayor Matarrese seconded the motion.
Under discussion, Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft noted the operation is amanzing;
clarified the motion is approval of introducing the ordinance approving a lease and
authorizing the City Manager to execute documents necessary to implement the terms
of a 10-year lease with Power Engineering Construction Company for Building 166
located at 1501 Viking Street, Suite 200 at Alameda Point.
On the call for the question, the motion carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.
CITY MANAGER COMMUNICATIONS
(15-596) The Interim City Manager stated that she has no additional communications.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
18
October 6, 2015",CityCouncil/2015-10-06.pdf
CityCouncil,2015-10-06,19,"As a Point of Order, Councilmember Oddie inquired whether the Enterprise District
[paragraph no. 15-593] could be addressed, to which Mayor Spencer responded in the
negative; stated the matter cannot be heard because the vote to hear items past 10:30
did not include the item and additional items cannot be added.
The City Attorney noted the vote at 10:30 p.m. was to take up any new action items
after 10:30 p.m.; the vote at 11:00 p.m. is whether to continue past 11:00 p.m.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA
None.
COUNCIL REFERRALS
None.
COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS
(15-597) Councilmember Daysog announced that he attended the League of California
Cities annual meeting along with Mayor Spencer and Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft; he
attended sessions on share economy and AirBnb issues.
(15-598) Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft announced that she attended different sessions
at the League of California Cities Annual meeting, including workshops on emerging
issues in policing, building affordable housing, and e-cigarette policy.
(15-599) Councilmember Oddie announced that he attend the September 24th Alameda
County Lead Program meeting; residents could request the County to inspect, test and
monitor their homes for lead.
(15-600) Mayor Spencer announced that she also attended the League of California
Cities annual meeting, including a workshop on digital strategies for economic
development.
(15-601) Consideration of Mayor's Nominations to the Commission on Disability Issues
and Housing Authority Board of Commissioners.
Mayor Spencer nominated Kenji Tamaoki for appointment to the Housing Authority
Board of Commissioners.
(15-602) Mayor Spencer announced a special City Council meeting would be held on
October 7th at 7:00 p.m. to discuss the General Plan regarding Harbor Bay.
ADJOURNMENT
(15-603) There being no further business, Mayor Spencer adjourned the meeting at
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
19
October 6, 2015",CityCouncil/2015-10-06.pdf
CityCouncil,2015-10-06,20,"10:50 p.m. in honor of former Councilmember Barbara Kerr.
Respectfully submitted,
Lara Weisiger
City Clerk
The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Sunshine Ordinance.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
20
October 6, 2015",CityCouncil/2015-10-06.pdf
CityCouncil,2015-10-06,21,"MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING
TUESDAY--OCTOBER 6, 2015- -5:30 P.M.
Mayor Spencer convened the meeting at 5:31 p.m.
Roll Call - Present:
Councilmembers Daysog, Ezzy Ashcraft, Matarrese, Oddie
and Mayor Spencer - 5.
Absent:
None.
The meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider:
(15-569) Conference with Legal Counsel - Anticipated Litigation; Significant exposure to
litigation pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 54956.9; Number of cases: One (As
Defendant- City Exposure to Legal Action)
(15-570) Conference with Legal Counsel - Anticipated Litigation; Initiation of litigation
pursuant to subdivision (c) of Section 54956.9; Number of cases: One (As Plaintiff- City
Initiating Legal Action)
(15-571) Conference with Labor Negotiators (54957.6); City Negotiator: Elizabeth D.
Warmerdam; Employee Organizations: International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers,
Local 1245; (IBEW), Electric Utility Professional Association of Alameda (EUPA),
Alameda City Employees Association (ACEA), Alameda Police Officers Association,
Non-Sworn (PANS), Management and Confidential Employees Association (MCEA);
Under Negotiation: Salaries and terms of employment
Following the Closed Session the meeting was reconvened and Mayor Spencer
announced that regarding exposure to litigation, the settlement of a dispute was
discussed and direction was given to staff; regarding initiation of litigation, the Council
discussed authorization to pursue litigation and direction was given to staff; and
regarding labor, direction was given to staff.
Adjournment
There being no further business, Mayor Spencer adjourned the meeting at 6:47 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 6, 2015",CityCouncil/2015-10-06.pdf