body,date,page,text,path
CityCouncil,2018-11-27,1,"MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING
TUESDAY -NOVEMBER 27, 2018- -5:00 P.M.
Mayor Spencer convened the meeting at 5:04 p.m.
Roll Call -
Present:
Councilmembers Ezzy Ashcraft, Matarrese, Oddie, Vella and
Mayor Spencer - 5.
Absent:
None.
Public Comment
John Knox White, Alameda, expressed concern over the City Manager hiring process
not being publically discussed or announced; stated some of the process should be
reconsidered due to the recent election; two City Attorney applicants expressed interest
in applying after the change in leadership; suggested reopening the City Manager
application period through the end of the year without impacting the timeline, including
newly elected officials in discussion and providing a public announcement about the
process tonight.
Ken Peterson, Alameda, discussed prior City Managers and urged Council to hire
someone suited for the job.
Tony Daysog, Alameda, expressed support for involving the public in the City Manager
hiring process, which should be extended to identify additional candidates.
The meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider:
(18-623) Conference with Legal Counsel - Existing Litigation; Pursuant Government
Code section 54956.9(a); Case Name: Campbell, Joseph V. City of Alameda, et al.;
Court: Superior Court of the State of California, County of Alameda; Case Number:
RG18912595
(18-624) Conference with Legal Counsel - Existing Litigation; Pursuant Government
Code section 54956.9(a) Case Name: Clyde Grossman et al V. City of Alameda, et al.;
Court; Superior Court of the State of California, County of Alameda; Case Number:
RG15777784
(18-625) Public Employee Appointment/Hiring; Pursuant to Government Code § 54957;
Title/description of positions to be filled: City Manager
(18-626) Public Employee Appointment/Hiring; Pursuant to Government Code § 54957;
Title/description of positions to be filled: Acting/Interim City Attorney and City Attorney
(18-627) Conference with Labor Negotiators (Government Code section 54957.6); CITY
Negotiators: David L. Rudat, Interim City Manager, Elizabeth D. Warmerdam, Assistant
Special Meeting
Alameda City Council
November 27, 2018",CityCouncil/2018-11-27.pdf
CityCouncil,2018-11-27,2,"City Manager and Nancy Bronstein, Human Resources Director; 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 Unit (PANS), and
Alameda Management and Confidential Employees Association (MCEA); Under
Negotiation: Salaries and Terms of Employment
Following the Closed Session, the meeting was reconvened and the City Clerk
announced that regarding the Campbell litigation, direction was given to staff by
unanimous vote; regarding Grossman litigation, direction was given to staff by
unanimous vote; regarding the City Manager hiring, direction was given to staff by two
unanimous votes; regarding the City Attorney hiring, direction was given to staff by
unanimous vote; and regarding Labor, direction was given to staff.
Adjournment
There being no further business, Mayor Spencer adjourned the meeting at 7:03 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
November 27, 2018",CityCouncil/2018-11-27.pdf
CityCouncil,2018-11-27,3,"MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
TUESDAY- -NOVEMBER 27, 2018- 7:00 P.M.
Mayor Spencer convened the meeting at 7:14 p.m. and led the Pledge of Allegiance.
ROLL CALL -
Present:
Councilmembers Ezzy Ashcraft, Matarrese, Oddie,
Vella, and Mayor Spencer - 5.
Absent:
None.
AGENDA CHANGES
None.
PROCLAMATIONS, SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY AND ANNOUNCEMENTS
(18-628) Proclamation Declaring November 27, 2018 as Janet C. Kern Day.
Mayor Spencer read and presented the proclamation.
Ms. Kern made brief comments.
Vice Mayor Vella, Councilmembers Oddie, Matarrese Ezzy Ashcraft and Mayor Spencer
made brief comments.
(18-629) Proclamation Declaring November 2018 as National Native American Heritage
Month.
Mayor Spencer read the proclamation and presented it to Nanette Deetz and Cathy
Dana, Alameda Island Poets, Frank Bette Center for the Arts and Artists Embassy
International Arts Ambassadors.
Ms. Deetz made brief comments and read a poem.
(18-630) The City Attorney introduced the new Assistant City Attorney.
The Assistant City Attorney made brief comments.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA
(18-631) Ken Peterson, Alameda, discussed the recent fire and a study proposing
mitigations; expressed concern over roads being narrowed.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Mayor Spencer announced that the tobacco ordinance [paragraph no. 18-641 was
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
November 27, 2018
1",CityCouncil/2018-11-27.pdf
CityCouncil,2018-11-27,4,"removed from the Consent Calendar for discussion.
Councilmember Matarrese moved approval of the remainder of the Consent Calendar.
Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice
vote - 5. [Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk preceding the
paragraph number.]
(*18-632) Minutes of the Special and Regular City Council Meetings Held on October
16, 2018. Approved. [610-10]
(*18-633) Ratified bills in the amount of $4,781,580.86.
(*18-634) Recommendation to Approve Revisions to an Interfund Loan for the Financing
of Fire Station #3 and to Transfer Remaining Balance of the Loan to the General Fund.
Accepted.
(*18-635) Recommendation to Accept the 2013 Local Library Bond Measure Annual
Report. Accepted.
(*18-636) Recommendation to Accept the Police and Fire Construction Impact Fee
Annual Report. Accepted.
(*18-637) Recommendation to Accept the Development Impact Fee and Fleet Industrial
Supply Center (FISC)/Catellus Traffic Fee Report. Accepted.
(*18-638) SUMMARY: Recommendation to Accept and File Various Community
Facilities Districts (CFD) Reports for Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2018
Recommendation to Accept and File CFD No. 03-1 (Bayport Municipal Services District)
Report for the Fiscal Year (FY) Ending June 30, 2018; CFD No. 13-1 (Alameda Landing
Public Improvements) Report for FY Ending June 30, 2018; CFD No. 13-2 (Alameda
Landing Municipal Services District) Report for FY Ending June 30, 2018; CFD District
No. 14-1 (Marina Cove II) Report for FY Ending June 30, 2018; and CFD No. 17-1
(Alameda Point Public Services District) Report for FY Ending June 30, 2018. Accepted.
(*18-639) Resolution No. 15455, ""Amending the Part-Time Classifications Salary
Schedule Effective December 23, 2018, to Reflect Changes to the California State
Minimum Wage and to Maintain Adequate Differentials Between Part-Time Job
Categories."" Adopted.
(*18-640) Ordinance No. 3229, ""Approving a Lease Amendment with a Maximum
Three-Year Extension of the Lease with CSI Mini-Storage, LLC, a California Limited
Liability Company, for Buildings 338, 608, and 608A-C Located at 50 and 51 West
Hornet Avenue at Alameda Point."" Finally passed.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
2
November 27, 2018",CityCouncil/2018-11-27.pdf
CityCouncil,2018-11-27,5,"(*18-641) Ordinance No.3230, ""Amending the Alameda Municipal Code by Adding
Article XVII (Tobacco Retailers) to Chapter VI (Businesses, Occupations and Industries)
to Require Licensure of Tobacco Retailers and Prohibit the Sale of Flavored Tobacco
Products.' Finally passed.
Mayor Spencer stated there are 37 speakers for the item; those not in favor expressed
concern over the shortened time for public comment; inquired how Council would like to
proceed and whether Council is agreeable to inquiring how many speakers are in favor
versus not in favor.
Vice Mayor Vella stated the regulations and rules do not specify between support or
oppose; this is the second reading of the item; she is inclined to follow what the rules
stipulate and shorten the time.
Mayor Spencer stated that a previous rent item was handled differently; inquired if
Council would be okay with a one minute speaking time.
Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired if it is possible to let the tobacco store
proponents speak first.
Councilmember Matarrese moved approval of lowering the time to one minute.
Vice Mayor Vella seconded the motion, which carried by the following voice vote: Ayes:
Councilmembers Ezzy Ashcraft, Matarrese, Oddie and Vella - 4. Noes: Mayor Spencer
- 1.
Expressed concern over losing businesses; suggested capping the number of retailers
and the measurement distance be door to door: Jaime Rojas, Alameda.
Suggested a 55 tobacco license cap and 300 feet door to door; stated 18 business will
lose their life savings: Linda Asbury, West Alameda Business Association (WABA).
Expressed concern over zoning and taking away licenses: Samir Saleh, Alameda.
Stated the proposal will not make a difference since youth make purchases online;
suggested State regulations rather than regulating businesses locally: Alex Korade
Foster, Alameda.
Showed a maps of businesses; suggested changes: Paul Sekhon, Alameda.
Urged Council to put health before profits: Kimberly McGowan, Lincoln Parent Teachers
Association.
Expressed concern over high schoolers vaping, provided statistics related to youth
vaping: Randy Uang, Breathe California Golden Gate Public Health Partnership.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
November 27, 2018
3",CityCouncil/2018-11-27.pdf
CityCouncil,2018-11-27,6,"Urged the Council to keep the ordinance language as-is: Denise Zachariah, Alameda.
Stated the ordinance will reduce the chances of children vaping: Malia Zachariah,
Alameda Girl Scout.
Expressed concern over vaping on campus; stated school bathrooms doors are being
locked open to monitor vaping use: Seamus McGuinnis, Encinal High School.
Expressed concern over tobacco companies targeting her friends: Karen Nguyen,
Encinal High School.
Stated her friends are getting hooked on vaping products: Charlie Kleinman, Encinal
High School.
Expressed concern over tobacco companies targeting and marketing to youth: Sydney
Williams, Encinal High School.
Stated retailers work hard to keep products away from youth; expressed concern over
punishing businesses: Matt Hussain, Alameda.
Expressed concern over the ordinance's deep flaws, which will lower 50 businesses to
32: Debbie George, Alameda.
Stated that he does not sell to youth; expressed concern over street dealers selling to
youth: Antonio Neumann, Alameda.
Expressed concern over losing his business without a cigarette license: Surinder Singh,
Alameda.
Expressed concern over not being able to sell his business; stated people should not be
able to buy products online: Inderjit Sidhu, Alameda.
Expressed concern over the ordinance threatening small business owners: Timothy
Lankford, Alameda Business Consultant.
Expressed support for the business community's concerns: Narinder Matharu, Alameda.
Stated taking away tobacco licenses does not keep the product out of kids' hands: Paul
Dhindsa, Alameda.
Expressed concern over banning menthol and losing small businesses: Ali Quashasha,
Alameda.
Outlined the 49 existing stores; stated only 30 stores could be sold; distance should be
300 feet door to door: Bob Sekhon, Alameda.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
4
November 27, 2018",CityCouncil/2018-11-27.pdf
CityCouncil,2018-11-27,7,"***
Mayor Spencer called a recess at 8:14 p.m. and reconvened the meeting at 8:21 p.m.
Stated taking away a tobacco licenses is killing businesses; stated his father's ability to
pays for his college will be impacted: Didar Bhullar, Alameda.
Expressed support for the buffer zones; urged support of health over profit: Shea
Overstreet, Alameda.
Expressed support for the flavored tobacco ban and concern for small businesses;
suggested starting January 1, 2020: Michael McDonough, Chamber of Commerce.
Stated the issue comes down to money; expressed support: John F. Sykes, Alameda.
Stated taking away tobacco licenses will not solve the problem; suggested businesses
be given time to sell: Anil Pandey, Alameda.
Stated no one will lose their license; stated new owners purchasing businesses will be
aware: Lizzy Velton, American Heart Association.
Outlined cities that have adopted similar measures; stated local measures are needed:
Philip Gardner, Alameda.
Stated city governments have reduced tobacco use; expressed sympathy for
merchants: Serena Chen, Alameda.
Stated tobacco companies cannot advertise, so marketing occurs in stores: Holly
Schneider, Alameda County Public Health Department (ACPHD).
Expressed support for changing the guidelines to door to door, exempting certain stores
and meeting with businesses: Raed Abdulah, Alameda.
Expressed concern for businesses: Robert Todd, Alameda.
Discussed marketing tactics of tobacco companies: Irene Nikka, American Cancer
Society Cancer Action Network.
Stated the ordinance has a big flaw; people selling stores will be impacted: Ann Sekhon,
Alameda.
Discussed his business: Shapoor Zazai, Alameda.
Stated small businesses will be impacted; urged reconsideration; suggested the
effective date change to 2020: Theresa James, Alameda.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
November 27, 2018
5",CityCouncil/2018-11-27.pdf
CityCouncil,2018-11-27,8,"Stated tobacco continues to be the leading cause of preventable death in the United
States: Paul Cummings, ACPHD.
Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft expressed sympathy for the immigrant-owned small
businesses; stated the reason tobacco sales are decreasing is due to effective
education causing people to stop smoking; inquired if other inventory can be procured
by vendors instead of tobacco; stated public health will take precedence every time.
In response to Mayor Spencer's inquiry regarding data on City retailers selling to youth,
the Assistant City Attorney stated based off of 2013 data provided by the Alameda
Police Department, 2 out of 47 stores had violations of selling to minors; in 2012, 9 out
of 45 stores had violations of selling to minors.
Mayor Spencer inquired whether there is more recent data, to which the Interim City
Manager responded in the negative.
Mayor Spencer inquired whether online sales are permitted to Alameda residents, to
which the Assistant City Attorney responded in the affirmative
Councilmember Matarrese moved final passage of the ordinance; stated the leading
cause of preventable death in the United States is tobacco; the Food and Drug
Administration (FDA) has increased warning labels on tobacco related industries
targeting children; that there is no control over online sales, but there is control over
sales Citywide.
Vice Mayor Vella seconded the motion.
Under discussion, Vice Mayor Vella stated allowing the same number of tobacco
licenses to continue defeats the purpose of the ordinance; there is a difference in
quantity between cannabis dispensaries and tobacco retail licenses; tobacco is
addictive and kills; the solution is not to pass the burden of selling to the next small
business owner; part of flourishing as a small business or convenience store is to sell
alternate products and having a solid business and marketing plan; expressed concern
about retailers with tobacco licenses being near schools.
Councilmember Oddie discussed a study by ""The Truth Initiative"" group; noted 74%
youth indicated they obtained Juuls from a physical retail location, 52% from a social
source, and 6% on the internet; stated many people who smoke might not be able to
enjoy their retirements due to a tobacco related illness.
Mayor Spencer stated the data she reviewed indicated 75% of youth obtained smoking
devices from other social sources, not physical retailers; 95% of City retailers have not
sold tobacco products to youths; the State recently increased the legal purchasing age
of tobacco from 18 to 21, causing a difference in survey response ages; she strongly
opposes smoking, but supports adults being capable of making their own decisions;
expressed concern over what might be banned next.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
6
November 27, 2018",CityCouncil/2018-11-27.pdf
CityCouncil,2018-11-27,9,"On the call for the question, the motion carried by the following voice vote: Ayes:
Councilmembers Ezzy Ashcraft, Matarrese, Oddie and Vella - 4. Noes: Mayor Spencer
- 1.
***
Mayor Spencer called a recess at 9:00 p.m. and reconvened the meeting at 9:10 p.m.
REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS
(18-642) Resolution No.15456, ""Appointing Joyce McConeghey as a Member of the
Library Board. Adopted;
(18-643A) Resolution No.15457, ""Appointing Simon Chiu as a Member of the Rent
Review Advisory Committee."" Adopted; and
(18-643B) Resolution No.15458, ""Appointing Carolyn Johnson as a Member of the Rent
Review Advisory Committee."" Adopted.
Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft moved adoption of the resolutions.
Councilmember Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice
vote - 5.
(18-644) Introduction of Ordinance Amending the Alameda Municipal Code by
Amending Section 30-5.15 of Chapter XXX (Zoning Ordinance) to Adopt New Bird-Safe
Building Standards and Update Outdoor Lighting Regulations Consistent with Dark
Skies Standards. [The proposed amendment is categorically exempt from the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Sections 15061(b)(3),
15305, 15307, and 15183.] Introduced.
The Planning, Building and Transportation Director gave a brief presentation.
In response to Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft's inquiry, the Planning, Building and
Transportation Director stated the Audubon Society proposes new buildings over 35
feet in height with over 50% of the façade glass would be subject to new standards; the
amendment requires replacement of existing windows over 12 feet to be subject to the
ordinance
Mayor Spencer inquired if the issue was presented at the Planning Board, to which the
Planning, Building and Transportation Director responded in the affirmative; stated the
Planning Board's goal was not to impede homes from being rehabilitated.
Mayor Spencer inquired if multiple windows exist on one wall of a residence and one
window must be changed due to damage, can the one window be replaced without
meeting the bird safe regulations, to which the Planning, Building and Transportation
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
November 27, 2018
7",CityCouncil/2018-11-27.pdf
CityCouncil,2018-11-27,10,"Alameda City Council
8
November 27, 2018",CityCouncil/2018-11-27.pdf
CityCouncil,2018-11-27,11,"Councilmember Oddie moved introduction of the ordinance.
Vice Mayor Vella seconded the motion.
Under discussion, Vice Mayor Vella stated the Golden Gate Audubon Society has done
great work in educating both Council and the community on the regulation's impacts;
discussed impacts to affordable housing costs, and potential window treatments.
Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft expressed concern over the added cost to affordable
housing projects; inquired how enforcement would be done to ensure alternative
window coverings are closed in the evening and the estimated added cost to affordable
housing projects.
The Planning, Building and Transportation Director responded he does not have an
estimated added cost; stated the ordinance has two exceptions as written: historic
structures and glazing on commercial storefronts; Council may add a third exemption for
affordable housing projects, if desired.
Mayor Spencer stated that she has not heard a request from the affordable housing
community to be included as an exemption.
On the call for the question, the motion carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.
(18-645) Introduction of an Ordinance Amending the Alameda Municipal Code by
Amending Various Provisions of Article XVI (Cannabis Businesses) of Chapter VI
(Businesses, Occupations and Industry), Including but not Limited to (a) Modify the
Definition of ""Youth Centers"" as a Sensitive Use, Including Specifically Excluding
Certain Uses (Martial Arts/Combat Sports, Cultural or Similar Education, and Physical
Fitness); (b) Modify the Definition of ""Cannabis Business Owner"" to Conform with State
Law; and (c) Make Any Other Conforming Amendments. Introduced.
Councilmember Matarrese moved approval of keeping two minutes for speakers.
Mayor Spencer seconded the motion, which failed by the following voice vote: Ayes:
Councilmember Matarrese and Mayor Spencer - 2.
Councilmember Oddie moved approval of changing the time to one minute.
Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft seconded the motion, which failed, due to requiring four
affirmative votes, by the following voice vote: Ayes: Councilmembers Ezzy Ashcraft,
Oddie and Vella - 3. Noes: Councilmember Matarrese and Mayor Spencer - 2.
Mayor Spencer moved approval of 90 seconds.
Vice Mayor Vella seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
November 27, 2018
9",CityCouncil/2018-11-27.pdf
CityCouncil,2018-11-27,12,"The Base Reuse and Economic Development Manager gave a Power Point
presentation.
In response to Mayor Spencer inquiry regarding the change in the buffer zones
displayed, the Economic Development Manger outlined the buffer zone.
Councilmember Oddie inquired how many square feet are left on the main island.
The Economic Development Manager responded she does not know; stated locating
any dispensaries in the main districts would be virtually impossible.
Councilmember Oddie requested confirmation that keeping the buffer zones the same is
a de facto prohibition, to which the Economic Development Manager responded a few
small opportunities may be available, but the opportunity diminishes if martial arts
studios are included as youth centers.
Councilmember Oddie inquired if any buildings are available in the miniscule areas left
outside the buffer zones, to which the Economic Development Manager responded she
does not know; stated the building she is aware of are within the buffer zones.
In response to Councilmember Oddie's inquiry about the State law regarding youth
centers, the Economic Development Manager stated the State allows each City to make
the determination.
Councilmember Oddie inquired if a State law mandates a buffer zone around youth
centers, to which the Economic Development Manager responded in the negative.
Councilmember Oddie inquired if State law defines youth centers, to which the
Economic Development Manager responded State law has a definition cities may use,
but also gives the option to change the definition to become more or less stringent.
In response to Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft's inquiry, the Assistant City Attorney
stated the State Law definition is in the Health and Safety Code and is the current
definition the City has, which reads: ""any public or private facility that is primarily used to
host recreational or social activities for minors including but not limited to private youth
membership organizations or clubs, social service teenage club facilities, video arcades
or similar amusement park facilities.""
Vice Mayor Vella stated there is ambiguity in the State definition.
The Assistant City Attorney concurred; stated the State is aware; the reason behind the
ambiguity is to allow cities to make the decision.
In response to Mayor Spencer's inquired regarding ambiguous language, the Assistant
City Attorney stated many cities are struggling over how to specifically quantify
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
10
November 27, 2018",CityCouncil/2018-11-27.pdf
CityCouncil,2018-11-27,13,"""primarily"" in ""primarily used to host.""
Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired why the Council would not treat the definition of
youth center the same for Alameda Recreation and Park Department (ARPD) recreation
centers and a martial arts studio on Webster Street.
The Assistant City Attorney responded there is more clarity surrounding the definition of
parks than a martial arts studio.
Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired if ARPD requested their centers be left out of
the definition, to which the Assistant City Attorney responded in the negative.
Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired if ARPD's protection would be removed by
teaching martial arts, to which the Assistant City Attorney responded in the negative.
Councilmember Oddie inquired if staff modified the State definition of youth center to
include ARPD centers, to which the Assistant City Attorney responded in the affirmative.
Councilmember Oddie inquired if Council could eliminate youth center as a sensitive
use and keep the ARPD centers.
The Assistant City Attorney responded doing so is an option; stated the City would want
to ensure certain federal enforcement priorities are effectuated.
Councilmember Oddie stated the definition could instead read: ""a youth center is a
facility determined by the ARPD to be a recreation center"".
Mayor Spencer inquired what the State's recommendation is regarding distance from
schools, to which the Economic Development Manager responded the State's
recommendation is at 600 feet.
Mayor Spencer inquired what is the City's proposed distance, to which the Economic
Development Manager responded 1000 feet.
Vice Mayor Vella inquired whether having the language read: ""a facility exclusively used
to host recreational or social activities for minors"" would apply to ARPD, to which the
Assistant City Attorney responded in the affirmative.
Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated almost all recreation facilities, park events and
classes are offered to minors and adults; inquired if the criteria is a facility exclusively
used by youth.
The Assistant City Attorney responded in the affirmative, stated ARPD centers would be
carved out as protected.
Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether there was discussion at a previous
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
November 27, 2018
11",CityCouncil/2018-11-27.pdf
CityCouncil,2018-11-27,14,"meeting addressing minor enrollment percentages when listing a business as a youth
center.
The Base Reuse and Community Development Director responded the ordinance
definition states if ARPD makes the determination that a City facility is a recreation
center, the City has control over determining whether the facility should be construed as
a youth center; it is not a requirement; the City controls the discretionary decision;
expressed concern over private businesses documenting youth participation and how to
enforce documentation; stated the City has no way of controlling how private
businesses keep records; expressed further concern over the City's staffing capacity to
undertake such significant enforcement.
Mayor Spencer moved approval of lowering the speaker's time from 90 seconds to one
minute.
Vice Mayor Vella seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.
Urged Council to adopt the least restrictive language possible: Carrie Tillman, Cannabis
Health Advocates.
Outlined cannabis regulations and requirements which protect children: Mark Hirsman,
Portman Enterprises.
Urged the Council to move forward: Linda Asbury, West Alameda Business Association.
Urged dispensaries be away from children: Anita Ng, Alameda.
Expressed concern over dispensaries being near youth: Barry Parker, Alameda.
Stated cannabis should not be near youth centers: John Montgomery, Alameda.
Expressed support for safe access to cannabis; urged martial arts businesses not be
considered youth centers: Elizabeth Henry, Alameda.
Expressed support for safe access to cannabis: April Alvarez, Alameda.
Expressed support for small business owners; stated not changing the definition is a
ban; urged approval of the revision: Michael McDonough, Chamber of Commerce.
Urged Council to consider the amendment: Jennifer Tran, Alameda.
Discussed dispensary operations: Terry Miller, Alameda.
Outlined dispensary good neighbor policy requirements: John Ngu, Alameda.
Urged approval; discussed a University of California, Los Angeles study and provided
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
12
November 27, 2018",CityCouncil/2018-11-27.pdf
CityCouncil,2018-11-27,15,"statistics: Ryan Agabao, Alameda Safe Cannabis Access.
Discussed benefits of cannabis, which should be sold in grocery stores: Howard
Harawitz, Alameda.
Submitted petitions; expressed concern over cannabis being near youth: Joanna Lau,
International Chi Institute.
Expressed support for the ordinance: Christina Ramirez, Alameda.
Discussed an online petition to support cannabis businesses and the importance of
educating youth: Vivian Vu, Alameda.
Stated that he opposes cannabis businesses near youth centers; suggested the
dispensary be delivery only: Wally Beaver, Alameda.
Discussed giving out free cannabis: Phillip Redd, Alameda.
Stated that he opposes the ordinance; dispensaries should not be next to students: Don
Sharrat, Alameda.
Expressed support for cannabis: John F. Sikes, Alameda.
Stated cities that have embraced cannabis are now stepping back buffer zones: Serena
Chen, Alameda.
Stated businesses can co-exist: Josh Von Trap, Alameda.
Discussed the ages of his students and other uses near the institute: Yanging Ding,
International Chi Institute.
Stated that he opposes the ordinance; suggested considering mixed use zones: Ben
Mickus, Alameda.
Expressed concern over smoking and protecting youth from addiction: Mohammad
Alekozai, Quba Mosque.
Stated that he opposes the dispensary location: Maaz Khan, Quba Mosque.
Expressed concern over placing cannabis businesses near youth: Amanda Naprawa,
Public Health Institute.
Stated that he opposes the definition change: Shanon Lee, Alameda.
Stated that he supports cannabis businesses; urged the City should to follow the State
definition: Aaron Kraw, Alameda.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
November 27, 2018
13",CityCouncil/2018-11-27.pdf
CityCouncil,2018-11-27,16,"Stated that he supports cannabis businesses, which are safe: Miguel Rodriguez, The
Green Door.
Expressed concern over allowing cannabis businesses in Alameda: Adnan, Quba
Mosque.
Expressed concern over kids being affected by smelling cannabis: Nagi Mohson, Quba
Mosque.
Stated the proposal does not provide a consideration of compromise; expressed
concerns: Cross Creason, Alameda.
Expressed concern over the proposed cannabis store location: Michelle Wong,
Alameda.
Stated that she opposes opening a cannabis store next to the martial arts center: Qiao
Feng Chen, Alameda.
Expressed support for cannabis businesses: Nick Portolese, Portman Enterprises.
Expressed support for the ordinance: Tyler Champlin, CN Holdings.
Stated that he opposes opening a cannabis store on Webster Street: Vincent Wu,
Alameda.
Expressed concern over targeting the International Chi Center: Rasheed Shabaaz,
Alameda.
Urged the Council to move forward: Rich Moskowitz, Alameda.
Councilmember Oddie stated there is a permit application in process based on the
ordinance originally passed; once that permit was made public, the location became
known; the item being discussed is not directly related to a particular business
application; the application will go through the standard process; members of the public
can speak at the Planning Board meeting; Council stopping a specific applicant from
continuing through the permit process is not on the agenda; discussed a back-door
attempt to ban cannabis businesses based on additional buffer zones; expressed
concern over a de facto ban.
Vice Mayor Vella stated that she does not believe in spot zoning; no child is going to be
entering a dispensary as it is strictly prohibited; discussed the good neighbor policies
that can work with the Planning Board processes; safe access is being looked into on
the East End and Park Street Business District; the difference between schools and
youth centers is a place that solely serves youth; expressed concern over delivery only
dispensary options; outlined the benefits of adult use in addition to medicinal use.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
14
November 27, 2018",CityCouncil/2018-11-27.pdf
CityCouncil,2018-11-27,17,"Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft disagreed with Councilmember Oddie's statement
related to the discussion at hand not being about the current permit application for a
cannabis dispensary on Webster Street; expressed concern over modifying the
definition of youth centers to the carve out process to allow the dispensary applicant to
proceed on Webster Street; discussed ways to audit businesses in order to prove youth
enrollment; stated changing the definition of youth centers is effectively spot zoning.
Councilmember Matarrese stated calling out martial arts studios specifically in the
definition of youth centers makes the issue about the Webster Street application;
cannabis is still illegal from a federal standpoint and has not been cleared by the Food
and Drug Administration (FDA); expressed concern over spot zoning to allow two
cannabis permit applications to move forward.
Vice Mayor Vella inquired if the current agenda item will legally impact the application
on Webster Street, to which The Assistant City Attorney responded in the affirmative.
Vice Mayor Vella inquired if there would be liability for the City if the language is
changed after the fact, to which the Assistant City Attorney responded it is hard to say
what an individual party will do, but it is a possibility.
The Base Reuse and Community Development Director stated the application was
deemed to be in an eligible location under the current definition and will continue to
move through the process, which prompted the discussion about whether or not
adjacent uses are primarily serving youth; the amendment will provide clarity for City
staff and ensure the regulation and implementation of the ordinance is clear; the item
presented is not solely about the proposed dispensary at Haight Street and Webster
Street; there are a number of martial arts studios on Park Street as well; staff wants to
know the Council's direction to be clear for future Requests For Proposals (RFP) and
proper execution of the ordinance.
Vice Mayor Vella inquired whether the 100% youth service requirement would still stand
if Council strikes the caveat for martial arts and dance studios, to which the Base Reuse
and Community Development Director responded in the affirmative.
Vice Mayor Vella inquired if there is evidence that facilities serve 100% youth, to which
the Base Reuse and Community Development Director responded there are two
businesses believed to only serve youths; stated that neither of the businesses
mentioned are martial arts or dance studios.
; Vice Mayor Vella inquired whether ARPD carve-out could be removed from the
language as well and instead state the location must exclusively provide services to
youths, to which the Base Reuse and Community Development Director responded in
the affirmative; stated it is possible to remove the recreation centers under the youth
center definition; documenting whether martial arts studios, which are the most
numerous, would pose a challenge for staff to document and verify whether or not youth
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
November 27, 2018
15",CityCouncil/2018-11-27.pdf
CityCouncil,2018-11-27,18,"are primarily and exclusively served.
In response to Mayor Spencer's inquiry whether or not marital arts would fall under the
cultural education definition, the Assistant City Attorney stated the only caveat is some
martial arts uses are not considered cultural, such as modern mixed marital arts, which
would qualify as a martial arts studio, but not a cultural education center.
Councilmember Matarrese stated when the Planning Board conditional use permit
hearing occurs, members of the public will be able to convey how they truly feel.
Councilmember Oddie stated the definition is currently subject to interpretation; he
appreciates the inquiry posed by Mayor Spencer.
Mayor Spencer inquired if it is possible to strike the language causing a double standard
for ARPD recreation centers, to which the Assistant City Attorney responded in the
affirmative.
Mayor Spencer stated the fastest growing demographic for cannabis use is senior
citizens; the current status quo is not working; illegal sales are currently happening;
urged access to safe, legal, lab-tested cannabis.
Councilmember Oddie moved introduction of the ordinance.
Vice Mayor Vella seconded the motion, with a friendly amendment directing staff to look
at the good neighbor policy and work with all of the public who expressed concerns, as
well as those who support the item, to see if good guidelines can be created to ensure
operators have guidance.
Under discussion, Councilmember Oddie moved approval of giving Councilmembers an
additional 30 seconds time.
Councilmember Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice
vote - 5.
Vice Mayor Vella outlined policies which stipulate people cannot smoke outside of a
dispensary; stated, different penalties can occur, including license revocation; license
revocation through the conditional use permit process can be expedited in the instance
of certain violations, which gives the neighbors next door to dispensary facilities an
opportunity to weigh-in and express concerns.
In response to Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft's inquiry if the good neighbor policy is
something Council can work on crafting, Vice Mayor Vella stated the direction would be
to have staff look into the policy and come back to Council.
Mayor Spencer inquired if there is interest in striking the language referencing ARPD in
the definition of youth centers, to which Councilmember Oddie stated not at this time.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
16
November 27, 2018",CityCouncil/2018-11-27.pdf
CityCouncil,2018-11-27,19,"On the call for the question, the motion carried by the following voice vote: Ayes:
Councilmembers Oddie, Vella and Mayor Spencer - 3. Noes: Councilmembers Ezzy
Ashcraft and Matarrese - 2.
CITY MANAGER COMMUNICATIONS
(18-646) The Interim City Manager made an announcement regarding a recent fire at a
Alameda Housing Authority projects; stated the State of California has allocated several
million dollars to California counties to help with homelessness; Alameda County will
allocating $16 million to cities; based on a formula Alameda will receive $756,524 in
one-time funds to help with homeless issues; options will return to Council in January;
acknowledged the work and donations from the community relative to protecting citizens
from the harmful air the past several days due to the Butte County fires; read a
statement related to the fires and air quality and provided information for donations.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA
None.
COUNCIL REFERRALS
None.
COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS
(18-647) Consideration of Mayor's Nomination for Appointment to the Library Board and
Rent Review Advisory Committee. Not heard.
(18-648) Vice Mayor Vella expressed her appreciation for staff's response; discussed a
lead abatement litigation award; stated the City should be aware and might want to join
the fight.
Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated the litigation took nine years and cities are only
being given five years to spend the settlement; discussed staff's response to the air
quality; noted United Way was also accepting donations.
Councilmember Oddie added his appreciation of staff's response.
Councilmember Matarrese expressed his appreciation of staff's response.
(18-649) Mayor Spencer thanked the City Manager for working to ensure the City
receives its share of homeless funding; announced the upcoming art in City Hall
reception and Midway Shelter run.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
November 27, 2018
17",CityCouncil/2018-11-27.pdf
CityCouncil,2018-11-27,20,"ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, Mayor Spencer adjourned the meeting at 11:59 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Lara Weisiger
City Clerk
The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Sunshine Ordinance.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
18
November 27, 2018",CityCouncil/2018-11-27.pdf
RentReviewAdvisoryCommittee,2018-11-27,1,"Approved Minutes
November 27, 2018
Minutes of a Special Meeting of the
Rent Review Advisory Committee
Monday, November 27, 2018
1. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL
The meeting was called to order at 6:56 p.m.
Present were:
Vice Chair Murray; Members Griffiths and Sullivan-Cheah
Absent:
None
Program staff:
Jennifer Kauffman, Samantha Columbus
City Attorney staff: None
2. AGENDA CHANGES
None.
3. STAFF ANNOUNCEMENTS
None.
4. PUBLIC COMMENT, NON-AGENDA ITEMS, NO.1
None.
5. CONSENT CALENDAR
None.
6. UNFINSHED BUSINESS
None.
7. NEW BUSINESS
7-A. CASE 1063 - 1825 Poggi St., Apt. A311
Tenants: Yosief Philipos
Landlords: Andy King
Proposed rent increase: $119.00 (10.0%), effective September 1, 2018
Mr. King said that Vue Alameda was purchased by new ownership in October 2017. He
said the new ownership intended to address the deferred maintenance concerns of the
residents to make the property safer, as well as provide new amenities. He said the new
owners have spent $3 million on improvements and expect the improvements to be
completed by 2019. He explained that the owners are requesting a rent increase above
5% to compensate for the additional services that are being provided to residents and to
help cover some of the renovation expenses. Some examples of improvements include
new pedestrian and vehicle gates, additional storage space, a fitness center, a child
center, propane barbeque equipment, a new roof, a new pool, new roofing, and new
Page 1 of 5",RentReviewAdvisoryCommittee/2018-11-27.pdf
RentReviewAdvisoryCommittee,2018-11-27,2,"Approved Minutes
November 27,2018
landscaping. Additionally, safety upgrades were made to the units with balconies,
including seismic retrofitting for earthquake safety.
Vice Chair Murray asked about a discrepancy in the rent increase history provided at the
unit and asked if he had any information on when the rent increases occurred and what
the circumstances for the rent increases were. Mr. King replied that when they took over
the property in 2017 there were a number of lease files that were incomplete.
Mr. Philipos stated that he has seen changes to the outside of apartments but no changes
inside. He said his carpet was more than 15 years old and when he asked his previous
landlord to fix it they just covered up the parts that needed fixing. He also stated that
there are water leaks in the bathroom that has caused the floor to bubble up. He stated
the requested increase of 10% would pose a financial hardship, explaining that he is the
only person working in his family and has to take care of his mother.
Mr. King responded that tenants were encouraged to come to management with
maintenance issues, and that things like water leaks were considered a priority to fix.
Member Sullivan-Cheah asked Mr. King if there were procedures in-place for maintenance
requests.
Mr. King stated that there were several ways to request a maintenance work, including
an online submission form.
Mr. Philipos stated that he did not know about the online submission form but would use
it to request maintenance work.
Member Sullivan-Cheah asked Mr. Philipos about the rent increase history details at the
unit and Mr. Philipos said he could not recall.
Member Sullivan-Cheah asked if Mr. Philipos' wife was able to work, and Mr. Philipos
stated that she is able to but has not found work yet. He asked if Mr. Philipos is the sole
caretaker for his mother and Mr. Philipos said that he supports her financially.
Member Sullivan-Cheah asked Mr. Philipos what percentage of his income would go
towards his rent if the 10% increase went into effect. Mr. Philipos stated that it would be
too much, and he would have to make adjustments to his lifestyle and budget to
accommodate.
Vice Chair Murray asked what Mr. Philipos' occupation was, and he said he is an engineer.
She asked the maximum increase he could afford and he said $55.00.
The parties took a seat and the Committee deliberated.
Motion and second for a $0 increase from September 1, 2018 through November 30,
2018, followed by an increase of $100.00 from December 1, 2018 through August 31,
2019 (Vice Chair Murray and Member Sullivan-Cheah). Motion passed 3-0.
Page 2 of 5",RentReviewAdvisoryCommittee/2018-11-27.pdf
RentReviewAdvisoryCommittee,2018-11-27,3,"Approved Minutes
November 27, 2018
7-B. CASE 1107 - 1825 Poggi St., Apt. A309
Tenants: Brandon Isaacson
Landlords: Andy King
Proposed rent increase: $175.00 (10.0%), effective October 1, 2018
Mr. Isaacson said that this is the 2nd rent increase at his apartment in the past three
years, adding the improvements were more cosmetic than structural. He stated that there
have been no changes made to the inside of the apartment, and voiced concern over a
possible safety hazard with a gap in between cement floors and railing in his unit.
Member Sullivan-Cheah asked about the tenant's prior rent increases, and Mr. Isaacson
said the rent had been raised 5% every year that he has been a resident.
Vice Chair Murray asked what effect the increase would have on Mr. Isaacson, and he
stated that it would strain their finances; for example, that they were already putting off
having car repairs done due to shortage of money.
Member Griffiths asked how much of an increase he could afford and Mr. Isaacson replied
he could afford an increase of about $52, which coincided with the 2-3% increase in his
salary.
The parties took a seat and the Committee deliberated.
Motion and second for a $0 increase from October 1, 2018 through November 30, 2018,
followed by an increase of $100.00 from December 1, 2018 through September 30, 2019
(Vice Chair Murray and Member Sullivan-Cheah). Motion passed 3-0.
At 8:10 p.m. the Committee agreed to take a five-minute break.
At 8:14 p.m., Vice Chair Murray made an announcement that given the time remained
they could only hear two more cases for the night, so they are going to defer two cases
- Agenda Items 7-G and 7-I - to the next meeting.
7-C. CASE 1108 - 1825 Poggi St., Apt. A310
No Committee review. The tenant was not present. The landlord may impose the rent
increase as noticed or as otherwise agreed-upon by the parties.
7-D. CASE 1109 - 1825 Poggi St., Apt. A313
Tenant: Naza Hojic
Landlords: Andy King and Shahzad Raufi
Proposed rent increase: $126.00 (9.9%), effective October 1, 2018
Page 3 of 5",RentReviewAdvisoryCommittee/2018-11-27.pdf
RentReviewAdvisoryCommittee,2018-11-27,4,"Approved Minutes
November 27,2018
Mr. Hojic stated he has lived in the unit for about ten years, and there have been no
changes made to the inside of his apartment during that time. He presented to the
Committee a picture of his bathtub, which he believed was in need of repair. He shared
that he had been without work for two months, and his wife was disabled and worked
part-time, as they tried to raise a 10 year old daughter. He noted that the landlords had
made improvements to the outside of the property, but reiterated that no improvements
have been made to his unit.
Mr. King withdrew the rent increase, stating that he was not aware of the tenants'
circumstances.
7-E. CASE 1110 - 1861 Poggi St., Apt. B101
No Committee review. The tenant was not present. The landlord may impose the rent
increase as noticed or as otherwise agreed-upon by the parties.
7-F. CASE 1111 - 1861 Poggi St., Apt. B103
No Committee review. The tenant was not present. The landlord may impose the rent
increase as noticed or as otherwise agreed-upon by the parties.
7-G. CASE 1112 - 1861 Poggi St., Apt. B202
No Committee review. Review of this case was postponed to a future meeting due to time
constraints.
7-H. CASE 1115 - 1861 Poggi St., Apt. B301
No Committee review. The tenant presented evidence that she had received a rent
increase within the last twelve months and the landlord withdrew the rent increase
request.
7-I. CASE 1116 - 1861 Poggi St., Apt. B304
No Committee review. Review of this case was postponed to a future meeting due to time
constraints.
8. PUBLIC COMMENT, NON-AGENDA ITEMS, NO. 2.
9. MATTERS INITIATED
Page 4 of 5",RentReviewAdvisoryCommittee/2018-11-27.pdf
RentReviewAdvisoryCommittee,2018-11-27,5,"Approved Minutes
November 27,2018
Member Sullivan-Cheah asked staff why City Attorney staff had been absent for several
meetings. Staff replied that the absences were due to the fact that the increased and
irregularly-scheduled RRAC meetings sometimes ran concurrently with other meetings
that City Attorney staff had to attend, such as City Council meetings.
10.ADJOURNMENT
a. The meeting adjourned at 8:35 p.m.
Respectfully Submitted,
RRAC Secretary
Grant Eshoo
Approved by the Rent Review Advisory Committee on January 23, 2019
Page 5 of 5",RentReviewAdvisoryCommittee/2018-11-27.pdf