body,date,page,text,path
CityCouncil,2018-12-04,1,"MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
TUESDAY- - DECEMBER 4, 2018- 7:00 P.M.
Mayor Spencer convened the meeting at 7:06 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
(18-651) Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she would like to consolidate the
McKay Hearing [paragraph no. 18-662 and the certificate of sufficiency [paragraph no.
18-662B].
Mayor Spencer stated that should would like to move the referral update [paragraph no.
18-661] above the McKay Hearing; stated that she does not want to consolidate the two
items; the is the first time the matters are being heard; the issues are different; if the
items are combined she would like speakers to have three minutes.
Councilmember Oddie inquired the number of speakers.
The City Clerk responded there are approximately 9 speakers on each and some
people submitted slips for both.
Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft moved approval of moving the certificate of sufficiency to
the regular meeting and consolidating it with the McKay Hearing, and hearing the
combined matter after the referral update.
Vice Mayor Vella seconded the motion with an amendment to give the speakers three
minutes.
Under discussion, Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft accepted the amendment to the
motion.
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.
PROCLAMATIONS, SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY AND ANNOUNCEMENTS
(18-652) Proclamation Declaring December 4, 2018 as Sea Fox Crew Appreciation
Day.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
1
December 4, 2018",CityCouncil/2018-12-04.pdf
CityCouncil,2018-12-04,2,"Mayor Spencer read the proclamation and presented it to Sea Scouts Cole Harris,
Mason Ensley, Ken Kirwin, and Skipper Ken Shupe.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA
None.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Mayor Spencer announced the Annual Review of the Affordable Housing Ordinance
[paragraph no. 18-655 was 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.]
(*18-653) Minutes of the Special and Regular City Council Meetings Held on November
7,2018. Approved.
(*18-654) Ratified bills in the amount of $2,285,182.03.
(18-655) Recommendation to Accept the Annual Review of the Affordable Housing
Ordinance and the City's Affordable Housing Unit Fee Consistent with Section 27-1 of
the Alameda Municipal Code and California Government Code Section 66001, and
Accept the Annual Affordable Housing Unit Fee Fund Activity Report.
The Base Reuse and Community Development Director stated the she and the Housing
Authority Management Analyst are available to respond to any questions.
Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft requested the Base Reuse and Community Development
Director to explain the fee.
The Base Reuse and Community Development Director stated every year, the City is
required to file an annual report with the City Council on the amount of money received,
the amount of money expended, and the purpose of the expenditure; the fee is charged
to certain commercial development projects to mitigate impacts on affordable housing.
Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she has no problem levying the fee and
collecting it; expressed concern over the ending fund balance of $144,609; stated that
she would prefer not to see a six figure balance left.
The Base Reuse and Community Development Director stated the fund can fluctuate,
and is used for special studies, projects and administrative costs; staff cannot rely on
the same amount of money remaining in the fund every year.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
2
December 4, 2018",CityCouncil/2018-12-04.pdf
CityCouncil,2018-12-04,3,"Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft requested staff to discuss other pressing needs that the
funds might be applied towards in the future.
Councilmember Oddie moved approval of the staff recommendation.
Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice
vote - 5.
(*18-656) Recommendation to Authorize the Interim City Manager to Execute a Second
Amendment for One Year with NCE, in the Amount of $95,375 with the Option for Two
One-Year Extensions at the same Terms and Cost, for a Total Five Year Expenditure
Under the Agreement, as Awarded, of $359,890 for Municipal Regional Stormwater
Permit Compliance Support. Accepted.
(*18-657) Recommendation to Authorize the Interim City Manager to Execute a Three
Year Contract, in an Amount Not to Exceed $30,000 Annually for a Total Three-Year
Expenditure Amount Not to Exceed $90,000, with Physio-Control Inc. for Warranty and
Maintenance of Fire Department Advanced Life Support (ALS) Medical Monitors and
Equipment. Accepted.
(*18-658) Resolution No. 15459, ""Setting the 2019 Regular City Council Meeting Dates.""
Adopted.
REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS
(18-659) Presentation Providing an Update on the Veterans Affairs Project at Alameda
Point by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Health Administration.
The Base Reuse and Community Development Director made brief comments.
Councilmember Matarrese inquired if the presentation is a response to the letter sent
following a referral, to which the Base Reuse and Community Development Director
responded the presentation is a bonus in addition to the letter.
Larry Janes and Bill Ulibarri, Department of Veterans Affairs, gave a Power Point
presentation.
Councilmember Matarrese inquired what the Secretary of the VA can do to accelerate
the project.
Mr. Ulibarri stated he will relay the inquiry from Councilmember Matarrese to the
Secretary.
Councilmember Oddie inquired if there is a way to quantify what part of the project
delay is due to the Army Corps of Engineers as opposed to anything the VA may or may
not have done.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
3
December 4, 2018",CityCouncil/2018-12-04.pdf
CityCouncil,2018-12-04,4,"Mr. Ulibarri responded that he would rather not say; stated there have been some
challenges; the Army Corps, being newly involved, are going to want to take the project
from zero and go over the whole project design again.
Mr. Janes stated the process has been lengthy with transitions; the entire design of the
project had to be reviewed with comments provided, and was finally accepted in 2017;
the VA is working with utility companies through the permitting process; during the non-
breeding season, the VA has provided licenses to law enforcement agencies to conduct
annual Urban Shield exercises, as well as licenses to the Air Museum for the Doolittle
Historic Walk; a contractor with U.S, Fish and Wildlife Service is working to install
cameras around the least tern colony.
Stated the project is fantastic; expressed concern over taking care of veterans and
using the area for urban shield exercises: Richard Bangert, Alameda.
Stated the Bay Conservation and Development Commission (BCDC) permit with the VA
has expired; suggested the VA return to BCDC to renew the permit: Irene Dieter,
Alameda.
Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft expressed disappointment with the opening date being
pushed to 2026; stated construction delays will not coincide with surrounding
development, leaving equipment present longer than desired; expressed concern for
veterans and their families; stated that she wants to see the project proceed with as
much speed as possible.
Councilmember Matarrese stated that he would like Council to give direction to the City
Manager to stay on top of the project; other projects have tight timelines that must be
adhered to; if delays occur, a report back to the Council is needed; a promise was made
by the VA to have a clinic and columbarium cemetery to serve veterans in Alameda;
requested assistance from lobbyists to help expedite the project in any possible way.
Vice Mayor Vella inquired if a letter should be sent to the Army Corps due to its
substantial involvement in the project; stated if the site needs substantial changes, the
Army Corps can provide more insight; that she would like direction given to also reach
out to the Army Corps via a letter from the City's Mayor and City Manager; there is a
level of concern from the public related to Urban Shield, about the agreement being out
of compliance and the exercises being shocking; transparency is needed when
exercises occur; expressed concern about the infrastructure timing being disruptive to
other projects occurring in the area.
Tim Graham, VA, stated that he agrees the VA can do a better job of being transparent;
committed to promptly notifying the City of any upcoming Urban Shield activities; stated
the exercises are permitted within the VA's legal interpretation of the environmental
document during the off season for least tern breeding; Urban Shield exercises will not
occur once the VA clinic is built.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
4
December 4, 2018",CityCouncil/2018-12-04.pdf
CityCouncil,2018-12-04,5,"Councilmember Oddie stated reaching out to the Army Corps is important; expressed
disappointment in the clinic timeline being extended; requested City staff to return with
information related to Urban Shield not performing exercises on Alameda.
In response to the Interim City Manager's inquiry regarding the Urban Shield license,
Mr. Graham stated the license is with Alameda County Sherriff's Office, but he would
have to review the license.
The City Manager inquired whether the license is renewed annually, to which Mr.
Graham responded in the affirmative.
Mr. Janes inquired if Alameda Police Department participates in Urban Shield activities,
to which Mayor Spencer responded in the affirmative.
Councilmember Matarrese inquired if a summary of Council comments will be captured
and compiled in a report, to which the Interim City Manager responded in the
affirmative.
Mayor Spencer stated having Urban Shield events once the facility opens would not be
appropriate.
(18-660) Public Hearing to consider Resolution No. 15460, ""Amending Master Fee
Resolution No. 12191 to Add New and Revise Existing Recreation and Park Fees.""
Adopted.
The Recreation and Parks Director gave a Power Point presentation.
In response to Vice Mayor Vella's inquiry why golf information is not included, the
Recreation and Parks Director stated there is an operation and maintenance lease with
Greenway; under the lease, the City only has purview over is the resident, youth and
senior rates; concluded the presentation.
Councilmember Oddie inquired if there is an estimate of additional revenue the City will
receive from all fees combined, to which the Recreation and Parks Director responded
she has not looked at the total revenue of all fees, which can vary from year to year due
to the economy and marketing efforts.
In response to Councilmember Oddie's inquiry, the Recreation and Parks Director
stated that she will have specific numbers at the time the City budget is presented.
Vice Mayor Vella stated that she learned to swim at an Alameda Recreation and Parks
Department (ARPD) swim center; it is important to give an opportunity for everybody to
have access for water safety and swim lessons; expressed support for keeping swim
lessons at a lower cost.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
5
December 4, 2018",CityCouncil/2018-12-04.pdf
CityCouncil,2018-12-04,6,"The Recreation and Parks Director stated there are scholarship programs available for
all ARPD programs, including swim programs.
Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft expressed gratitude for ARPD staff; stated that she is
prepared to support the item.
Mayor Spencer moved adoption of the resolution.
Councilmember Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice
vote - 5.
(18-661) Recommendation to Accept an Update on the April 2, 2018 and May 1, 2018
Referrals from Councilmember Matarrese to Consider Banning Motorized Vehicles,
Including Robotic Commercial Vehicles, from Sidewalks and Commercial Drone Aircraft
Used for Deliveries; and Electric Scooters.
The City Engineer and Senior Transportation Coordinator gave a Power Point
presentation.
Councilmember Oddie inquired who is providing delivery via autonomous vehicles, to
which the City Engineer responded Starship Technologies.
The City Engineer continued the presentation.
Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired if the pilot programs in Walnut Creek are
ongoing, and if so, for how long, to which the City Engineer responded one year.
Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired if the pilot programs in Redwood City or Walnut
Creek did a report at the end of the program, to which the City Engineer responded staff
did not research said level of detail.
Vice Mayor Vella inquired why the secondary staff recommendation only bans the use
of sidewalks for autonomous vehicles, to which the City Engineer responded the intent
is to limit potential sidewalk congestion.
Vice Mayor Vella stated there have been incidents where autonomous vehicles have
been sighted without requesting approval from cities; San Francisco implemented a ban
addressing sidewalk and roadway use, yet has many startup companies which utilize
both sidewalks and roadways.
The City Engineer stated the San Francisco ban specifically addressed the sidewalk
component; the staff recommendation is based on language from the San Francisco
ban.
Vice Mayor Vella stated San Francisco has dealt with non-autonomous vehicles on
roadways; inquired if there is a way for cities to regulate the use of streets relative to
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
6
December 4, 2018",CityCouncil/2018-12-04.pdf
CityCouncil,2018-12-04,7,"something that is not a car but still using a road, to which the Acting City Attorney
responded the regulation of public thoroughfare is a Statewide concern; stated that he
would be happy to report back to Council with findings at a later date.
The City Engineer continued the presentation.
Councilmember Oddie inquired how restrictive the City can be, to which the City
Engineer responded staff could not definitively answer at the moment.
The Senior Transportation Planner continued the presentation.
Councilmember Oddie inquired what would happen if the scooter companies refused to
not deploy within the City, to which the Senior Transportation Planner responded both
companies, Bird and Lime, are present and have been cooperative in not deploying
scooters within the City.
Councilmember Oddie inquired what happens if a company decides to leave and the
City is left with the remaining scooters, to which the Senior Transportation Planner
responded companies who see interest from cities want to work cooperatively and not
be bad players so as to be allowed in at a later time.
Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired what scooter companies can do about the
enforcement of underage scooter use.
The Senior Transportation Planner responded all companies require a scan of the
users' valid driver license or learner's permit in order to access the scooter via the
application based program.
Vice Mayor Vella inquired the reason for staff's recommendation of a pilot program as
opposed to working on an end result.
The Senior Transportation Planner responded the pilot program would be the slower
option; stated staff could also bring a program to Council; other cities have also started
pilot programs.
Stated LimeBike looks forward to continuing to work with the City: Tarik Fleming,
LimeBike.
Submitted signatures for the record; stated that Bird would prefer waiting four months
instead of one year: Martin Fatool, Bird.
Expressed support for the Transportation Commission recommendation, and
implementing e-bikes and scooters to replace car trips: Brian McGuire, Bike Walk
Alameda.
Councilmember Matarrese moved approval of a ban, using language within the
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
7
December 4, 2018",CityCouncil/2018-12-04.pdf
CityCouncil,2018-12-04,8,"jurisdiction, of delivery by drones and robotic delivery vehicles.
Mayor Spencer seconded the motion.
Under discussion, Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she will not support the
motion; quoted passages from the December issue of Western City Magazine; stated
there is a need to keep up with emerging technology, but it must be managed.
Vice Mayor Vella stated there are a number of safety concerns that have not been
addressed yet; expressed concern over the kinds of items being transported and when
items are delivered; stated part of having a ban is not to say the City will never allow the
use to happen, but rather to require companies to ask for permission before operating in
the City and to have an enforcement mechanism; the intent is to prevent asking for
forgiveness instead of permission and to allow for public dialogue and conversation;
expressed support of the ban; stated the language could be bifurcated to have the
language on the ban regarding robotic delivery; inquired what options the City has when
items operate on the streets and impede traffic; stated staff could work on limitations
within the purview of what is permissible regarding the drone language restrictions on
time, place and manner
Councilmember Matarrese amended his motion to include Vice Mayor Vella's
recommendation; stated the intent is to grant permission, rather than react.
Councilmember Oddie stated that he does not want to run afoul of the Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA) regulations, but would like to implement whatever restrictions staff
thinks necessary; expressed concern over loss of jobs and support for the motion;
stated staff should come back with a regulation for drones that will pass the FAA's test,
but also recognizes the Council's desire.
Councilmember Matarrese accepted the friendly amendment to bifurcate the drone
portion.
On the call for the question, the motion carried by the following voice vote: Ayes:
Councilmember Matarrese, Oddie, Vella and Mayor Spencer - 4.
Noes:
Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft - 1.
The Acting City Attorney requested clarification that the direction from Council is to have
staff come back with formal legislation banning the landing of drones and regulating the
autonomous vehicles.
The Assistant City Manager inquired the agenda language allow adoption tonight, to
which the Acting City Attorney responded the preference is to have a first reading to
make specific findings supporting the enactment of the legislation.
Vice Mayor Vella stated that she is not in support of the one year pilot program;
scooters have been deployed and are currently being used; a better use of time would
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
8
December 4, 2018",CityCouncil/2018-12-04.pdf
CityCouncil,2018-12-04,9,"be to decide the way in which Council would like scooters to be deployed; expressed
concern over regulating the number of scooters being deployed and where scooters are
parked; stated that she would like to see a report back regarding the number of
complaints filed and the number of violations as a condition of approval; expressed
concern over citation of helmet laws.
Councilmember Matarrese expressed concern over the speed of scooters on sidewalks.
Councilmember Matarrese moved approval of coming back with a mechanism or
ordinance that precludes profit making companies from coming into the City and asking
for forgiveness and making the scooter companies liable for citations of helmet
infractions.
Councilmember Oddie stated that he does not want to impede the scooter vendors;
scooters are effective for the ""last mile"" issue; the goals of the Transportation Choices
Plan are being met utilizing scooters; opening Alameda up to scooters is a good thing.
Mayor Spencer stated it is critical that these items come to Council; that she is happy to
work with providers; expressed concern over safety; stated priority on the sidewalks is
people walking; stated the issue should be reviewed by the Commission on Disability.
Vice Mayor Vella moved approval of a substitute motion approving the alternative
language with direction from Council to look for a permitting process which the Council
can weigh in on; adding an enforcement mechanism within the process, and ensuring
compliance with different laws; stated it is clearly unlawful for a motorized scooter to be
used on a sidewalk or public right of way.
Councilmember Matarrese seconded the substitute motion.
Under discussion, Mayor Spencer stated that she would like to add a stipulation on
where to park scooters.
Vice Mayor Vella stated Council can also direct staff to look into the different limitations
on parking or regulations around that ensure compliance.
Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired if riding a motorized scooter on the sidewalk is
already prohibited by State law, to which Vice Mayor Vella responded in the affirmative.
Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft requested staff to confirm there is technology that allows
a fine to be placed on the user if bike share bikes are left in public right of way.
Vice Mayor Vella stated the desire of Council is to encapsulate the State law relative to
riding on sidewalks.
Councilmember Matarrese stated profit-making companies need to be held accountable
for educating customers, not the City.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
9
December 4, 2018",CityCouncil/2018-12-04.pdf
CityCouncil,2018-12-04,10,"Mayor Spencer stated companies can keep track of riders and users with multiple
violations can be banned from use.
Vice Mayor Vella stated the items should come back to Council in a fairly timely
manner.
On the call for the question, the motion carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.
***
Mayor Spencer called a recess at 9:21 p.m. and reconvened the meeting at 9:26 p.m.
***
(18-662) Public Hearing to consider Resolution No. 15461, ""Adopting a Mitigated
Negative Declaration, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, General Plan Land
Use Diagram and Text Amendment for the Property on the West Side of McKay Avenue
(APN 74-1305-26-2) (PLN18-0198) to Allow for Private Use of the Property for a
Wellness Center.' Adopted;
(18-662A) Introduction of Ordinance Amending Alameda Zoning Map for the Property
on the West Side of McKay Avenue (APN 74-1305-26-2) to Remove the G Government
Combining District Designation to Allow for Private Use of the Property for a Wellness
Center. Introduced;
(18-662B) 2-A. Recommendation to Accept the Certificate of Sufficiency for a Proposed
Initiative Measure to Change the Land Use Designation for a 3.671 Acre Site on McKay
Avenue, by Amending the General Plan Designation from Federal Facilities to Open
Space, and by Amending the Zoning Ordinance from Administrative-Professional
District, with Special Government Combining District Overlay, to Open Space District;
and
(18-662C) Select One of the Following Options: 1) Adopt the Ordinance; 2) Adopt a
Resolution Submitting the Ordinance to the Voters; Decide Interest in Drafting
Arguments and Direct City Attorney to Prepare Impartial Analysis; or 3) Order a Report
on the Effect of the Proposed Initiative Measure.
Note: The Public Hearing was combined with the certificate of sufficiency matter on the
7:01 p.m. special meeting agenda.
The Planning, Building and Transportation Director gave a Power Point presentation.
[Note: Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft returned at 9:29 p.m.]
The City Clerk gave a brief presentation.
Doug Biggs, Alameda Point Collaborative (APC), made brief comments; submitted
photographs.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
10
December 4, 2018",CityCouncil/2018-12-04.pdf
CityCouncil,2018-12-04,11,"Urged Council to follow the rules, vote to remove the G overlay and have a report on the
initiative return in January: John Knox White, Alameda.
Stated that he gathered signatures; expressed support for the initiative; suggested the
center should be located next to homeless housing; urged Council to approve zoning
the parcel open space: Robert Frank, Alameda.
Urged immediate adoption of the initiative, or if not, order a report; suggested the report
not be completed by City staff and removal of the G overlay wait until the initiative is
addressed: Karen Miller, Alameda.
Discussed Council adoption of the 2014 initiative measure and the parcels being split in
2016; urged Council to adopt the open space zoning: Liza Gabato Morse, Alameda.
Expressed support for APC and the wellness center; urged approval of removing the G
overlay and ordering a report on the initiative: Duke Austin, Alameda.
Expressed concern over safety issues with the location, such as access points and
room for emergency vehicles: Don Scroggins, Alameda.
Expressed support for further study; stated the location is not the right location for a
medical center: Linda Robertson, Alameda.
Discussed compassion for homeless people and expressed support for the center: Jeff
Locke, Island City Faith Coalition.
Urged the Council to order the report on the initiative and everyone to have compassion
and respect: Tova Fry, Alameda.
Stated both Renewed Hope and Alameda Justice Alliance support removal of the
G
overlay: Doyle Saylor, Renewed Hope and Alameda Justice Alliance.
Expressed concern over many children in the area; stated the project would be
welcome in another location, such as near the proposed Veterans Affairs project;
discussed traffic on Central Avenue and Webster Street: Elizabeth Phipps, Alameda.
Expressed concern over the appropriateness of the location; suggested other locations:
Diane Broch, Alameda.
Expressed concern over seniors not supporting the location; discussed human rights;
expressed support for the location; urged Council to remove the G overlay and order a
report on the initiative: Catherine Pauling, Alameda.
Discussed the project; stated issues with neighbors can be worked through; expressed
support for removing the G overlay and doing a study on the initiative: Keith McCoy,
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
11
December 4, 2018",CityCouncil/2018-12-04.pdf
CityCouncil,2018-12-04,12,"APC.
Discussed her experience advocating for patients; stated the project is the right thing to
do: Joy Malloy, Renewed Hope.
Discussed recovering from surgery, which he was able to do on his couch, not the
streets; urged Council to accept the project, remove to G overlay and do a report on the
initiative: Eric Strimling, Alameda.
Stated there are only 20 respite beds in Alameda County; expressed concern over
homeless having to recover on the streets; stated mentally ill people should not be
criminalized; discussed other measures being taken in the County; urged a study be
done; stated that she opposes the open space initiative: Lynette Lee, Renewed Hope
and Alameda County Health Care for Homeless Coalition.
Discussed Measure WW and petition gatherers misrepresentation; suggested the
measure be scheduled for November 2020: Brian McGuire, Alameda.
Urged Council to choose carefully; expressed support for the open space initiative;
discussed services for homeless people: Fey Adelstein, Alameda.
Stated the project is an opportunity to move forward toward the Alameda she knows as
one that came forward to help the people who need help: Kate Pryor, Alameda.
Outlined her experience gathering signatures; urged Council to order a report: Kris
Moore, Alameda.
Councilmember Oddie inquired what is the risk to Measure A1 funding if the G overlay
is not removed
Mr. Biggs responded that Mercy Housing has submitted a proposal for $13 million of
Measure A1 funding on behalf of APC; stated proof must be shown that zoning is
suitable for the project; if Council does not approve removing the G overlay, there is a
risk of disqualification from moving forward in the current round of applications.
Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft expressed support for removing the G overlay and staff's
recommendation that a report come back to Council in 30 days; stated every community
must do something to combat homelessness; she spoke with a representative from East
Bay Regional Parks District (EBRPD) who assured her that EBRPD is not interested in
the property and would welcome a facility that helps address homelessness; expressed
gratitude to the Base Reuse and Community Development Director for using mediation
between APC and Friends of Crab Cove.
Councilmember Oddie stated housing is a basic human right; read a call to action from
the Committee to House the Bay Area (CASA); expressed support for removing the G
overlay, the approval of the negative mitigation declaration, and the 30 day report back
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
12
December 4, 2018",CityCouncil/2018-12-04.pdf
CityCouncil,2018-12-04,13,"to Council with the addition of: the economic risks of changing the zoning including
litigation and financial exposure, requesting EBRPD to confirm or deny any intention of
the property, what happens if EBRPD denies any interest in the property, the remedy for
complaints related to paid signature gatherers, and if Measure WW required open
space.
Councilmember Matarrese requested confirmation that the property is surplus from a
federal agency under the McKinney Act, which requires it be offered to other federal
agencies; if other federal agencies do not take it, it has to be offered for homeless
services; inquired if the City is entitled to the property if it goes through a federal
process.
The Planning, Building and Transportation Director responded in the affirmative.
Councilmember Matarrese stated the public needs to know the process; stated
homelessness is urgent and important.
Councilmember Matarrese moved adoption of the resolution adopting a Mitigated
Negative Declaration and introduction of the ordinance removing the G overlay.
Councilmember Oddie seconded the motion.
Under discussion, Vice Mayor Vella stated homelessness is a growing problem; the City
is bound by a specific process the preempts the City from a federal level; where the City
is in the process as well as the process and timeline in its entirety, needs to be outlined;
the Council has fiduciary obligations to a functioning budget ensuring spending of City
funds is in accordance with priorities laid out by Council, but also with what is necessary
to ensure the City runs properly; there is a desire to locate services as close as possible
to the people in need; outlined transit barriers; questioned where services should be
located to ensure there are no transit barriers; stated concerns related to feasibility,
overall safety and planning and design are not currently before the Council; requested a
degree of civility from everybody; stated everything planned for the site are needed
services.
Mayor Spencer stated that she believes the noticing has been insufficient since it did
not include the words ""unhoused"" or ""homeless;"" it is important City notice be very clear
about projects; some who lives within 300 feet of the proposed project informed her they
did not receive notice; she collected signatures for the prior initiative; read findings
related to Measure WW; outlined details of a liaison meeting with EBRPD; stated legal
issues are being glossed over; expressed concern over removing the G overlay causing
more damage to the City as a result of the initiative process; stated there are issues
with the suitability of the building for any use, especially a medical facility due to
contaminants; requested the federal government clean the site; expressed concern over
emergency accessibility to the facility; stated it is critical for the area to be analyzed and
vetted before the G overlay is removed.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
13
December 4, 2018",CityCouncil/2018-12-04.pdf
CityCouncil,2018-12-04,14,"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.
Councilmember Oddie moved approval of ordering a report that incorporates comments
of the Council.
Councilmember Matarrese seconded the motion.
Under discussion, Vice Mayor Vella inquired if the motion includes both the items stated
from Councilmember Oddie and herself, to which Councilmember Oddie responded in
the affirmative.
Mayor Spencer requested the motion be repeated.
Councilmember Oddie stated the motion is to order a report on the effect of the
proposed initiative measure and incorporate the comments of the Council about
additional information that should be in the report.
Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired if the motion includes considering a companion
measure; stated that she would like the motion to include staff looking into also bringing
a companion measure and the City taking an opposition position to the measure.
Councilmember Oddie stated it is included in the motion based off it being a comment
from Council.
Mayor Spencer requested clarification that the action does not specify the election date,
which will be a separate motion, to which the Acting City Attorney responded in the
affirmative.
On the call for the question, the motion carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.
CITY MANAGER COMMUNICATIONS
None.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA
None.
COUNCIL REFERRALS
None.
COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
14
December 4, 2018",CityCouncil/2018-12-04.pdf
CityCouncil,2018-12-04,15,"None.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, Mayor Spencer adjourned the meeting at 11:18 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
15
December 4, 2018",CityCouncil/2018-12-04.pdf
CityCouncil,2018-12-04,16,"MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING
TUESDAY- -DECEMBER 4, 2018- -6:30 P.M.
Mayor Spencer convened the meeting at 6:34 p.m.
Roll Call - Present:
Councilmembers Ezzy Ashcraft, Matarrese, Oddie, Vella and
Mayor Spencer - 5.
Absent:
None.
(18-650) Conference with Labor Negotiators (Government Code section 54957.6); CITY
Negotiators: David L. Rudat, Interim City Manager, Elizabeth D. Warmerdam, Assistant
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 direction was given to staff.
Adjournment
There being no further business, Mayor Spencer adjourned the meeting at 6:59 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
December 4, 2018",CityCouncil/2018-12-04.pdf
CityCouncil,2018-12-04,17,"MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
TUESDAY- - -DECEMBER 4, 2018- -7:01 P.M.
AGENDA ITEM
(18-662B) 2-A. Recommendation to Accept the Certificate of Sufficiency for a Proposed
Initiative Measure to Change the Land Use Designation for a 3.671 Acre Site on McKay
Avenue, by Amending the General Plan Designation from Federal Facilities to Open
Space, and by Amending the Zoning Ordinance from Administrative-Professional
District, with Special Government Combining District Overlay, to Open Space District;
and
(18-662C) Select One of the Following Options: 1) Adopt the Ordinance; 2) Adopt a
Resolution Submitting the Ordinance to the Voters; Decide Interest in Drafting
Arguments and Direct City Attorney to Prepare Impartial Analysis; or 3) Order a Report
on the Effect of the Proposed Initiative Measure. [630-20]
The item was moved to the regular meeting and combined with the McKay Avenue
Public Hearing [paragraph no. 18-662].
Lara Weisiger, City Clerk
City of Alameda
The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Sunshine Ordinance.
Special Meeting
Alameda City Council
December 4, 2018",CityCouncil/2018-12-04.pdf