body,date,page,text,path
CityCouncil,2005-05-17,27,"Councilmember deHaan inquired whether residents are required to pay
for sidewalk repair, to which the Public Works Director responded
the City only repairs sidewalks damaged by street trees.
In response to Mayor Johnson's inquiry about sewers, the Public
Works Director responded the City's sewers are doing fairly well
because there is a dedicated funding source; dedicated funding
sources or fees would allow the City to keep up with on-going
maintenance.
Councilmember deHaan inquired whether Measure B funds were used for
the pothole crew, to which the Public Works Director responded in
the affirmative.
In response to Councilmember deHaan's inquiry regarding Measure B
funds being a fixed amount, the Public Works Director stated the
amount varies because it is based on sales tax.
Councilmember deHaan inquired whether the pothole crew defers the
need for maintenance, to which the Public Works Director responded
resurfacing is still often needed.
Councilmember Daysog stated little changes can change people's
perception; people think negatively of their surroundings if
streets and sidewalks are not maintained; people might have
confidence the City is on the right track if improvements cannot be
fully funded but common areas are improved.
Mayor Johnson stated not dealing with the problem creates a bigger
deficit; the Council needs to review the issue; a long-term plan is
needed to get infrastructure back in shape.
Councilmember Matarrese stated the sewer system is in good shape
because it has a dedicated funding source; a similar option for
streets, sidewalks, and median strips should be presented to the
public; other funding sources will not solve the problem.
The Acting City Manager stated the presentation was the first step
to identify the problem; the next step is to find ways to fund
improvements; having something similar to the sewer fund would be
good.
Mayor Johnson stated the City must be able to assure the public
that a thorough review was completed and there is not any money
available in the budget before raising fees; the deficit is huge.
Councilmember deHaan stated the most important thing is to set up a
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
27
May 17, 2005",CityCouncil/2005-05-17.pdf
CityCouncil,2005-06-07,27,"would like to have a six month review; she does not want to bog
down the process; the right amount of money needed for urgent
matters should be set; the Charter also allows the Council to
delegate the authority to other boards and commissions; the Council
should consider delegating the hiring of outside counsel for
Alameda Power & Telecom to the Public Utilities Board.
Councilmember Daysog stated that he does not feel there is over
spending in the City Attorney's office.
Mayor Johnson stated that she is not suggesting changing the budget
amount she is trying to follow the Charter.
Councilmember deHaan stated that the budget began with focus on the
General Fund; special revenue funds, capital projects, debt
service, and enterprise funds also need to be reviewed.
Mayor Johnson stated that all the funds are intermingled to
a
certain extent and have impacts on each other.
Board Member deHaan moved adoption of the Alameda Reuse and
Redevelopment Authority Resolution.
Board Member Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by
unanimous voice vote - 5.
Commissioner deHaan moved adoption of the Community Improvement
Commission Resolution.
Commissioner Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by
unanimous voice vote - 5.
Councilmember Daysog moved adoption of the City Council Resolution.
Councilmember Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by
unanimous voice vote - 5.
(05-031CIC) - Recommendation to approve the Determination that
planning and administrative expenses incurred during FY 2004-05 are
necessary for the production, improvement or preservation of low-
and moderate-income housing.
Commissioner Gilmore moved approval of the staff recommendation.
Commissioner Daysog seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous
voice vote - 5.
Special Joint Meeting
Alameda City Council, Community
12
Improvement Commission, and Alameda
Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
June 7, 2005",CityCouncil/2005-06-07.pdf
CityCouncil,2005-07-19,27,"interpretation, the special legal counsel is per matter, which is
reasonable; someone can get started on a case; legal matters go by
case; the City Attorney would not be hiring one person to do
multiple cases.
The City Attorney stated it is per matter or item, not per issue,
subject, attorney, etc.
Mayor Johnson stated reports must not just include litigation; the
report the City Attorney provided on outside counsel only included
litigation and not other non-litigation issues that outside counsel
handle for the City.
Councilmember deHaan inquired about the number of cases that hit
the $35,000 threshold per year, possibly ten to twelve.
The City Attorney responded in the affirmative; stated that she
estimates there are about 20 active litigation cases currently.
Councilmember deHaan inquired whether the 20 cases would reach the
$35,000 threshold, to which the City Attorney responded less than
that [20 cases].
Councilmember deHaan stated no more than eight to ten cases will
hit the $35,000 threshold over a year period of time the vast
majority are in the $3,000 to $4,000 bracket; inquired whether the
numbers [that will reach $35,000] are low.
The City Attorney responded that in trying to get some rational
basis to come up with a number, $35,000 is the exact median of the
average cost of outside counsel, so half of the cases are below and
half are above.
Councilmember deHaan disagreed.
Mayor Johnson inquired whether the Council received the report that
shows the actual amount spent on different litigation cases.
The City Attorney responded the report was provided last week.
Councilmember deHaan stated the report provided can be fine-tuned
and should work fine; that he does not see the number [of cases
$35,000 or over] being that great; the Council is allowing 70% of
the City Attorney's activity below the threshold; noted that he
used the data the City Attorney provided.
The City Attorney stated [$35,000] was found to be the median
number ; one reason for the reporting to Council is that changes can
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
27
July 19, 2005",CityCouncil/2005-07-19.pdf
CityCouncil,2005-08-16,27,"MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL COMMUNITY IMPROVEMEN'T COMMISSION MEETING
TUESDAY - - -AUGUST 16, 2005 - -6:45 P.M.
Chair Johnson convened the Special Meeting at 6:55 p.m.
Roll Call - Present : Commissioners Daysog, deHaan, Gilmore,
Matarrese, and Mayor Johnson - 5.
Absent :
None.
The Special Meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider:
(05-039) Conference with Real Property Negotiators - Property:
Fleet Industrial Supply Center; Negotiating parties : Catellus
Limited Operating Partnership and Community Improvement Commissioni
Under negotiation: Price and terms.
Following the Closed Session, the Special Meeting was reconvened
and Chair Johnson announced that the Commission gave direction to
Real Property Negotiators and no action was taken.
Adjournment
There being no further business, Chair Johnson adjourned the
Special Meeting at 7:30 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Lara Weisiger
Secretary, Community Improvement
Commission
The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown
Act.
Special Meeting
Community Improvement Commission
August 16, 2005",CityCouncil/2005-08-16.pdf
CityCouncil,2006-06-20,27,"The City Attorney/Legal Counsel responded a consultant would be
hired to prepare an update to the existing ADA Transition Plan;
City staff would need to coordinate efforts.
Mayor/Chair Johnson stated she is not sure whether a full time
person is needed to work with an outside consultant.
Councilmember/Commissioner Matarrese inquired whether the
position would do other risk assessments that might preclude the
City from spending money on outside counsel when sued.
The City Attorney/Legal Counsel responded in the affirmative;
stated the past Administrative Management Analyst position
assists the Risk Manager, reviews and investigated all claims,
and makes recommendations.
Mayor/Chair Johnson inquired how many employees are in Risk
Management, to which the City Attorney/Legal Counsel responded
two full-time positions Risk Manager and support staff.
The City Manager/Executive Director stated updating the ADA
Transition Plan is very staff intensive.
Mayor/Chair Johnson inquired whether the job responsibility
would include claim review.
The City Attorney/Legal Counsel responded in the affirmative;
stated some safety services could be reinstated.
Mayor/Chair Johnson inquired what type of safety services would
be reinstated.
The City Attorney/Legal Counsel responded a safety committee
would review workplace safety with the intent to reduce
workplace injuries.
The City Manager/Executive Director stated the person would work
in a pro-active mode rather than reacting to claims.
Mayor/Chair Johnson inquired whether another department could
handle the work.
The City Attorney/Legal Counsel responded in the affirmative;
Special Joint Meeting
Alameda City Council, Alameda Reuse
13
and Redevelopment Authority, and
Community Improvement Commission
June 20, 2006",CityCouncil/2006-06-20.pdf
CityCouncil,2006-09-05,27,"that all pay increases be projected also.
The Development Services Director requested a timeframe for the
applicant to submit the information.
Chair Johnson stated three weeks is a generous amount of time.
Commissioner Matarrese seconded the motion.
The Executive Director requested clarification about the request
for verification of the dependent; stated staff accepted the
dependent as a family member.
Chair Johnson stated whatever is acceptable to the Internal Revenue
Service.
The Development Services Director stated that the fifth member does
not have to be a dependent and only has to be part of the family
unit.
Commissioner Matarrese restated the motion is that the Rutledge's
are required to provide a letter from the appropriate authority at
the Social Security Office stating that there would be no overtime
from October 1, 2006 through the end of March 2007; that all
reportable income from Peralta College and any other source be
factored in; and all documentation needs to be submitted by
September 30, 2006.
Commissioner Gilmore stated Commissioner deHaan requested that
motion include salary increases be projected forward if trainee
status changes and there is an increase.
Commissioner deHaan requested that the motion be modified to
require the Social Security Administration to provide its overtime
policy and [overtime] percentage projection.
Chair Johnson stated there needs to be a statement that there is or
is not [overtime] income.
Commissioner Matarrese stated the motion includes receiving a
letter indicating that there would be no overtime.
The Executive Director clarified that the process was to resolve
the appeal, not to set a precedent for future evaluations.
Commissioner Matarrese stated a process is not being established;
information is being gathered to adjudicate the appeal.
Special Meeting
Community Improvement Commission
8
September 5, 2006",CityCouncil/2006-09-05.pdf
CityCouncil,2006-10-17,27,"Alameda County subject to the CMA or just everyone generally.
The City Engineer responded at least Alameda County because CMA
requires that Voyager Cube be used for a General Plan update for
CMA's link analysis; stated other traffic models can be used for
the operational analysis.
Councilmember Daysog inquired why the link analysis is important.
The City Engineer responded the link analysis shows if there is
sufficient capacity on roadway systems a deficiency occurs if
there is not sufficient capacity; CMA would require that the
situation be mitigated, which costs money.
Councilmember Daysog inquired whether the EMM2 has a link analysis.
The City Engineer responded in the affirmative; stated the CMA did
not like the software.
Councilmember Daysog seconded the motion.
Under discussion, Councilmember Daysog stated that he interpreted
that the autopilot is not an issue for Policy No. 7 and would go
through the process of being evaluated.
On the call for the question, the motion carried by unanimous voice
vote - 5.
Councilmember deHaan stated many EIRs are coming forward; he hopes
that overall developments are reviewed when looking at the
Transportation Master Plan, not just segments that are coming
forward; the piece meal affect does nothing but get one segment
through.
Councilmember Matarrese stated an hour has been spent discussing
the issue; Council would be remise in not thanking the
Transportation Commission and Public Works staff for all the
analysis. the issue is difficult; countless hours have been spent
on the issue; he does not want anyone to misconstrue that the issue
is easy and Council is just trying to forward on with the matter ;
the issue is a moving target and changes with people's habits, let
alone development. he is thankful for the volunteers and engineers
who know what they are doing.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA
(06-523) Rob Schmidt, Alameda, requested an explanation on how the
cable system will grow to be financially viable soon.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
27
October 17, 2006",CityCouncil/2006-10-17.pdf
CityCouncil,2006-12-05,27,"Councilmember/Authority Member/Commissioner Matarrese stated
internet connection would be needed; negotiations could include
utilizing Alameda Power and Telecom (AP&T) as the preferred
provider on residential and commercial land sales. he would like to
see municipal electric buses utilized.
The Supervising Planner stated the TDM program would explain
whether alternative fuel vehicles are used, and if not, why not; an
annual report would review the decision.
Mayor/Chair Johnson stated there are many areas in Alameda where
AP&T infrastructure is excluded.
louncilmember/Authority Member/Commissioner Daysog stated he does
not care what type of bus people take, as long as busses are used
as alternative vehicles.
Mr. Marshall stated Catellus has demonstrated willingness to
discuss all issues; he would prefer to be better informed before
making a commitment to use a particular provider.
Councilmember/Authority Member/Commissioner Matarrese stated issues
have been discussed for some time; he wants the AP&T connection for
the internet.
Mayor/Chair Johnson stated AP&T would install the infrastructure
into the buildings.
Gregory Weaver, Catellus Managing Director, noted that by law
Catellus could not require everyone to use a particular energy
provider in Austin, Texas; a preferred provider package was
marketed.
Mayor/Chair Johnson stated the City could not require residents to
sign up with AP&T; infrastructure does not need to be installed for
other companies.
Councilmember/Authority Member/Commissioner deHaan suggested that
the issue be referred to the City Attorney inquired whether
Catellus has put together a tentative agreement with the unions, to
which Mr. Marshall responded in the affirmative.
louncilmember/Authority Member/Commissioner Daysog stated he would
like to add: ""visually enhances the surrounding areas which
represent a key Alameda gateway"" to Pubic Benefits Exhibit C.
Special Joint Meeting
Alameda City Council, Alameda Reuse and
16
Redevelopment Authority, and Community
Improvement Commission
December 5, 2006",CityCouncil/2006-12-05.pdf
CityCouncil,2007-01-02,27,"program would be drafted as part of the TDM Program and would be
reviewed by the Transportation Commission.
Vice Mayor Tam inquired whether all three development agreements
need to be acted upon tonight noted that she would abstain.
The Base Reuse and Community Development Manager responded the
ordinances that are not being amended can be acted upon this
evening the ordinance for DA-06-003 can be addressed in two weeks
and works with Catellus' schedule.
Councilmember Matarrese moved approval of final passage for MPA-06-
001, DA-06-0002, and DA-06-0004.
Councilmember Gilmore seconded the motion, which carried by the
following voice vote: Ayes Councilmember deHaan, Gilmore,
Matarrese, and Mayor Johnson - 4. Abstentions Vice Mayor Tam - 1.
Councilmember Matarrese stated it is important to have the
opportunity to augment the TDM Program because traffic is the
biggest issue; the ordinance should be amended to state that the
TDM Program would be measured by criteria established by the
Planning Board and Transportation Commission; the timeframe would
be after operating five years; the augmentation would not exceed
15% and would be contingent on financial performance exceeding the
Performa.
Mayor Johnson inquired whether the percentage would be linked to
the percentage exceeding the Performa.
Councilmember Matarrese responded the percentage would be linked to
the percentage of the TDM Program budget in place at the time.
Vice Mayor Tam inquired whether the 15% would be in addition to the
CPI escalator.
Councilmember Matarrese responded whatever the amount is at that
time, stepped up over five years.
Councilmember deHaan stated 15% over the escalated number is not
much.
Mayor Johnson inquired whether the $425,000 would be reached in
year five.
The Base Reuse and Community Development Manager responded most
likely not; stated five years is about half way through the
project.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
27
January 2, 2007",CityCouncil/2007-01-02.pdf
CityCouncil,2007-06-19,27,"Councilmember Gilmore stated the grant application process should
be done on a two-year cycle; she has no problem with funding the
Museum; she has a problem with escalating rent; she does not want
to be in the same situation when the lease comes up in two years;
the City needs to help the Museum with finding a site if funding
raising is not enough to cover a projected rent increase; the City
is spending approximately $80,000 on the Museum and Meyers House;
the Meyers is an issue because it is a deteriorating asset; the
City needs to set aside a reserve fund to take care of issues or
consider reverting back to the trust.
Councilmember deHaan concurred with Councilmember Gilmore stated
the Recreation and Park Department has taken on another burden; the
Meyers House funding needs to be reviewed.
Mayor Johnson requested that the Museum agreement come back to
Council.
Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Matarrese moved adoption of
ARRA Resolution Approving and Adopting the Operating Budget and
Appropriating Certain Moneys for the Expenditures Provided in
Fiscal Year 2007-08; the CIC Resolution Approving and Adopting the
Operating Budget and Appropriating Certain Moneys for the
Expenditures Provided in Fiscal Year 2007-08. and the City Council
Resolution Approving and Adopting the Operating Budget and Capital
Improvements and Appropriating Certain Moneys for the Expenditures
Provided in Fiscal Year 2007-08, with maintaining the rent level
for the museum.
Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Gilmore seconded motion,
which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.
Councilmember Matarrese moved adoption of the Resolution
Establishing Guidelines for Reimbursement of Per Diem Allowance for
City of Alameda Business Travel.
Councilmember Gilmore seconded the motion, which carried by
unanimous voice vote - 5.
Councilmember Matarrese moved approval of pursuing an agreement
with the Alameda Museum including the ability to match funds to the
full amount of the line item [$50,000], and the requirement that
the Museum establish a business plan, fund raising plan,
performance standards, and performance report.
Mayor Johnson requested that the motion be amended to require that
Special Joint Meeting
Alameda City Council, Alameda
16
Reuse and Redevelopment Authority,
and Community Improvement Commission
June 19, 2007",CityCouncil/2007-06-19.pdf
CityCouncil,2007-12-04,27,"The Finance Director responded the auditors pointed out that it was
a deficit this year but the issue was already determined.
Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Matarrese stated the Power
Point presentation should be posted to the website and Council
should receive a copyi the national economic environment affects
California and will affect the City; thanked the Finance Director
for doing a good job on the presentation.
Vice Mayor/Board Member/Commissioner Tam echoed Commissioner
Matarrese's appreciation for the presentation; inquired how the
City deals with replenishing or drawing down on the reserves from
the 20% to 25% range.
The Finance Director responded the draw down was purposeful and
well thought out by Council in terms of trying to meet unmet
infrastructure needs.
Vice Mayor/Board Member/Commissioner Tam inquired whether reserves
are replenished also.
The Finance Director responded reserves are replenished only by
having revenues exceed expenditures; stated the expenditure budget
is $85.7 million; typically, not all money is spent and will go
back into the fund balance; an absolute commitment cannot be made
at this time.
Councilmember/BoardMember/Commissioner deHaan stated there was a
draw down on the reserves because of needed infrastructure; the
draw down was supposed to be 25% to 23% and is now 21%; 18% is left
and will leave approximately $12 million; a lot of the $12 million
is obligated.
The Finance Director stated 18% leaves approximately $15.5 million
the $400,000 reserve designated for Fire Station 3 replacement is
excluded; approximately $6 million is loaned to other funds.
Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan inquired whether the
$6 million could be called back.
The Finance Director responded the $6 million could be called back,
but the disaster would be pushed off to another area.
Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan inquired what loans
are in the $6 million.
Special Joint Meeting
Alameda City Council, Alameda Reuse
13
and Redevelopment Authority and
Community Improvement Commission
December 4, 2007",CityCouncil/2007-12-04.pdf
CityCouncil,2008-01-15,27,"Waterfront Improvement Area) Series 2003C, and the Commission's
$1,025,000 Taxable Tax Allocation Refunding Bonds (Business and
Waterfront Improvement Area) , Series 2003D, Approving the Form and
Authorizing and Directing Execution of a Guaranty Agreement
Relating to Such Surety Bond and Authorizing and Directing Certain
Actions with Respect Thereto. Adopted.
AGENDA ITEM
(08-07) - Recommendation to adopt the update to the Economic
Development Strategic Plan.
The Development Services Director gave a brief presentation.
Commissioner deHaan stated that surveys indicate that Alameda Point
top priorities include 1) Recreation amenities; 2) public access
to the waterfront; and 3) job creations through commercial
development; affordable housing and historical preservation ranked
lower.
The Development Services Director stated specific plan goals
address the need to ensure that the development includes multi-
modal, transit-oriented-development concepts a good mix of
commercial, industrial and retail uses developing a core center ;
public access issues; and public benefits.
Commissioner deHaan inquired how valid was the study's
demographics.
The Development Services Director responded the survey was
statistically valid; voting and non-voting residents were surveyed.
Commissioner deHaan stated that a concerning factor has always been
where people work; other surveys indicate that 42% of residents
work in San Francisco; the current survey indicates that only 5%
work in San Francisco; the developer needs to understand the
percentage because of transportation corridor issues.
Chair Johnson stated that the Public Transit Committee performed a
survey which showed a high number of South Bay commuters.
The Development Services Director stated that she would like to do
a survey comparison.
Commissioner Matarrese stated the background information is good ;
the Economic Development Commission [EDC] did a great job; he
supports strategy one [create industrial and office jobs ] ; the
follow up should connection what is going on with Harbor Bay
Special Meeting
Community Improvement Commission
2
January 15, 2008",CityCouncil/2008-01-15.pdf
CityCouncil,2008-06-03,27,"two-year extension.
The Finance Director responded the payments for total debt services
for all three funds is about $573,000 each year.
Councilmember/Authority Member Gilmore stated the deferred payments
not being made over the first two years are slightly under a
million dollars.
Mayor/Chair Johnson stated the added interest and cost of
restructuring is an additional $594,000.
The City Treasurer stated bills should be paid when due.
The City Auditor stated money needs to be spent to refinance; he
does not see the benefit in pushing obligations into the future;
tough decisions need to be made now.
louncilmember/Authority Member Gilmore stated deferred payments
over the first two years are approximately $1 million; $594,000 is
the delta between what would need to be spent if nothing is done
and what would need to be spent for refinancing; inquired whether
the savings would be the difference between $1 million and
$594,000.
The Finance Director responded there is no savings because the $1
million is part of the calculation of the $594,000.
Mayor/Chair Johnson stated the non-payment years cannot be counted
as savings inquired whether payments would be higher in the third
year because of the restructuring.
The Finance Director responded the payments go up to $567,00 in
year three; in year three payments would be $610,000 as compared to
$567,000; payments start to decline in 2017 because the 1996 Police
Building debt would be paid in 2015 the existing debt service
would decline to $369,000; the new debt service would stay in the
$570,000 range.
The City Treasurer stated the situation is whether to borrow money
over the next two years to balance the budget and pay it back over
the next twenty years.
louncilmember/Authority Member Gilmore moved approval of tabling
the item pending budget discussions.
Special Joint Meeting
Alameda City Council, Alameda Public
13
Financing Authority, and Community
Improvement Commission Meeting
June 3, 2008",CityCouncil/2008-06-03.pdf
CityCouncil,2008-06-17,27,"levels is difficult, let alone adding additional staff; contractual
agreements cannot be made unless there is revenue in hand.
Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Matarrese inquired whether
hiring people is a contractual obligation; stated people can be
layed off; the Fire Chief mentioned that two to three positions per
shift should be added; more information is needed; enough direction
has been given to the City Manager/Executive Director to approve
numbers provided tonight trees need to be addressed so that
further liability is not incurred; plenty of notice needs to be
given before spending down the $300,000 of overtime; some matching
fund capability needs to be left to provide an incentive to the
Museum; information has been requested regarding setting up a trust
this year for unfunded post employment benefits.
Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan inquired what
agreement has been arrived at regarding trees.
The Public Works Director responded Zone 4 will commence July 1;
Mr. Buckley suggested not pruning specific species at all, which
does not make sense; structural pruning will be performed; left
over money will be applied to new street tree planning.
Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan inquired how the
process would equate to manpower.
The Public Works Director responded the tree crew would be reduced
by a Maintenance Worker I and a Team Leader; stated $50,000 has
been added to the Consultant Contract.
Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan stated some of the
work would be outsourced.
The Public Works Director stated all mature tree pruning is done by
an outside contractori currently, emergency response to down limbs,
some new tree planting, and young tree pruning is done in house;
emergency removal of down limbs and young tree pruning is being
proposed to be done by existing contractor.
Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Gilmore stated time would
be provided if the Golf Return on Investment (ROI) and surcharge
were not rebated and put into the General Fund; the money would be
able to fund Fire Department overtime and not take a truck out of
service.
Mayor/Chair Johnson stated the projected Golf Course deficit is
Special Joint Meeting
Alameda City Council, Alameda Public
Financing Authority, Alameda Reuse and
17
Redevelopment Authority, and
Community Improvement Commission
June 17, 2008",CityCouncil/2008-06-17.pdf
CityCouncil,2008-10-07,27,"Chair Johnson requested that language be added that if DE Shaw
terminates SunCal for reasons insufficient for our ENA, it doesn't
affect the relationship between the ARRA and SunCal. Ms. Potter
explained that if SunCal is terminated for cause, the ARRA has the
opportunity to approve a replacement. The path forward under
either scenario would be approval of replacement, or termination if
DE Shaw did something contrary to ENA.
Member deHaan expressed deep concern with this issue in general. He
discussed that SunCal was selected because they had multimillion
dollar background. He was uncomfortable that SunCal had to get a
hedge fund partner to tie them over to get through the ENA.
Because he has no in-depth knowledge of the company, Member deHaan
requested a financial consultant prepare a fiscal evaluation of DE
Shaw and their capability to weather the storm for this project.
Member Tam stated that it is clear that there have been
extraordinary events in financial market, and a solvent financial
partner is difficult to find. Comparing Alameda to Mare Island
(Lennar) she said we have the safeguards in place, and if DE Shaw
jettisons SunCal, the deal would be off and we're not absorbing any
fallout or cost.
In response to Member deHaan's request, Ms. Potter explained that
DE Shaw had submitted their financial information to our
consultant, EPS, who analyzed the data and determined that DE Shaw
could take on the financial obligations of ENA. Ms. Freilich
further discussed DE Shaw, stating that they have $36 billion under
management and $1.8 billion in real estate. They began 20 years ago
as hedgefund in global and technology, with 10 different asset
classes, and have hired an experienced team to do real estate
acquisitions. DE Shaw acknowledges that it is a difficult real
estate market, but that they've done extensive due diligence at
Alameda Point, which they view as a unique and irreplaceable
opportunity. SunCal is thrilled to have a partner with the
capacity and ability that DE Shaw has, and they understand the goal
of tightening up the milestones, and remain a committed partner in
producing the DDA.
Member deHaan asked if SunCal was in such dire straits that $10m
was difficult for them to invest without a financial partner. Ms.
Freilich explained that because the markets have changed, lines of
credit are not available under the same terms. From SunCal's
standpoint, partnering with DE Shaw provides stability to the
project rather than the opposite.
Special Joint Meeting
Alameda City Council, Alameda Reuse and
8
Redevelopment Authority, and Community
Improvement Commission Meeting
October 7, 2008",CityCouncil/2008-10-07.pdf
CityCouncil,2009-01-06,27,"Commissioner Tam stated northern elevation improvements were value
engineered out i improvements are expected; plants are functional
and remove toxins that she does not support the motion.
Commissioner deHaan stated the strip needs covering; maintenance is
an issue.
On the call for the question, the motion carried by the following
voice vote: Ayes: Commissioners Gilmore, Matarrese and Chair
Johnson - 3. Noes Commissioners deHaan and Tam - 2.
ADJOURNMEN'T
There being no further business, Chair Johnson adjourned the
Special Meeting at 8:37 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Lara Weisiger
Secretary, Community Improvement
Commission
The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown
Act.
Special Meeting
Community Improvement Commission
4
January 6, 2009",CityCouncil/2009-01-06.pdf
CityCouncil,2009-02-07,27,"Mayor Johnson inquired what the $140 million represents, to which
the Interim Finance Director responded the amount was from the
Bartel report.
Mayor Johnson stated the $70 million figure assumes that the
federal government will enact national health care.
The Interim Finance Director stated the assumption is not factored
into the $75.6 million calculation; the amount increases to over
$200 million if the City continues to pay-as-you-go.
The City Manager and the Interim Finance Director continued the
presentation.
Mayor Johnson inquired whether investing $75 million at 4.5% would
pay for the benefit; and whether borrowing said amount and paying
interest would not be sufficient.
The Interim Finance Director responded in the affirmative; stated
the scenario described would finance OPEB, which is not stationary
and would increase and require overlaying debt.
Mayor Johnson inquired whether the $75 million only covers current
and retired employees, to which the Interim Finance Director
responded new employees are not included.
The Interim Finance Director continued her presentation.
The City Manager provided an overview of the actuarial.
The Interim Finance Director continued her presentation.
Vice Mayor deHaan inquired whether reaching $10 million would take
8 years, to which the Interim Finance Director responded in the
affirmative.
Councilmember Matarrese inquired whether the plan is to finance $25
million to pay for the 1079/1082 retirement plans, continue paying
$2.1 million for OPEB [pay-as-you-go] and set aside and invest
money for 8 years until it reaches $10 million.
The Interim Finance Director responded in the affirmative; stated
the annual OPEB obligation would be absorbed until there is enough
money to mitigate.
Councilmember Matarrese inquired whether the tables assume the $10
million is compounding and nothing is taken out , to which the
Special Meeting
Alameda City Council
27
February 7, 2009",CityCouncil/2009-02-07.pdf
CityCouncil,2009-10-20,27,"Mayor/Chair Johnson stated a developer could request additional
units [above the limit] because less money would be made on smaller
units.
The City Attorney/Legal Counsel stated a developer does not get
extra units under State law; State law has certain absolutes the
ordinance provides an application process if a developer requests
an incentive, concession, or waiver; the matter would be presented
to the Planning Board; the Planning Board would have to make
certain findings if the incentive, concession, or waiver is denied.
Mayor/Chair Johnson stated the ordinance should be amended to
include comments.
Vice Mayor/Commissioner deHaan stated the Collin's plan did not
have setbacks; that he is interested in reviewing the new plan.
The City Attorney/Legal Counsel stated projects would still have to
go through the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) process
even with a density bonus, concession, or waiver request; part of
the CEQA process could be preferred alternatives.
In response to Councilmember/Commissioner Tam's inquiry, the City
Attorney/Legal Counsel stated State density bonus law pre-empts
local agency zoning and development regulations and is specifically
applicable to Charter cities; the State density bonus law trumps
the City's Measure A requirements; developing a City density bonus
ordinance allows the City to articulate a multi-family
configuration prohibited under Measure A as a waiver, not a
concessioni the findings are more stringent for a waiver.
Mayor/Chair Johnson opened the public portion of the hearing.
Proponents: (In favor of ordinance) : Jamie Keating, Trailhead
Ventures, LLC; Robb Ratto, Park Street Business Association (PSBA) ;
Kathy Moehring, West Alameda Business Association (WABA) .
Opponents (Not in favor or ordinance) : Former Councilmember Barbara
Kerr; Patsy Paul, Alameda. ; Christopher Buckley, Alameda
Architectural Preservation Society; Corinne Lambden, Alameda;
There being no further speakers, Mayor/Chair Johnson closed the
public portion of the hearing.
Following Former Councilmember Kerr's comments, Mayor/Chair Johnson
Special Joint Meeting
Alameda City Council, Alameda Reuse
and Redevelopment Authority, and
Community Improvement Commission
October 20, 2009",CityCouncil/2009-10-20.pdf
CityCouncil,2009-11-17,27,"ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, Mayor/Chair Johnson adjourned
the Joint Meeting at 12:50 a.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Lara Weisiger, City Clerk
Secretary, CIC
Agenda for meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act.
Special Joint Meeting
Alameda City Council and
Community Improvement Commission
November 17, 2009",CityCouncil/2009-11-17.pdf
CityCouncil,2010-03-16,27,"The City Attorney/Legal Counsel responded the issue tonight is whether or not to agree
to a 60-day tolling period.
Councilmember/Boaro Member/Commissioner Tam stated that she is trying to
understand the reason for the tolling period request and whether there is an ability on
the part of the City's partner to cure the deemed default her understanding of Section
3.2.5.1 is that the developer shall use best efforts to submit all required supplemental
information sufficient for the entitlement application to promptly be deemed complete by
Alameda; inquired whether the City deemed the application incomplete.
The City Attorney/Legal Counsel responded the Notice of Default sets forth the analysis
and reasoning; stated SunCal can be asked whether they feel capable of curing by the
deadline; the City's position is that SunCal is clearly capable of curing; the Notice of
Default is very specific about the problem with the OEA and what needs to be done to
be in compliant with existing law.
Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Tam stated the ENA states that the
developer may include: General Plan amendments, Zoning amendments to the MX
Mixed Use zoning, and other entitlements and approvals the developer may request for
the project site; inquired whether said action has occurred.
The Planning Services Manager responded the OEA includes a submittal for a MX
amendment and specific plan for the site; stated neither submittal can be processed
under the current City Charter and would require another initiative.
Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Tam inquired whether the submittals
cannot be processed because of non-compliance with the Charter provisions or
because the submittals do not include a request to deal with some General Plan and
Zoning amendments or other entitlements including the Density Bonus Ordinance
passed in December.
The Planning Services Manager responded General Plan, Rezoning, and Master Plan
amendments were included; stated the problem is that the submittals cannot be
processed because of inconsistency with the City Charter.
The Deputy City Manager - Development Services stated that ENA does not allow for a
second initiative.
Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Tam inquired what is the typical process
that the Community Development Department goes through when reviewing and
considering non Measure A Compliant submittals; referenced the Francis Collins'
project.
Special Joint Meeting
Alameda City Council, Alameda
Reuse and Redevelopment Authority, and
2
Community Improvement Commission
March 16, 2010",CityCouncil/2010-03-16.pdf
CityCouncil,2010-04-20,27,"without a vote of the people under the new revision of the law; inquired whether Mr.
Faye would dispute that the State density bonus law applied in Alameda.
Mr. Faye responded the issue is the implementation of the density bonus provisions;
stated given the prohibitions on certain kinds of attached dwellings because of Measure
A, Charter Article 26, the ability to modify the City Charter to implement the law was not
enacted by the City until the middle of December; the election would have been moot
had that been enacted sooner and had the State law provisions that caused the City to
enact the modification to the Code in the middle of December.
Mayor/Chair Johnson stated that the City has a fundamental disagreement with Mr.
Faye; the City has a different understanding of the applicability of the State's density
bonus law; Mr. Faye believes that the State density bonus law did not apply in Alameda
until December.
Mr. Faye stated that is not what he is saying; Measure A prevents certain kinds of
attached dwelling units; in order to modify the City Charter, Council enacted an
ordinance in the middle of December and implemented State law that permits the City
Charter to be amended by Council, not requiring a vote of the people; the election would
have been irrelevant had the particular provision of the Code been changed before the
project proponents submitted signatures.
Mayor/Chair Johnson inquired whether there is any difference in how State law would
have been applied before December; requested an explanation from the City
Attorney/Legal Counsel; also requested an explanation of the application of the State
density bonus law.
Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Tam stated when the Council discussed
the density bonus in December, the City Attorney/Legal Counsel stated that State law
nullified Measure A for the City and State law trumps the Charter.
The City Attorney/Legal Counsel stated that she said State law pre-empts the Charter;
density bonus is a matter of Statewide concern; it does not mean that Measure A is set
aside; in order to implement bonus market rate units, someone could need and request
a waiver of the multi-family restriction; the same was true before December and has
been true for twenty years.
Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Tam stated the ordinance was tailored to
Alameda; discussions involved exempting the 15% requirement if there is inclusionary
housing; inquired whether said issue was unique to Alameda.
The City Attorney/Legal Counsel responded in the negative.
Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Tam inquired whether said issue is in
Special Joint Meeting
Alameda City Council, Alameda
7
Reuse and Redevelopment Authority, and
Community Improvement Commission
April 20, 2010",CityCouncil/2010-04-20.pdf
CityCouncil,2010-05-04,27,"Respectfully submitted,
Lara Weisiger, City Clerk
Secretary, CIC
The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act.
Special Joint Meeting
Alameda City Council, Alameda Reuse and
Redevelopment Authority, and Community
10
Improvement Commission
May 4, 2010",CityCouncil/2010-05-04.pdf
CityCouncil,2010-06-01,27,"ORAL REPORTS
(ARRA) Oral report from Member Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner
Matarrese, Restoration Advisory Board (RAB) representative - Highlights of May 6
Alameda Point RAB Meeting
Board Member Matarrese stated the Navy is nearing completion of the replacement and
removal of several radio active storm drain lines that go from Buildings 5 and 400 to the
seaplane lagoon; requested clarification on whether the new storm drains would meet
current standards; stated a number of remediation are in place; nearly 75% completion
of characterization is being approached; part of the clean up plan includes the former
Todd Shipyard near the existing ferry terminal where copper is being removed, which is
not all Navy contamination, but the Navy is paying for it.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, Mayor/Chair Johnson adjourned the meeting at 10:55
p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Lara Weisiger, City Clerk
Secretary, CIC
The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act.
Special Joint Meeting
Alameda City Council, Alameda
Reuse and Redevelopment Authority, and
16
Community Improvement Commission
June 1, 2010",CityCouncil/2010-06-01.pdf
CityCouncil,2010-06-15,27,"billion; the Governor is proposing an insurance surcharge on home premiums in order to
pay for emergency response and is looking at increasing booking fees to help raise $1
billion for fire protection; Councilmembers throughout the cities have urged their
legislative delegation not to take any more redevelopment money.
(10-306) Mayor Johnson inquired when the vehicle parking ordinance is coming back to
Council, to which the Deputy City Manager - Administrative Services responded at a
meeting in July.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the meeting at 12:11 a.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Lara Weisiger
City Clerk
The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
June 15, 2010",CityCouncil/2010-06-15.pdf
CityCouncil,2010-07-20,27,"Under discussion, Mayor/Chair Johnson stated the process was very thorough when
SunCal was selected; that she did not vote for SunCal but supported the position of the
majority of the Councilmembers/Board Members/Commissioners; Councilmembers/
Board Member/Commissioner Matarrese did not vote for SunCal but also supported the
selection of the majority of the Council/Board Members/Commissioners; four
Councilmembers/Board Members/Commissioners made an effort to accept the vote to
work, support, and cooperate with SunCal; that she appreciates SunCal's community
outreach; situations leading to Measure B took a turn for the worse; the relationship
between SunCal and the City has gotten worse; the community made an effort to work
with SunCal; SunCal has not returned the community's good faith efforts; that she has
had an open relationship with SunCal and has expressed community concerns; there is
too much development; she does not see how all the traffic could get through two lanes
in the Tube in both directions; her family members lived in Alameda at the peak of the
former Naval Base; that her grandmother could not get out of her driveway on the
1700th block of Versailles Avenue because Base workers would come over the Fruitvale
Bridge; people accepted and supported traffic backups because of Alameda's
contribution toward national security and military efforts; allowing an inappropriate
development is different; she ran for Council twelve years ago to help guide the former
Naval Base redevelopment; the City needs a trustworthy partner; some of the things
that SunCal has done questions SunCal's trustworthiness; that she does not think
SunCal's threats and bullying is appropriate, particularly when a decision has not been
made; she never makes up her mind until there has been a public hearing; that she is
very concerned about the project's financial feasibility; she does not think there could be
a 25% IRR; now she is learning there would be a 25% profit in addition.
Vice Mayor/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan stated one incident does not change
a person's mind; that he has supported and given all to SunCal; having a developer
spend more than $1.25 million on a campaign is bizarre; spending another $1.5 million
on pre-campaign efforts is equally bizarre; the community should be proud that it
pushed back with less than $22,000; money does not buy loyalty and trust; money
should not flow inappropriately.
Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Tam stated that she is being attacked in
her efforts to keep Alameda government open and honest; that she wants to be clear
that the correspondence in the documents and allegations, including the ones to the fire
fighters, SunCal, and whoever has asked her questions, shows that she has diligently
followed up on the tough questions with the Interim City Manager/Executive Director
and that she has pushed to have important questions answered; having said that, with
the vote this evening, the MOEA may not be the plan the City ultimately wants at
Alameda Point; staff has made some assumptions on financial and environmental
impacts; the historic resources group has made some findings that are part of the
Special Joint Meeting
Alameda City Council, Alameda Reuse and
15
Redevelopment Authority, and Community
Improvement Commission
July 20, 2010",CityCouncil/2010-07-20.pdf
CityCouncil,2010-07-27,27,"The Interim City Manager inquired whether the issue actually went on the ballot or was
just discussed.
Mayor Johnson, Councilmember Tam, and Councilmember Gilmore stated the issue
went on the ballot.
Mayor Johnson stated all measures passed and perhaps the Charter has not reflected
the change yet.
Speakers: Jon Spangler, Alameda; Ann Spanier, League of Women Voters; and
Domenick Weaver, IAFF.
The City Clerk stated Section 22-8 was modified; the following language was struck: ""to
increase such hours for the necessary accommodations of the public""; the section after
the 2008 election reads: ""All public offices except for otherwise provided by law shall be
open for business every day, except holidays from 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. subject to
modification by Council"".
Councilmember Gilmore stated the Subcommittee thought subject to modification by
Council would mean Council could pass an ordinance to modify hours.
The Interim City Manager stated her interpretation is different; inquired whether the
language allows Council to amend hours by ordinance or resolution.
The City Attorney responded in the negative; stated that she recalls that the section was
modified in 2008 because the way the Charter read, Council could only increase hours,
not decrease hours; what is being suggested now is to repeal the section entirely so
that Council would have more flexibility and hours could be set by resolution, ordinance,
or policy; making a change now would require a Charter amendment.
In response to Councilmember Tam's regarding repealing the section in 2008, the City
Attorney stated the matter was not discussed.
Mayor Johnson requested the City Clerk to read the section again.
The City Clerk read the section again.
Mayor Johnson stated that it sounds as though Council can modify the schedule,
including Saturdays and Sundays.
Councilmember Gilmore stated the Subcommittee's intent was to enable Council to
change hours; the Subcommittee had discussions regarding departments having
different operating hours and did not want to have a Charter amendment every time
Council wanted to change a department's hours; despite what the Charter said prior to
the amendment, some departments did not have the correct hours.
Special Joint Meeting
Alameda City Council, Alameda Reuse
27
and Redevelopment Authority, and
Community Improvement Commission
July 27, 2010",CityCouncil/2010-07-27.pdf
CityCouncil,2011-02-15,27,"The Public Works Director responded $282,000 is for water, and $125,000 for is for
JPA; stated the 18-month payment plan includes payments next year.
Vice Mayor/Board Member/Commissioner Bonta stated burning through the $2.1 million
transfer tax in a short period of time is difficult; alternatives should be explored for the
discretionary items; putting some of the money aside would be nice.
Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan stated every good budget has
contingencies; inquired why some items could not be taken care of with contingencies.
The Controller responded the City Manager contingency amount for Fiscal Year 2010-
2011 is approximately $200,000; stated half has been used this year.
The Acting City Manager/Executive Director stated the contingency would be used for
the City Manager recruitment and employee training; some contingencies exist because
departments have been good at saving money; a lot of departments will come in under
budget.
Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan inquired how things would have
been paid without the money from the Alameda Towne Centre sale, to which the
Controller responded the General Fund reserve would have had to be drawn down.
Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan stated the established threshold
would be broken; inquired whether there would be enough revenue generation next
year.
The Acting City Manager/Executive Director responded revenues will not have a
spectacular growth; stated the real problem will be on the expenditure side; there will be
a $1.3 million hit for PERS, payments for miscellaneous employees and health care
costs will go up.
Councilmember Tam moved approval of accepting the Quarterly Financial Report.
Councilmember Johnson seconded the motion.
The Controller inquired whether the motion includes approval of the budget
adjustments.
Councilmembers Tam and Johnson agreed to amend the motion to include budget
adjustments.
On the call for the question, the motion carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.
Special Joint Meeting
Alameda City Council, Alameda Reuse
and Redevelopment Authority, and
12
Community Improvement Commission
February 15, 2001",CityCouncil/2011-02-15.pdf
CityCouncil,2014-07-15,27,"has left us in a strange place where we've stopped contacting the management company for anything
other than major repairs. Our policy has been to keep as far below the radar as we can.
We can't afford to live here if our rent increases again next year. My Husband is a temp making only
$14.50/hr at nearby XXX, and I am a contractor, read, not full time employee, at a tech company in
Silicon Valley. Of course no significant upgrades or work has been done to our house, either.
I'm concerned it's going to continue to go up as more affluent people continue to move to the island.
I
know I am very lucky to have a landlord interested in long term retention of tenants. My commitment
to
being here for years was a major factor in them accepting my application.
I received an initial increase from $900 to $1, 150. After attending a meeting with Alameda Housing
Authority, the rent was reduced to $990. Am I to expect a minimum of 10 percent each year.
I moved to a different apartment complex and a smaller apartment after less than a year at my previous
location, because I knew the rent was going to increase from 2095 for a 3 bedroom, at least $150 and
the landlord would not let me move into a smaller apartment, even when my one year lease was up.
I have no concerns - the rent is very reasonable.
I moved in years ago. Now, since Alameda is the place to move, my rent has gone up just so the
manager can pocket profit to keep up at the market rate.
Concerned that the owner will recognize how much they could charge (3000) VS. what they do charge
me! Live month by month waiting for the other shoe to drop
I've been lucky to have a landlord who wants us to stay so hasn't raised the rent but relocation would
be impossible. Too expensive now!
No moderate income housing; no rent control
Unfortunately, continuous increases are the standard, not the exception. This is regardless of the actual
work being done and the market. While the percentage may fluctuate, the increase has become all too
""normal."" I have lived in two units in this complex and even in probably one of the least favorable units
(in terms of location - bottom floor, between units, no view, facing a wall and a studio) increases were
still standard. You are all but forced into a one-year lease if you do not have something ready for move-
in because the shorter term lease options have such a steeper increase. And with the 1-year, they still
try to shave days so you don't even get that rate for a full year.
We moved in December and within just 6 months the rents have skyrocketed! Our rental company said
that if we were to walk in off the street today they would charge almost $800 more o month! This is
ridiculous! They have told us to expect at least a 5%-10% increase in rent when our lease is up
(perhaps more depending on the market).
Our last building was bought and the new owner had everyone leave. The new owner redid the floors
and painted, over doubling the rent. My concern is that I am being pushed out of my city of birth. I have
worked at the same non-profit institution for 30 years, have a Bachelor's degree. My salary is far under
the median. Soon, rents will be at over a third of my income so no one will rent to me. I am concerned
Rent Survey for City of Alameda - Summary of Survey Results as of July, 15, 2015
9
www.RenewedHopeHousing.or
RenewedHopeHousing@gmail.com
I
Laura Thomas (510)522-8901",CityCouncil/2014-07-15.pdf
CityCouncil,2015-01-21,27,"better or become unintelligible; Roberts Rules of Order or some other system gets the
motion on the table with a second so there can be discussion and something real can
be modified, which is why Council should consider adhering to some specific points of
Roberts Rules of Order, which has some practical parts; the Council has to walk the line
between freedom of speech and practical policy applications; noted having a rules
subcommittee would take less staff time.
Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated the City has procedures for making motions,
which perhaps have not been followed; the City Attorney could provide a workshop or a
write up; on the Planning Board, she had a guide on how to handle motions;
consolidating the rules would be good; she would be happy to work on a rules
subcommittee with Vice Mayor Matarrese; stated Council should consider the number of
Council Referrals that can be included on an agenda; having seven to eight every time
will cause meetings to be long; her preference would be all members of the Council use
Council Referrals to get items on the agenda, which is more informative to the public
and staff.
Mayor Spencer stated her understanding is that in the past, the Mayor worked with the
City Manager to submit items directly and did not submit referrals; stated that she wants
to adjourn the meeting, which has gone on longer than she intended and the meeting
last night ended at 1:30 a.m.; stated that she appreciates everyone's input.
Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether a motion to adjourn is needed, to which
Mayor Spencer responded in the negative.
Councilmember Oddie noted the Council Communications section of the agenda still
needs to be heard.
In response to a public speaker, the Assistant City Manager clarified that staff does not
put controversial items at the end of the agenda to limit the ability of the public to speak.
COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS
(15-079) Councilmember Oddie reported that he attended the League of California
Cities new Mayor and Councilmember training.
(15-080) Councilmember Daysog reported that he attended the League Housing
Community Development Policy Committee meeting last Thursday.
(15-081) Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft reported that she recently attended the signing
of a memorandum between Bay, Ship and Yacht and the College of Alameda for a joint
training program; applauded Bay, Ship and Yacht for providing job training and
employment opportunities.
ADJOURNMENT
Special Meeting
Alameda City Council
27
January 21, 2015",CityCouncil/2015-01-21.pdf
CityCouncil,2015-10-20,27,"Councilmember Daysog stated there is great progress at Alameda Point.
Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated Alameda is becoming a great place to attract new
business.
Councilmember Oddie stated Council needs to not lose sight of the big picture; adaptive
reuse buildings need a lot of work; Council needs to not micromanage or businesses
will not want to come to Alameda.
Vice Mayor Matarrese stated periodic reports are a good idea and should continue on a
regular basis; the raw data should be provided, including details about square footage,
option to purchase and investment in the building in the future; requested reports be
provided on a quarterly or semi-annual basis.
Mayor Spencer noted Google purchased Makani, which has been an Alameda company
since 2006; there is a higher level of due diligence when an action requires four votes.
Councilmember Daysog stated it seems that a lot of businesses that come to Alameda
are related to existing businesses; inquired if there is a business organization at
Alameda Point.
The Economic Development Division Manager responded the tenants are working on a
business association.
Councilmember Daysog requested Council be provided an update on the Main Street
District.
CITY MANAGER COMMUNICATIONS
(15-631) The Interim City Manager made an announcement about a job fair recently
hosted by the City.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA
None.
COUNCIL REFERRALS
None.
COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS
(15-632) Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft made brief comments about the recent job fair.
(15-633) Consideration of Mayor's Nominations to the Commission on Disability Issues
(CDI).
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
27
October 20, 2015",CityCouncil/2015-10-20.pdf
CityCouncil,2016-01-05,27,"In response to Councilmember Oddie's comment regarding rents already being limited
to once per year, the Assistant City Attorney noted the lease that is offered one time
might include other provisions.
Councilmember Oddie outlined the lease renewal options he receives from his landlord
with a one year lease being the lowest increase; a 6 month lease being slightly higher
and month-to-month being the highest increase due to the uncertainty.
The Community Development Director stated a number of properties have the same
structure in Alameda, especially larger ones.
Councilmember Daysog stated that he likes the direction Council is moving; the
possibilities are being narrowed down; however, there seems to be fuzziness; the
direction should be treated as a framework for further refinement.
The Community Development Director concurred; stated the exercise is very helpful to
staff because more precision will allow things to advance.
Councilmember Daysog stated staff should take notes and continue to think about the
issues more with public input.
Mayor Spencer requested Council to weigh in about whether an existing tenant should
be offered a year lease one time at a rent increase.
In response to Councilmember Oddie's inquiry, the Community Development Director
stated the requirement is strictly to deal with the ordinance going into effect to have
existing tenants be offered the same thing as new tenants; staff could review Mountain
View's ordinance and see how in place tenants are being treated.
Councilmember Daysog stated said review would be helpful.
Mayor Spencer stated the Council will not decide tonight and the issue will come back.
Councilmember Oddie concurred; stated that he is sure Council can come to an
agreement on the matter at the next meeting.
The Community Development Director stated the next item staff heard consensus on
would prevent landlords from raising rents more than one time in a year.
Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft expressed support.
Mayor Spencer stated there is consensus on said issue.
Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the vote is five in favor, to which Mayor
Spencer responded in the affirmative.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
27
January 5, 2016",CityCouncil/2016-01-05.pdf
CityCouncil,2016-02-02,27,"Mayor Spencer stated Council was told in rent controlled city, when evicting for no
cause rent cannot increase for the next tenant, per the Civil Code section.
The Assistant City Attorney responded that the Council has the discretion to set the 5%
cap.
Mayor Spencer inquired what the Code section refers to.
The Assistant City Attorney responded it refers to a different issue.
Mayor Spencer stated it is not about evicting someone and then raising the rent as
much as a landlord wants for a no cause eviction.
Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated both sides of the issue have to be addressed; she
supports allowing no cause evictions and agrees to the 5% cap.
Councilmember Oddie stated that he agrees with the 5% cap.
Mayor Spencer stated that she agrees with the 5% cap.
The Community Development Director requested direction from Council on the cap for
the number of allowable no cause evictions.
Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired why the City would allow property owners to
evict all tenants without a CIP.
The Community Development Director responded the City is trying to prevent doing so;
stated direction on a cap is needed; if a landlord needs to do substantial rehabilitation,
they would need to go through the CIP process.
Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the cap is to prevent a housing provider
from doing a mass no cause eviction, to which the Community Development Director
responded in the affirmative; stated staff is recommending 25% for buildings with 5 or
more units and buildings with 4 or fewer units, could do 1 no cause eviction a year.
Mayor Spencer stated that she agrees with staff recommendation.
Councilmember Daysog inquired if this was a tool to prevent Harbor Island from
happening again, to which the Community Development Director responded in the
affirmative.
Vice Mayor Matarrese stated he would support the recommendation for buildings with
10 or 20 more units; the City has not had a problem with the smaller buildings.
Mayor Spencer inquired whether Vice Mayor Matarrese is okay with mass evictions for
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
26
February 2, 2016",CityCouncil/2016-02-02.pdf
CityCouncil,2016-02-16,27,"Mayor Spencer inquired whether it could happen concurrently.
The Assistant City Attorney responded the ordinance is not set up that way; stated 50%
is to be paid when the tenant gives notice and the other 50% when the tenant moves
out; staff feels 50% is reasonable.
Councilmember Oddie stated other cities follow the same process; tenants will have the
hardship of relocating; there is always a risk that one or both parties will violate the
agreement and will have to go to litigation; suggested a stipulated judgement be drawn
up with a writ of execution.
The Assistant City Attorney responded a court action needs to be filed for a stipulated
judgement; he is not clear how to enforce a stipulated judgement without an underlying
court action.
Councilmember Oddie stated that he has experience with a stipulation pay; if rent is
paid the case is dropped; when they go into default, the action would be filed.
The Assistant City Attorney inquired whether there was already an underlying action, to
which Councilmember Oddie responded in the affirmative.
The Assistant City Attorney stated the underlying action is missing from the suggestion.
Mayor Spencer inquired what about an irrevocable notice of termination on a date
certain.
The Assistant City Attorney stated the City can create something, but it would not be
self-executing and there is no guarantee that the parties will follow it.
Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she agrees with staff's proposal of 50% up
front and 50% once the unit is vacated; urged Council to allow the provision for one year
and revisit the matter to see if stricter provisions are needed.
Mayor Spencer stated that the entire document is because of outliers; she feels even
though the issues would impact a small percentage, the problem is significant.
Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated outlier landlords, not tenants, brought the City to
this position.
Mayor Spencer stated there needs to be an administrative regulation or something clear
that there is an agreement; the tenant is choosing time or money and the legal
arrangement carries weight.
The Community Development Director stated staff is aware of the issue and will draft a
document with the strongest language possible that is permissible; documentation that
people have paid their relocation benefits is required so there will be a way to track the
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
25
February 16, 2016",CityCouncil/2016-02-16.pdf
CityCouncil,2016-03-01,27,"Mayor Spencer nominated Michaela Tsztoo for appointment to the CDI; Arthur Kurrasch
for reappointment to the HABOC and Tina Landess Petrich and Robert Schrader for
appointment to the RRAC.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, Mayor Spencer adjourned the meeting at 12:44 a.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
March 1, 2016",CityCouncil/2016-03-01.pdf
CityCouncil,2016-11-01,27,"Vice Mayor Matarrese moved approval of adopting the referral as written; stated the
SSHRB is working on a specific plan for Jean Sweeney Park; he would like to make
sure all the policies for Police procedures and recommendations come to Council.
The City Manager responded the kick off will be in December.
Vice Mayor Matarrese stated there should be a project specific update in December; he
would like the ongoing review of City policies and procedures and recommendations
from the SSHRB to come to Council.
Councilmember Oddie seconded the motion.
Under discussion, Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated she would like to wait to hear
what SSHRB says about Operation Dignity and then make a decision.
Vice Mayor Matarrese stated that he is asking the SSHRB to help the City
systematically look at all the City's policies and procedures and come back with
recommendations.
Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the Council makes recommendations
when the SSHRB comes to Council.
Vice Mayor Matarrese responded Council is not making recommendations.
The City Manager stated when the issue comes to Council in December, the immediate
plan can be discussed and Council will provide input for policy matters; the SSHRB
wants direction from Council.
On the call for the question, the motion carried by the following voice vote: Ayes:
Councilmembers Matarrese, Oddie and Mayor Spencer - 3. Abstentions:
Councilmembers Daysog and Ezzy Ashcraft - 2.
(16-578) Consider Directing the City Manager to Initiate Revisions to the Ordinances
and Code Sections for Mixed-Use Zoning in the City of Alameda to Aid Retention of
Beneficial Commercial Uses within Areas Zoned for Mixed Use. (Vice Mayor Matarrese)
Refer to the first referral on inclusionary housing [paragraph no. 16-573 for City
Manager comments on all the referrals.
Dorothy Freeman, Alameda, spoke before the Council referrals were heard.
Vice Mayor Matarrese moved approval of directing the City Manager to initiate revisions
to the ordinances and Code sections for mixed-use zoning in the City of Alameda.
Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether Vice Mayor Matarrese would accept a
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
November 1, 2016",CityCouncil/2016-11-01.pdf
CityCouncil,2017-04-18,27,"issues; not having control over issues is difficult; having the discussion is important; he
supports the referral.
Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she does not support Council returning to its
role as Board of Commissioners for the HA; doing so would mean Council has the
potential of placing the HA Section 8 funds in jeopardy; she feels the remedy is extreme
with a lot of dangerous repercussions.
Vice Mayor Vella stated that she has concerns about the fiscal impacts; Council could
address some of the rent program issues in connection with the services contract; she
would prefer to maintain the basic relationship instead of taking the bigger step and
placing funds in jeopardy.
Mayor Spencer stated that she would like to have more discussion on the referral;
suggested a presentation from the HA to help Council understand how issues are being
addressed; Council could reconsider after receiving more information; she does not
support the referral at this point.
Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated the matter is not agendized and Council cannot
provide direction beyond directing staff to present steps as the referral states.
In response to Mayor Spencer's inquiry, Councilmember Matarrese stated modifying his
referral would no longer make it a referral; suggested the next Rent Review Advisory
Commission (RRAC) report or the management of rental complaints be expanded to
include the status of the HA projects.
The HA Executive Director stated there are privacy issues which may prevent disclosing
tenant information; she would only be able to inform Council of general, statistical
information.
Councilmember Matarrese withdrew the referral.
(17-270) Consider Directing Staff to Review and Update Alameda's 2008 Local Action
Plan for Climate Protection. Not heard.
(17-271) Consider Reviewing and Updating the Rules of Order for City Council Agendas
and Meetings. Not heard.
COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS
None.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, Mayor Spencer adjourned the meeting at 1:53 a.m.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
26
April 18, 2017",CityCouncil/2017-04-18.pdf
CityCouncil,2017-06-06,27,"MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL JOINT MEETING OF THE
CITY COUNCIL AND SUCCESSOR AGENCTY TO THE COMMUNITY
IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION (SACIC)
TUESDAY--JUNE 6, 2017- -7:01 P.M.
Mayor/Chair Spencer convened the meeting at 11:49 p.m.
ROLL CALL -
Present:
Councilmembers/Commissioners
Ezzy
Ashcraft,
Matarrese, Oddie, Vella and Mayor/Chair Spencer -
5.
Absent:
None.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
None.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Councilmember/Commissioner Oddie moved approval of the Consent Calendar.
Councilmember/Commissioner 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.]
(*17-365 CC/17- SACIC) Minutes of the Special Joint Meeting of the City Council and
Successor Agency to the Community Improvement Commission (SACIC) Held on May
2,2017. Approved.
(*17-366 CC/17- SACIC) Recommendation to Accept the Fourth Quarter Financial
Report for the Period Ending June 30, 2016. Accepted.
(*17-367 CC/17- SACIC) Recommendation to Accept the First Quarter Financial Report
for the Period Ending September 30, 2016. Accepted.
REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS
(*17-368 CC) Resolution No. 15272, ""Approving and Adopting the City of City Alameda
Operating and Capital Budget for Fiscal Years (FY) 2017-18 and 2018-19."" Adopted;
(17- SACIC) Resolution No. 17-07, ""Approving and Adopting the Successor Agency to
the Community Improvement Commission Budget for FY 2017-18 and 2018-19.""
Adopted;
(17-368 A CC) Resolution No. 15273, ""Approving Workforce Changes in the Recreation
and Parks Department, Public Works Department, Community Development
Special Joint Meeting
Alameda City Council and Successor Agency
1
to the Community Improvement Commission
June 6, 2017",CityCouncil/2017-06-06.pdf
CityCouncil,2017-07-05,27,"CITY MANAGER COMMUNICATIONS
(17-437) The City Manager thanked the Coast Guard for help with 4th of July parade;
stated Building 91, owned by Joe Ernst, is in line for becoming an organic malt
cultivation facility, the building is being purchased for $3 million, which starts the City's
contribution for improving the infrastructure at Alameda Point.
Councilmember Matarrese requested an update on Public Utilities Board (PUB) local
solar and Renewable Energy Credits (RECs).
The City Manager stated RECs are green credits that the City can sell to other
companies that are not as green; the City has used the money for additional green
efforts; the question at the next PUB meeting will be how to spend the approximately $9
million; the City's previous goals are community solar; AMP is conducting a feasibility
study on Mount Trashmore as a possible site for community solar.
Councilmember Matarrese inquired whether the feasibility study is currently underway,
to which the City Manager responded in the affirmative.
Councilmember Matarrese inquired whether the REC funds will be allocated.
The City Manager responded direction will be given on how to allocate the funds.
Vice Mayor Vella inquired what is the timeline for the feasibility study.
The City Manager responded that she is unaware but she will find out.
COUNCIL REFERRALS
(17-438) Consider Directing Staff to Propose Regulations to Authorize Convenient and
Safe Cannabis Businesses in Alameda. (Mayor Spencer)
Mayor Spencer made brief comments regarding the referral.
Councilmember Oddie requested an update from staff.
The City Manager stated the previous referral was medium priority due to the timeline
for the State regulations; staff has held an internal workshop regarding cannabis and is
going to have the consultant return to share information with Council tentatively set for
the September 5th Council meeting; Council will address activities that should be
regulated and policy planning; the City has until January 2018; the City's quality of life
survey includes a question regarding opinions on cannabis.
Mayor Spencer stated that she would like to have dispensaries sooner rather than later.
Stated she is a patient and a potential business owner; she owns a topical cannabis
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
26
July 5, 2017",CityCouncil/2017-07-05.pdf
CityCouncil,2017-07-18,27,"Sheet. A Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Alameda
Landing Mixed Use Development Project was Certified in Accordance with the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (State Clearinghouse #2006012091) in
2006. An Environmental Assessment for the Proposed Actions has been Prepared.
The City Attorney clarified the order of the remaining items.
The Community Development Director and Assistant Community Development Director
gave a Power Point presentation.
Mayor Spencer inquired whether the impact of traffic includes residential plus
commercial.
The Assistant Community Development Director responded the trips include the total
from morning to night.
Mayor Spencer inquired whether the impact of having more homes, thus more traffic
and parking, is taken into account.
The Assistant Community Development Director responded all trips are accounted for in
the EIR.
Mayor Spencer inquired whether the Alameda Unified School District (AUSD) would
have more money to build more schools with the school impact fees.
The Assistant Community Development Director responded AUSD will be receiving
larger school impact fees due to the increased housing.
Mayor Spencer inquired how AUSD will ensure they have additional classrooms for the
additional students.
The Assistant Community Development Director responded that AUSD receives notice
about all of City projects.
The City Manager clarified Mayor Spencer's question is whether the City can tell AUSD
to add more classrooms; stated the City does not have any control over how AUSD
spends its money.
The Community Development Director continued the presentation.
Mayor Spencer inquired whether Catellus owns the land.
The Community Development Director responded the land is owned by the Successor
Agency to the Community Improvement Commission (SACIC); stated the Disposition
and Development Agreement (DDA) is a purchase and sale agreement between the
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
July 18, 2017",CityCouncil/2017-07-18.pdf
CityCouncil,2017-11-07,27,"Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft's request; stated the language requires the matter to
return to Council.
Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated the concept does not belong in the ordinance.
Mayor Spencer inquired whether three Councilmembers support keeping the language
in the ordinance.
Councilmember Oddie inquired whether the intent is to say if you promise something
that you deliver.
In response to Councilmember Oddie's inquiry, the Community Development Director
stated if Council would like to strike the language, it can be done; staff feels comfortable
with including the language in the ordinance.
Mayor Spencer inquired whether three Councilmembers would like to leave the
language in the ordinance, to which Councilmember Oddie and Vice Mayor Vella
responded in the affirmative.
Mayor Spencer requested that language be added to indicate that the onsite community
relations staff and the onsite operations manager can be the same person.
Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the decision to hire multiple people for
the position can be left up to the business.
Mayor Spencer stated that she would like to make it clear that there is not a requirement
to hire two different people.
The Community Development Director stated the language will read the onsite
community relations staff can perform the duties of the onsite operations manager.
(17-670) Council discussed whether not to hear the pension item [paragraph no. 17-
673].
Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft moved approval of continuing the pension item
Vice Mayor Vella seconded the motion, which carried by the following voice vote: Ayes:
Councilmembers Ezzy Ashcraft, Matarrese, Vella and Mayor Spencer - 4. Abstention:
Councilmember Oddie - 1.
***
The Community Development Director stated regarding the hours of operation, staff's
intent between 9 p.m. versus 10 p.m. is to not conduct business after 10 p.m.
The City Attorney stated the language works because it says for all permitted facilities;
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
November 7, 2017",CityCouncil/2017-11-07.pdf
CityCouncil,2018-03-06,27,"Commission.
Mayor Spencer nominated Elizabeth Rush.
(18-138) Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she attended a summit meeting on
homelessness and encampments in Alameda County; she will share some ideas with
staff.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, Mayor Spencer adjourned the meeting at 12:11 a.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
27
March 6, 2018",CityCouncil/2018-03-06.pdf
CityCouncil,2018-04-17,27,"Under discussion, Mayor Spencer stated that she would like to see fiscal impact
information, the comprehensive list of comments from the outreach, and, if possible,
a
survey of the people who go off island for a minimum wage job.
Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated that is not part of the motion.
Mayor Spencer stated that she made the comments earlier; many people included in
the outreach groups do not earn minimum wage; it is important to hear their voices.
The Acting City Manager stated the more outreach staff does, the longer it will take to
bring the item back to Council.
Mayor Spencer stated that she would like some kind of intentional outreach for folks
earning minimum wage.
Vice Mayor Vella moved approval of calling the question.
Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft seconded the motion, which carried by the following
voice vote: Ayes: Councilmembers Ezzy Ashcraft, Matarrese, Oddie and Vella - 4.
Noes: Mayor Spencer - 1.
On the call for the question on the original motion, the motion carried by the following
voice vote: Ayes: Councilmembers Ezzy Ashcraft, Matarrese, Oddie and Vella - 4.
Noes: Mayor Spencer - 1.
CITY MANAGER COMMUNICATIONS
(18-239) The Acting City Manager announced the City and the School District will be
hosting an event called In the Mix on Saturday, April 28th at the Island High School from
10:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA
None.
COUNCIL REFERRALS
(18-240) Update on Tracking of Council Direction through the Referral Process.
(18-241) Consider Directing Staff to Return with a Sanctuary City Contracting and
Investment Ordinance. (Vice Mayor Vella)
Vice Mayor Vella made brief comments regarding the referral.
Urged Council to adopt an ordinance and make a stand tonight; stated there is a need
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
23
April 17, 2018",CityCouncil/2018-04-17.pdf
CityCouncil,2018-06-05,27,"Mayor Spencer inquired whether the sales tax measure requires three or four votes, to
which the Acting City Manager responded three.
Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated a majority of Council does not feel there is enough
time to do community outreach and education to place an infrastructure bond on the
ballot; inquired how the bond measure differs from the outreach and community
education for the sales tax measure; stated she would have liked to do both measures.
The Acting City Manager stated the sales tax issue is primarily operational, which has
been discussed over the last two years; forecasts are known; there have been
conversations about future gaps; the sales tax measure is a way to help bridge the gap.
Councilmember Matarrese stated the sales tax measure is not his preferred option, but
he is going to make a motion.
Councilmember Matarrese moved approval directing staff to go forward with the sales
tax measure.
Councilmember Oddie seconded the motion.
Under discussion, Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired when Council needs to
decide if the sales tax measure should address both operations and capital needs;
inquired what the motion includes.
Councilmember Matarrese stated the motion is to get the discussion going; part of the
discussion is whether Council wants to modify the measure to include some capital;
Council needs to determine if and how the funds should be sliced up.
The Public Works Director stated dedicating the funds too specifically to a project or
program could cause the measure to require a two-thirds threshold.
Councilmember Matarrese stated the measure may require a two-thirds vote if a
Statewide measure qualifies and passes in November.
(18-344) Mayor Spencer stated a motion is needed to continue past 11:00 p.m.
Vice Mayor Vella moved approval of continuing the meeting.
Councilmember Oddie seconded the motion, which carried by the following roll call vote:
Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye; Councilmember Matarrese: Aye; Councilmember
Oddie: Aye; Vice Mayor Vella: Aye; and Mayor Spencer: No. Ayes: 4. Noes: 1.
***
Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the motion is to adopt the draft
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
27
June 5, 2018",CityCouncil/2018-06-05.pdf
CityCouncil,2018-07-10,27,"will get people to submit proposals; questioned what the timeline and process would be
if there are no applicants.
Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft concurred with Councilmember Matarrese's approach;
stated waterfront property is diminishing on the Island; Council has heard arguments for
more square footage for maritime uses; artist studios are permitted in other areas of the
property and around the City; throughout the City, uses that do not need to be on the
water are on the water, such as Recreational Vehicle (RV) storage; the developers can
request a modification; she disagrees with Councilmember Matarrese's suggestion to
eliminate open space; she would like to keep the public open space along the Bay Trail;
she is excited about the project; discussed housing development; expressed support for
and discussed the 50/50 rental/for sale housing mix, the environmental aspect of the
project, and the RFP/RFQ process; stated the project opens the waterfront to all.
Councilmember Oddie stated that he thinks the project is exciting and was made better;
he would like page 49 to say at least 50% rental, instead of ownership; expressed
concern over modification being made by Councilmembers voting against an item.
Vice Mayor Vella expressed concern over housing ratios; stated that she does not want
an extra step slowing down housing; flexibility should be built in for where the market is
going to ensure the project comes to fruition; the project is going to be a win for the
maritime community, neighbors and future waterfront residents; there is intent to have a
modern, efficient boatyard; hopefully, community members will make the RFQ/RFP
successful; the project is an alternate way to fund necessary infrastructure, deals with
mid-century sea level rise and creates a funding mechanism for the future; hopefully,
the developer will continue to work with the City on traffic mitigation, such as additional
crossings; she is ready to support the project with the minor changes, including removal
of artist studio space in the commercial core.
Councilmember Oddie inquired whether Vice Mayor Vella want to eliminate the housing
ratio to allow the market to decide, to which Vice Mayor Vella responded that she
understands there was a lot of discussion to have the ratio in the Plan.
The Assistant Community Development Director stated the developer has to come back
to the Planning Board for all of the phases; the Planning Board could be given the
authority to adjust the ratio; the development process will take five to ten years and the
market will change.
Councilmember Oddie stated that he remains concerned about the lack of rental
housing.
Mayor Spencer stated that she wants the percentage included in the Plan; she supports
the 30% for workforce/middle-income housing, which is critical and was not achieved at
Site A; 50% should be for sale; she likes the mix; she would like to hear more on
Councilmember Matarrese's proposal to eliminate the green space.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
19
July 10, 2018",CityCouncil/2018-07-10.pdf
CityCouncil,2018-07-24,27,"Mayor Spencer inquired whether businesses in different cities would have to obtain an
Alameda license, to which the Economic Development Manager responded in the
affirmative; stated staff has not put the requirement in place, but is currently working on
doing so.
Mayor Spencer inquired whether Council is agreeable, to which Council responded in
the affirmative.
In response to Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft's inquiry, the Economic Development
Manager stated if a business with a State license and a brick and mortar location in
another city delivers to Alameda, an Alameda business license would be required to do
deliveries; expressed concern over enforcement.
The Economic Development Manager stated staff would go out for a new RFP following
the changes requested; inquired whether the same evaluation process should be used.
Councilmember Oddie responded a business that has already submitted and failed due
to the boundaries should not be required to do another RFP; stated the RFP could be
for new businesses; making someone re-do the RFP is costly if just the boundary has
changed and the same evaluation would be used.
The Acting City Manager inquired what if the business wants to submit a new RFP, to
which Councilmember Oddie responded if a business wants to submit a new one, it can.
Mayor Spencer stated someone rejected could reapply.
Vice Mayor Vella noted the business might want to apply to have adult use.
The Acting City Attorney expressed concern over treating groups differently and the fee.
In response to Vice Mayor Vella's inquiry regarding the fee, the Economic Development
Manager stated the fee is $1,000.
Vice Mayor Vella stated perhaps a discount can be offered if the application is for the
same location since the work is done.
The Economic Development Manager stated staff would return with a recommendation.
Mayor Spencer stated it sounds like everyone is fine with said suggestion.
Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the tax should be addressed in the staff
report when the matter returns, to which the Assistant City Attorney responded the
matter could be addressed in the staff report; stated staff also has cleanup amendments
to the ordinance; the intention is to bring back both together, but the amount of changes
might require the actions be separate.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
23
July 24, 2018",CityCouncil/2018-07-24.pdf
CityCouncil,2018-09-04,27,"Councilmember Oddie stated a confidentiality agreements would prevent tenants from
telling the RRAC; he is concerned about the large decrease in number of rent
increases.
Vice Mayor Vella questioned if the City could track when someone goes to a RRAC
member involved in a settlement outside the RRAC proceedings; suggested the annual,
cumulative rent increase causing effective evictions be brought to the RRAC's attention
and included in the information provided in the future.
Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she hopes changes can be made to the
ordinance following the election in November; one of the main changes to be made is
noting the actual relocation expenses versus the relocation assistance funds provided to
tenants; that she is troubled by the allegations made against a particular RRAC member
and would like to again renew her call to get rid of the RRAC altogether; resources can
be used better by staff.
In response to Councilmember Oddie's inquiry regarding Councilmembers and RRAC
members appropriate roles, the City Attorney stated her office is looking into the matter
in question.
The Assistant City Attorney stated regular ongoing and onboarding meetings are
included as part of the training provided to the RRAC members.
The Community Development Director noted the Council had clearly directed staff to
look into possibly revising relocation benefits.
Mayor Spencer moved approval of accepting the annual report.
Councilmember Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice
vote - 5.
CITY MANAGER COMMUNICATIONS
None.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA
None.
COUNCIL REFERRALS
None.
***
Vice Mayor Vella left the meeting at 12:20 a.m.
***
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
25
September 4, 2018",CityCouncil/2018-09-04.pdf
CityCouncil,2018-10-16,27,"Councilmember Oddie stated the language was just presented.
Councilmember Oddie inquired if the language being considered includes the cleanup
language.
The Economic Development Manager responded the cleanup language needs to be
approved.
Mayor Spencer inquired if the cleanup language is part of this motion, to which the
Economic Development Manager responded in the affirmative; stated the motion
includes cleanup language and the buffer.
Councilmember Oddie inquired if the alignment of labor peace with State law does not
change the number of employees the City requires before labor peace, to which the
Economic Development Manager responded in the affirmative.
Mayor Spencer moved approval [introduction of the regulatory ordinance].
Councilmember Oddie seconded the motion, which carried by the following voice vote:
Ayes: Councilmembers Ezzy Ashcraft, Oddie, Vella and Mayor Spencer - 4. Noes:
Councilmember Matarrese - 1.
The Economic Development Manager stated the final item to address is the Request for
Proposals (RFP).
Mayor Spencer inquired if a motion is needed.
The Economic Development Director inquired if the Council wants the applicant to send
out a 300-foot radius notice.
Vice Mayor Vella stated that she would like it to be a pass/fail requirement; the
requirement would be to send the notice; part of the Use Permit process is to allow
people to weigh-in; the requirement is to certify that the applicant has notified people.
Mayor Spencer concurred with Vice Mayor Vella.
Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated the Use Permit process starts when neighbors in
the 300-foot radius are notified.
Vice Mayor Vella stated the requirement is fine; the notice just needs to be certified as
pass/fail and complete.
The Economic Development Director inquired if the 300-foot notice portion of the RFP
would be pass/fail.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
24
October 16, 2018",CityCouncil/2018-10-16.pdf
CityCouncil,2019-03-19,27,"missed.
Councilmember Daysog expressed support for the workforce changes resolutions;
stated that he will abstain from the budget amendments due to the budget coming in
negative and since he has only been present for two months as the two year budget; he
is looking forward to the next two-year budget cycle.
Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she appreciates the conservative budget projections;
even though revenues have been high, ten years ago some departments were cut in
half; spending excess revenues should be avoided; public safety vacancies are not due
to Council not funding the positions; recognized the City Clerk's office for passport
services.
Vice Mayor Knox White moved adoption of the resolutions.
Councilmember Vella seconded the motion, which carried by the following voice vote:
Ayes: Councilmembers Knox White, Oddie, Vella and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft - 4.
Abstention: Councilmember Daysog - 1.
(19-176) Recommendation to Consider: (A) Introduction of Ordinance Repealing in Its
Entirety Ordinance No. 3227 (Ordinance Amending the Alameda Municipal Code by
Amending Article XVI (Cannabis Businesses) of Chapter VI (Businesses, Occupations
and Industry) to (1) Eliminate the Cap on Testing Laboratories, (2) Allow for Two
Additional Cannabis Businesses to Operate as ""Dispensary/Delivery' (Delivery
Required; Open to the Public) Within the Zoning Districts for Cannabis Retail, (3)
Amend the Dispersion Requirement to Require No More Than Two Cannabis Retail
Businesses to Operate on Either Side of Grand Street, (4) Create a Two-Tier Buffer
Zone from Sensitive Uses for Cannabis Businesses, (5) Amend Certain Portions of the
Regulatory Ordinance to Enable Cannabis Retail Businesses to Dispense Non-
medicinal or ""Adult Use"" Cannabis, (6) Modify Requirements for Off-Island Delivery, and
(7) Make Other Clarifying or Conforming Amendments Thereto; and (B) Introduction of
Ordinance Repealing in Its Entirety Ordinance No. 3228 (Ordinance Amending Section
30-10 (Cannabis) to (1) Add Cannabis Retail Businesses as Conditionally Permitted
Uses in the C-1, Neighborhood Business, and C-M, Commercial-Manufacturing Zoning
Districts, (2) Amend Certain Portions of the Zoning Code to Enable Cannabis Retail
Businesses to Dispense Non-medicinal or ""Adult Use"" Cannabis, and (3) Amend Certain
Portions of the Zoning Code to Remove the Dispersion Requirement); and Public
Hearing to Consider: (A) Introduction of Ordinance: (1) Amending the Alameda
Municipal Code by Amending Article XVI (Cannabis Businesses) of Chapter VI
(Businesses, Occupations and Industry) to (a) Eliminate the Cap on Testing
Laboratories, (b) Allow for Two Additional Cannabis Businesses to Operate as
""Dispensary/Delivery"" (Delivery Required, Open to the Public) within the Zoning Districts
for Cannabis Retail, (c) Amend the Dispersion Requirement to Require No More Than
Two Cannabis Retail Businesses to Operate on Either Side of Grand Street, (d) Create
a Two-Tier Buffer Zone from Sensitive Uses for Cannabis Businesses, (e) Amend
Certain Portions of the Regulatory Ordinance to Enable Cannabis Retail Businesses to
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
23
March 19, 2019",CityCouncil/2019-03-19.pdf
CityCouncil,2019-05-07,27,"clients have have the City Manager cast votes for simplicity.
On the call for the question, the motion carried by the following roll call vote:
Councilmember Daysog: Aye; Knox White: Aye; Oddie: Ayes; Vella: Aye; and Mayor
Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye. Ayes - 5.
(19-283) Public Hearing to Consider Resolution No. 15534, ""Confirming the Webster
Street Business Improvement Area (BIA) Assessment Report for Fiscal Year (FY)
2019=20 and Levying an Annual Assessment on the Webster Street BIA."" Adopted.
Councilmember Daysog recused himself and left the dais.
Vice Mayor Knox White moved adoption of the resolution.
Councilmember Oddie seconded the motion, which carried by the following roll call vote:
Vice Mayor Knox White: Aye; Councilmembers Oddie: Ayes; Vella: Aye; and Mayor
Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye. Ayes - 4. [Absent: Councilmember Daysog - 1.]
(19-284) Recommendation to Approve Agreement Appointing Yibin Shen as City
Attorney Effective May 13, 2019.
The City Clerk read a summary of the City Attorney's salary and benefits.
Councilmember Oddie moved approval of the contract.
Councilmember Daysog seconded the motion, which carried by the following roll call
vote: Councilmember Daysog: Aye; Knox White: Aye; Oddie: Ayes; Vella: Aye; and
Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye. Ayes - 5.
CITY MANAGER COMMUNICATIONS
(19-285) The City Manager announced the City has put out a press release regarding
the 4th of July parade; stated those interested in volunteering should contact the City
Manager's Office for details.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA
None.
COUNCIL REFERRALS
None.
COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS
(19-286) Councilmember Oddie, Daysog, Vice Mayor Knox White and Vella thanked the
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
May 7, 2019
26",CityCouncil/2019-05-07.pdf
CityCouncil,2019-07-16,27,"selected development team.
The City Clerk responded it can be approved via one motion.
Councilmember Oddie moved approval.
Councilmember Daysog seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote -
5.
(19-447) Recommendation to Approve Water Quality and Flood Protection Fee Report;
(19-447A) Resolution No. 15574, ""Declaring Intention to Initiate a Proceeding to Obtain
Approval of the City's 2019 Water Quality and Flood Protection Fee, a Property-Related
Fee Conforming to Article XIII D, Section 6 of the State Constitution."" Adopted;
(19-447B) Resolution No. 15575, ""Ballot Procedures for the City's 2019 Water Quality
and Flood Protection Fee."" Adopted; and
(19-447C) Call for a Public Hearing Tentatively Scheduled for October 1, 2019.
The Public Works Director gave a Power Point presentation.
In response to Councilmember Oddie's inquiry regarding the last date to put something
on the ballot, the Public Works Director stated the March 2020 ballot deadline is
December.
Councilmember Oddie stated the ballot will be mailed October 10th. expressed support
for having a backup plan.
The Public Works Director stated staff reports and resolutions would need to be
completed earlier than November 25th when ballots are due.
Councilmember Vella inquired whether the meeting can be classified as a special or
regular meeting.
The City Clerk responded the deadline to submit to the County is the beginning of
December; stated a special meeting versus a regular meeting will provide more time.
Councilmember Daysog stated if the item fails on November 25th, the people will have
spoken; there is no need to rush.
Councilmember Vella expressed concern over the concept of property owners being the
only voice that is heard and saying the people have spoken.
Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated polling results were decent.
The Public Works Director continued the Power Point presentation.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
22
July 16, 2019",CityCouncil/2019-07-16.pdf
CityCouncil,2019-12-18,27,"City Council Workshop
Workshop Report
Management Partners
Why managers can't always do what you want them to do:
The manager can often be confronted with a situation of an individual council-
member wanting something done that is not consistent with the wishes of the city
council. The manager needs to respond to the direction of the city council as a
whole. While managers try to be as responsive as possible to the needs/desires of
individual members, on matters of any consequence, the direction of the city
council will often be required.
Take your role to evaluate your city manager's performance seriously:
Like any other employee, the city manager benefits from regular and thoughtful
performance evaluations. Performance evaluations are an important
communication tool between the manager and council. Working for multiple
individuals is challenging enough without clear and consistent feedback on
performance. At least annual evaluations should be conducted. This provides the
opportunity to communicate how the council views the manager's performance,
including areas of strength and areas for potential additional emphasis. This is
also the only opportunity for the council as a whole to provide this input in
private. Also, due to the inherent challenge of multiple individuals attempting to
evaluate an individual who works for them as a group, the use of a consultant to
facilitate the evaluation can be very helpful. If done right, evaluations can be a
very valuable communication mechanism for the council and manager.
Tolerance for organizational imperfection (mistakes!):
While no one likes mistakes, they are unavoidable in the context of organizational
life. Cities are complex organizations dealing with a wide variety of services with
unique and sometimes challenging clientele. It is not a matter of whether mistakes
will be made, but when. It is critical as a leader of your city that you react to
mistakes appropriately. While mistakes should be avoided to the greatest extent
possible, overreacting can cause further damage. You should expect that mistakes
will be addressed promptly, fully disclosed and that steps will be taken to avoid
repeating the same mistakes again. You will need to trust the manager to follow
up and effectively address the situation when organizational miscues occur. Have
high expectations but recognize that mistakes will occur, even in the best
organizations, and try not to overreact when they do.
Support of reasonable risk-taking:
High-performing organizations will occasionally need to take ""reasonable risks"" in
order to achieve community objectives. Sometimes these endeavors will not be
successful. However, organizations that avoid ANY unnecessary risk are not
likely to accomplish a great deal. While city councils need to be informed and
concur that the risk being taken is reasonable for the potential benefit being
gained, councils should also be understanding that projects and initiatives that
have inherent unknowns may not always turn out as hoped Intolerance for any
- -7-
21",CityCouncil/2019-12-18.pdf
CityCouncil,2020-02-18,27,"COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS
(20-109) Councilmember Oddie announced that he is on the League of California Cities
Environmental Quality Policy Committee.
(20-110) Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft made an announcement regarding Association of Bay
Area Government and Metropolitan Transportation Commission meetings and the
Alameda Mayors Conference.
(20-111) Vice Mayor Knox White announced the Charter subcommittee would bring
issues in March and April; he and Councilmember Oddie are holding a Town Hall on
transportation safety.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft adjourned the meeting at 11:32
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
February 18, 2020
25",CityCouncil/2020-02-18.pdf
CityCouncil,2020-03-03,27,"Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft suggested the motion be revised to include the meeting end by
11:30 p.m.
Councilmember Oddie agreed to the time, which could be revisited.
On the call for the question, the motion carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.
The Recreation and Parks Director continued the presentation.
Expressed support for DePave Park being the top priority; discussed environmental
benefits of the park; expressed support for additional staff: Dawn Lemoine,
Expressed support for proceeding with DePave Park; requested the project be
prioritized; expressed support for additional staff: Ruth Abbe, CASA.
Urged moving forward with the planning process for DePave Park: Richard Bangert,
Alameda.
Stated human use will increase as Alameda Point is developed, which will impact birds
in the area; discussed warming and acidification of the ocean; urged approval of the list
and starting to look for a consultant and additional staffing: Marjorie Powell, Golden
Gate Audubon Society.
Vice Mayor Knox White stated the staff report provided a lot of information; the staff
report states there are many priorities, with no staffing; that he would not support the
new sustainability and resiliency position to act as an adjunct Recreation and Parks
Department position; noted that he has been a strong voice for DePave Park;
expressed concern about DePave park not being in plans; stated 11 resiliency projects
are unfunded in the Climate Action Resiliency Plan (CARP); urged being careful about
jumping a park to the head of a line after holistic planning around parks and climate;
stated staff has identified funding to help plan DePave Park, which will be available later
this year and is not available to fund any other unfunded needs the City has for
resiliency; should Council provide direction, a recommendation should be made based
on the City's resources; discussed a meeting held with traffic and safety; stated that he
cannot support a vote to approve a position for Recreation and Parks specifically
because he has not seen all asks; expressed support for the presented priorities; stated
the staff report has laid out finishing items that have been started; work should start
where items do not conflict and interfere; Proposition AA is the funding source;
expressed support for funds that become available later this year to write grants for
consultants to do planning to expand City resources.
Councilmember Vella stated that she defers a little from Vice Mayor Knox White; stated
there is different direction for DePave Park; DePave Park was discussed prior to
November 2019; other water-based parks are coming up through developer projects;
expressed support for focusing on DePave Park, including plans and discovering
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
24
March 3, 2020",CityCouncil/2020-03-03.pdf
CityCouncil,2020-05-05,27,"funding; the issue is cash flow; expressed support for sole proprietors.
Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she would like more information provided on the Great
Plates program.
The City Manager stated Great Plates is another way to help restaurants; staff supports
looking into the program.
Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft noted the program is for middle income seniors in need of meals.
The City Manager stated there are about four programs within the community which
provide meals to seniors; expressed concern about using the program and staff
resources; noted the program requires an implementation plan; expressed support for
using gofundme.com; expressed concern about the lack of regulation with
gofundme.com; stated that he would like to ensure those donating understand
donations will be used towards the cause; foundations and municipal trust options could
be funding sources as well.
Vice Mayor Knox White discussed the Meals on Wheels program; stated there is a huge
need for assistance; noted a partnership with Meals on Wheels could be explored.
Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether staff has received sufficient direction.
The City Attorney responded in the affirmative; stated Council can provide additional
direction, but is not required to do so; Council may take a vote on any specific action,
but a motion is not required.
Vice Mayor Knox White inquired whether the City Manager has received direction and
plans to investigate and report back at the next meeting on steps that can be taken for
the Great Plates program and additional funding; expressed support for $300,000 and
supporting the public-private partnership with the City Attorney's input and the City
Manager's agreement.
Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated the City Manager is keeping a close eye on the City's
finances to come back with an amount; expressed support for all three approaches
provided by the City Manager.
Councilmember Vella stated Meals on Wheels and the senior meal delivery at Mastick
Senior Center have increased delivery; the demand has gone up; expressed support for
the programs to be run through or coordinated with an existing program or partnership;
expressed concern about duplication of resources and staffing.
Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated the Great Plates program signs up participating restaurants;
the restaurants have criteria to meet from the Department of Agriculture and nutrition
standards; the restaurants provide delivery with staff that has been through a
background check; the City is not involved in the delivery, but would be involved with
Special Meeting
Alameda City Council
6
April 21, 2020",CityCouncil/2020-05-05.pdf
CityCouncil,2020-05-19,27,"The Assistant Community Development Director inquired whether staff will have
flexibility in the repayment terms; noted some repayment terms might exceed lease
terms.
Councilmember Oddie responded that he is open to having flexible repayment terms.
Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated terms may be individualized to particular business's needs;
staff will have the best knowledge of the needs and can negotiate; expressed support
for staff having flexibility.
Vice Mayor Knox White expressed concern about picking companies that are thought of
as good.
Councilmember Oddie stated the use of the lease term will assist the repayment terms.
On the call for the question, the motion passed by the following roll call vote:
Councilmembers Daysog: Aye; Knox White: Aye; Oddie: Aye; Vella: Aye; and Mayor
Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye. Ayes: 5.
(20-341) Vice Mayor Knox White inquired whether a motion can be made to ensure all
items will be heard.
Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft responded that she could support a motion that any item which
has public speakers will be heard; noted some items on the regular agenda need to
move forward; stated that she is unsure the entire agenda will be heard.
***
***
Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft recessed the special meeting at 10:02 p.m. and reconvened the
meeting 10:20 p.m.
***
(20-342) Recommendation to Endorse Implementation of Temporary Street
Reconfigurations to Provide Space for Social Distancing in Response to the COVID-19
Emergency.
Councilmember Oddie inquired whether the recusal requires members to be out of the
[Zoom] picture.
The City Attorney responded that his recommendation would be to have
Councilmembers Daysog and Oddie step ""off the dais"" or off camera for the entirety of
public comment.
The City Engineer gave a brief presentation on commercial and business districts.
Special Meeting
Alameda City Council
18
May 19, 2020",CityCouncil/2020-05-19.pdf
CityCouncil,2020-06-02,27,"Vice Mayor Knox White seconded the motion, with the following amendment that A
[cleanup] and B [City prosecutor] be combined, and D [Section 7-3] and E [Article 26] be
stand alone.
Councilmember Daysog accepted the amendment to the motion.
Under discussion, Councilmember Vella requested clarification of each item being
combined and the letters represented.
Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft requested the motion be restated.
Councilmember Daysog moved approval of combining A and B as one set of ballot
measures, and D and E will standalone.
Vice Mayor Knox White seconded the motion.
Under discussion, Councilmember Oddie stated that he supports combining all as long
as E is standalone.
Vice Mayor Knox White expressed support for the proposal.
Councilmember Vella stated all should be separate if not combined.
Councilmember Oddie expressed support for having two initiatives; stated the items are
cleanup.
Vice Mayor Knox White stated A, B and D are all cleanup language; E should not be
connected with anything else and should be standalone.
Councilmember Daysog expressed support.
Councilmember Vella expressed support.
Councilmember Daysog made a substitute motion to move approval of items A, B and D
being combined and E being separate.
Vice Mayor Knox White seconded the motion, which carried by the following roll call
vote: Councilmembers Daysog: Aye; Knox White: Aye; Oddie: Aye; Vella: Aye; and
Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye. Ayes: 5.
(20-380) Resolution No. 15658, ""Approving a City Council Handbook and Code of
Conduct."" Adopted.
The City Manager gave a brief presentation.
Councilmember Oddie stated the City Clerk has traditionally been the Parliamentarian.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
14
June 2, 2020",CityCouncil/2020-06-02.pdf
CityCouncil,2020-06-16,27,"Councilmember Daysog expressed support for having further conversations related to
the way special meetings are processed and conducted and for receiving input from the
OGC.
Councilmember Vella expressed support for notifying as many people across platforms
with as much notice possible regarding special meetings; stated media noticing is
defined specifically; due to COVID, meetings have been noticed in a different way.
Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether there will be different noticing standards for
special and regular Council meetings.
Councilmember Vella responded in the negative; stated both regular and special
meeting noticing could be the same.
Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated this is the new normal; Council must ensure the rules which
govern Council are kept up to date with changing times.
Councilmember Vella moved approval of incorporating Council comments and for staff
to bring the matter to the OGC for input, keeping in mind Council comments and
direction.
Councilmember Oddie seconded the motion.
Under discussion, Vice Mayor Knox White inquired whether the item includes Charter
language or whether the item is being presented in a broader form.
Councilmember Vella responded the matter is being presented in a broader form, while
incorporating Council comments; noted that the matter should return to Council for
discussion and action.
On the call for the question, the motion carried by the following roll call vote:
Councilmembers Daysog: Aye; Knox White: Aye; Oddie: Aye; Vella: Aye; and Mayor
Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye. Ayes: 5.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft adjourned the meeting at 7:20
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
June 16, 2020
2",CityCouncil/2020-06-16.pdf
CityCouncil,2020-07-21,27,"Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft expressed support for extra time spent to have an application
process; stated many people might be interested; it is an important opportunity to be
inclusive.
The Recreation and Parks Director stated anyone interested in serving on the
committee may email: arpd@alamedaca.gov.
Councilmember Vella inquired whether Vice Mayor Knox White would like an
amendment made to the motion that there be additional direction added for staff to look
at ways to use the space of the signage to allow for artistic opportunities.
Vice Mayor Knox White responded that he welcomes the addition; noted that he offered
the statement as feedback; expressed support for the language being added to the
motion, should there be support.
Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated there is no funding being allocated to do so.
Councilmember Vella stated there is a Public Art in City Hall program; noted staff can
look into opportunities for different uses of the space; amended the motion to include
direction to staff to look at ways to use the park signage space.
Councilmember Daysog seconded the amended motion.
The Recreation and Parks Director stated the sign will be removed as soon as possible;
noted the sign is made of solid concrete.
On the call for the question, the motion carried by the following roll call vote:
Councilmembers Daysog: Aye; Knox White: Aye; Oddie: Aye; Vella: Aye; and Mayor
Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye. Ayes: 5.
***
Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft recessed the meeting at 9:50 p.m. and reconvened the meeting at
10:06 p.m.
***
(20-540) Recommendation to Authorize the City Manager, or Designee, to Execute a
One Year License with Greenway Golf Associates, Inc. for the ""Grandview Pavilion""
Located at 300 Island Drive, including an Option to Extend the Term of the License for
One Additional Year.
The City Manager gave a brief presentation.
Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether there should be a clause requiring Greenway to
comply with any applicable COVID-19 restrictions when holding events at the City-
owned property with consequences for failure to comply.
Special Meeting
Alameda City Council
5
July 21, 2020",CityCouncil/2020-07-21.pdf
CityCouncil,2021-01-19,27,"challenges filed against the City relating to the City's rezoning of a parcel west of McKay
Avenue to facilitate the development of a wellness center for unhoused persons and
seniors; the City previously prevailed at the trial court and the plaintiffs had appealed
the trial court decision to the court of appeal; the parties have reached a resolution
where by the plaintiffs would dismiss this litigation in exchange for the City not seeking
further fees and costs against the plaintiffs; the Council has authorized the City Attorney
to resolve this litigation and execute documents, including settlement agreements,
consistent with the above and accept the dismissal on behalf of the City and the City
employees/council members in their official capacity; regarding Real Property, the
matter was withdrawn and not heard; regarding the Amicus, staff provided information
and Council provided direction by the following roll call vote: Councilmembers Daysog:
No; Knox White: Aye; Spencer: No; Vella: Aye; and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye; Ayes: 3;
Noes: 2; the City has been asked to join numerous other local jurisdictions by authoring
and/or signing on to amicus briefs to be filed in the above case to support the Los
Angeles City's existing moratorium ordinance prohibiting evictions for COVID-related
unpaid rent for twelve months after the expiration of the local emergency; this
moratorium ordinance is similar to Alameda's existing law providing similar protections;
the eviction moratorium at issue falls squarely within the City's police power to promote
public health, safety, and welfare during a pandemic; the moratorium has done so by
enabling residents to shelter in place and socially distance; additionally, consistent with
the District Court's holdings, the moratorium does not substantially impart a landlord's
contractual rights with tenants; plaintiff's expansive and incorrect reading of the
Contracts Clause of the U.S. Constitution could unduly erode local control and limit
state and local governmental authority to enact regulatory measures to safeguard the
welfare of their residents during a crisis; the Council has authorized the City Attorney to
author and/or sign amicus briefs in support of Los Angeles City in this matter, in any trial
or appellate court of competent jurisdiction; regarding Nevarez, staff provided
information and Council provided direction by the following roll call vote:
Councilmembers Daysog: Aye; Knox White: Aye; Spencer: Aye; Vella: Aye; and Mayor
Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye; Ayes: 5I this litigation involves claims of ADA violations by the
Plaintiffs at the Corica Park Golf Course. The City has tendered the litigation to
Greenway given their operation and management of the Golf Course. The City Council
has authorized the City Attorney to waive certain conflicts to permit attorneys, including
Gerry Ramiza and Greg Akar, at the law firm of Burke Williams & Sorensen to handle
the defense of this litigation.
Adjournment
There being no further business, Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft adjourned the meeting at 6:24
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
January 19, 2021",CityCouncil/2021-01-19.pdf
CityCouncil,2021-02-02,27,"the City Council Meeting Rules of Order.
Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she and Councilmember Knox White would serve on
the subcommittee.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft adjourned the meeting at 12:00
a.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
22
February 2, 2021",CityCouncil/2021-02-02.pdf
CityCouncil,2021-03-16,27,"they found opportunities to support the training, Council is supportive; a specific number
or requirements are not being approved; he is trying to find a way to honor the fact that
Council all seem to think it is a good project; if the Communications and Legislative
Affairs Manager is planning something and Know Your Rights fits in, she should know
the Council thinks it is a good project.
Councilmember Daysog second the motion.
Under discussion, Councilmember Herrera spencer requested the motion be repeated.
The City Clerk stated the motion is approval of the second recommendations from the
Steering Committee report items: 1) 88 officers, 3) Code of Conduct, and 4) Crime
Analyst position, with the addition of the Know Your Rights.
Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft added the motion includes how many Officers have been trained
in the DA training.
The City Manager inquired whether staff could have the ability to keep the Social Media
active until next Monday to allow for a transition period.
Councilmember Knox White responded while Council already approved that, it does not
bother him.
On the call for the question, the motion which carried by the following roll call vote:
Councilmembers Daysog: Aye; Herrera Spencer: Aye; Knox White: Aye; Vella: Aye; and
Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye. Ayes: 5.
Councilmember Daysog stated that he would like the City Attorney's office involved with
criminalization of poverty regarding prosecutorial matters, not on the enforcement side;
he would like a staff report explaining whether it is logistically possible for the City
Attorney's office to pursue the idea and how it might look; he understands if it is not
possible since State or County Courts deal with the issue.
The City Attorney inquired whether Councilmember Daysog is referring to non-moving
vehicle violations, to which Councilmember Daysog responded that he would prefer to
relate it to things intimately related to poverty, but he leaves it to the City Attorney; non-
moving vehicle violations seem to be related.
The City Attorney stated in an advisory capacity, the City Attorney's office can work with
APD colleagues to address best ways not to have cases brought into the criminal justice
system; similar to the County prosecutorial process; it is ethically problematic for the
Council to give the City Prosecutor specific direction on whether or not to prosecute
cases because Prosecutors represent the people, not the City; in an advisory role, the
City Attorney could work with APD to address perhaps a class of cases that do not need
tickets issued and maybe warnings could be given or some other process.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
27
March 16, 2021",CityCouncil/2021-03-16.pdf
CityCouncil,2021-05-04,27,"(21-312) The City Manager announced updates related to exploring and defining mental
health resources within homeless services, gas leaf blowers, a vaccine clinic May 6th and
the Central Avenue Veterans Wall project.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA
(21-313) Zac Bowling, Alameda, discussed AB 339; stated that he is a fan of the bill; urged
Council adopt the current proposal for AB 339; stated the bill continues the ability for public
comment and civic engagement via internet and telephone remotely; the bill is voluntary for
cities to adopt; having access during COVID-19 has dramatically allowed participation and
engagement for members of the community; discussed AB 1322.
(21-314) Tripti Jain discussed a rental property she owns in Fremont.
COUNCIL REFERRALS
(21-315) Consider Scheduling a Performance Evaluation for the City Manager as Soon as
Possible. (Councilmember Herrera Spencer) Not heard.
(21-316) Consider Addressing the Surplus Lands Act, including Lobbying Efforts and
Assembly Bill 1486. (Councilmember Herrera Spencer) Not heard.
COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS
(21-317) Councilmember Knox White discussed Alameda County (AC) Transit transit talk
and an AC Transit Interagency Liaison Committee (ILC) meetings; stated the transit picture
is less grim for those impacted; AC Transit has a bare bones service solution being rolled
out for the summer; announced a new bus route timed with the new ferry terminal at
Alameda Point; stated there will be a direct connection for the West End that will start at the
East End; discussed AC Transit's budget and new services starting back up over the
coming year.
(21-318) Councilmember Herrera Spencer discussed a meeting from the Airport Noise
Forum; discussed the website: flyquietoak.com; stated people should report being affected
by airplane noise and traffic; the organization is working with the Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA) to get relief.
(21-319) Councilmember Daysog discussed the AC Transit ILC meeting; stated the
Alameda Unified School District will be sending a member to regularly attend the meetings.
(21-320) Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft discussed a meeting webinar preparing for receiving
recovery funding; stated the guidelines from the Treasury Department will come out on May
11th; discussed a Mayor's Town Hall on policing which was student-led by the Youth
Activists of Alameda; announced an upcoming Town Hall on bystander intervention training.
(21-321) Vice Mayor Vella stated the upcoming bystander training focuses on not
responding to the person that is performing hateful acts and instead focuses on the target or
victim; announced a Lead Abatement Board Healthy Homes Department meeting, which will
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
25
May 4, 2021",CityCouncil/2021-05-04.pdf
CityCouncil,2021-06-15,27,"In response to Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft's inquiry regarding San Francisco, Mr. Penn stated
San Francisco law enforcement handles 5150 calls.
Mr. Gilbert stated the Fire Department responds to situation requiring care.
Vice Mayor Vella inquired how Dispatch and calls to the non-emergency line would work
under the Fire Forward model; requested the Fire Department to address how the
model would address Police involvement.
The Interim Fire Chief responded the Fire Forward model is designed to respond
without Police in most instances; stated in a instance where there could be potential for
violence, the Police would be needed; many responses do not require Police; Fire is
already a first responder; the Fire Department has its own Dispatch Center; 911 calls
initially go through the Police Department Dispatch Center; calls for Fire response are
transferred.
Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired who would make the determination about a non-violent,
non-combative, behavioral health emergency for a client that does not need to be
restrained or have a medical complaint.
The Interim Fire Chief responded it is typically decided at the answer point; stated when
a call comes in, the Police Dispatch would decide whether to transfer the call to the Fire
Dispatch Center.
Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the Fire Department would not be involved in the
decision since the Dispatch Center makes the determination, to which the Interim Fire
Chief responded in the affirmative.
Councilmember Herrera Spencer expressed appreciation; stated that she plans to
support the first responders; the Fire Department already has relationships and is in the
community all the time.
Councilmember Herrera Spencer moved approval of supporting Option 1 [Fire
Department Fire Forward Response Pilot].
Vice Mayor Vella stated that she has a question about calls to the non-emergency line
that resulted in two high profile incidents; her frustration is Council has asked to know
how the Dispatch process is going to be addressed; the City can move to Option 1 or 2,
but she is very concerned about how Dispatch decisions will be made to ensure there is
a non-Police response; outside of whatever selection is made, she is looking for
something from the City Manager relative to addressing the overall process for
dispatching.
Councilmember Knox White seconded the motion.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
June 15, 2021
18",CityCouncil/2021-06-15.pdf
CityCouncil,2021-07-06,27,"The City Manager inquired whether the clarification needed is in relation to the Fire
fees.
Councilmember Herrera Spencer responded that she would like clarification on more
than just the Fire fees; stated there are alternatives as to when certain fees are put into
effect; expressed support for clarification provided on the Fire fees.
The Finance Director stated there are no increases to the current Master Fee Schedule
however, there are changes to the Schedules for fiscal year 2021-2022; the first change
are hourly rate increases for City Attorney Office staff and Police; noted Special Events
have been adjusted to reflect personnel costs; the second change is associated with the
Recreation and Parks Department; the third change is the Rent Stabilization Program
Fee study which had been recommended on a tier fee structure; the fourth change is
a
Planning, Building and Transportation Department change to no longer impose a fee for
accessory dwelling units; the fifth change is for a repeal of Alameda Point Development
Fees; and the sixth change are Fire Department fee increase recommendations, both
full increases or half increases; noted Council may decide not to increase Fire fees due
to COVID-19.
The City Manager requested the original fee increase to be highlighted as well as the
half increase; noted fees had been increased prior to his arrival at the City in 2019;
stated the fees are based on a Fee Study and a report of costs for service; the fee
increase had previously been delayed due to COVID-19; the reason for the
recommendation of a half fee increase is due to the fee increase being substantial; a no
fee increase due to COVID-19 would also be understandable.
Councilmember Herrera Spencer requested clarification for the fees.
The Finance Director stated the fees are highlighted on page 34-38 on the fee
schedule; staff can either increase as-is or forego the increase and wait until the next
fiscal year to implement changes.
Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired the impacts of each option.
The Finance Director responded the Fire Department will receive less revenue for
services should Council only approve the half increase; stated the department may
have to reduce expenditures.
The City Manager stated the General Fund currently subsidizes the costs; the proposed
fees will bring the proposed amounts in line with being full recovered; full cost recovery
will take longer should the half increase be approved.
The Finance Director stated the increase is about 9%.
Councilmember Herrera Spencer inquired whether the ambulance is included in the fee
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
4
July 6, 2021",CityCouncil/2021-07-06.pdf
CityCouncil,2021-07-20,27,"Council figure out how to help seniors connect with the community.
Councilmember Knox White moved approval of supporting the City Manager's
recommendation to have staff return with a combination of Options 1 and 2 containing a
housing focus, some revenue loss for flexibility and wireless hotspots with the potential
for broadband support as discussed.
Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the public and mental health are folded in, to
which Councilmember Knox White responded in the affirmative.
Councilmember Daysog seconded the motion, which carried by the following roll call
vote: Councilmembers Daysog: Aye; Herrera Spencer: Aye; Knox White: Aye; Vella:
Aye; and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye. Ayes: 5.
(21-505) Recommendation to Authorize the Chief of Police to Update the Existing
Alameda Police Department Policy Manual to be Current with Existing Best Practices
and Statutory Requirements.
The Police Chief gave a presentation.
(21-506) Councilmember Herrera Spencer moved approval of giving the Police Chief an
additional three minutes.
Councilmember Daysog seconded the motion, carried by the following roll call vote:
Councilmembers Daysog: Aye; Herrera Spencer: Aye; Knox White: Aye; Vella: Aye; and
Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye. Ayes: 5.
The Police Chief completed the presentation.
Councilmember Herrera Spencer moved approval of accepting the Police Chief's
recommendation to update the policies.
Councilmember Knox White seconded the motion.
Under discussion, Councilmember Knox White stated the changes all make sense; the
matter can return to Council on the Consent Calendar in the future.
Councilmember Herrera Spencer stated that she can add the comments made by
Councilmember Knox White as a friendly amendment to her motion.
Councilmember Knox White stated that he is happy to let staff decide when matters can
be placed on the Consent Calendar.
Councilmember Herrera Spencer expressed support for the matter returning on the
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
July 20, 2021
20",CityCouncil/2021-07-20.pdf
CityCouncil,2021-09-07,27,"COVID-19 has shown how important it is for families to have internet access; since
people are not able to participate at meetings in person, wireless hotspots continue to
be an important need; schools have tried to step up; however, not every family has
children attending schools offering assistance and not every family has children; seniors
have especially been left out during COVID-19; expressed concern about the hotel
acquisition; stated the hotel is a revenue generating asset which produces Transient
Occupancy Tax (TOT) for the City and is one of the few hotels in the City; TOT is
important to the City; the hotel is operating and generating revenue for the City; she has
concerns about removing one of the few hotels that produces a higher level of tax
dollars for the City as opposed to looking at other ways of housing those who are
unhoused and in need of transitional housing; taking away tax revenue defeats the
purpose; the City needs income in order to be able to provide services; she is not sure
the bottle parcel is the best use; she would like more information related to the fastest
timeline to provide housing; the AHA housing proposals could very well be the quickest
to get online; the AHA proposal will likely be the most effective use of any dollars and
meet the needs as opposed to the City working alone without the AHA; expressed
support for continuing the Feed Alameda program.
Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she strongly objects to any expenditure to AHA at this
time; she would like more information including how much ARPA money AHA has
received and why AHA would need the City's ARPA funding; there has been reference
to the possibility of AHA completing the North Housing project sooner if the City
provides ARPA funding; however, the North Housing project was conceived without
ARPA funding; she does not know whether the intent is for AHA to get cheaper money
due to zero finance charge from the City; if the funding is needed as supplemental
funds, the funding would become a loan; she strongly agrees with Vice Mayor Vella that
a community housing trust is something many cities have done; the trust allows the City
to purchase properties; the AHA accomplished one transactions recently; however, AHA
can find an apartment building for sale and guarantee a certain number of units will
remain affordable for a certain amount of time; there is no reason the City cannot do the
same; expressed support for the City working with a partner; expressed concern about
eviction protections offered by AHA; outlined AHA eviction cases; stated AHA has not
helped find alternative housing for some; she feels as though there are complexities
associated with AHA; there are enough important matters requiring funding from the first
tranche in Option 1 ; expressed support for not extending funds without safeguards in
place for AHA at this time, for allocating some ARPA funds to Alameda Sun as a
business which has been impacted by COVID-19 and for transitional housing; outlined
the supportive transitional housing program; inquired whether the location for the
program is the bottle parcel or an alternate location.
The Assistant City Manager responded the location could be the bottle parcel; stated
the idea is to put up temporary housing which can be put up quickly for fast services;
the site can move around; the bottle parcel is ideal as a location.
Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft outlined a visit to a transitional housing development in the City of
Mountain View; stated the units look like containers, are insulated and have Heating,
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
September 7, 2021
19",CityCouncil/2021-09-07.pdf
CityCouncil,2021-09-21,27,"Under discussion, Councilmember Herrera Spencer expressed support for reaching a
consensus and consistency for the spelling of DePave Park; stated that she would like
to have a discussion around Buildings 25 and 29; she would like to confirm that Council
is not agreeing to demolish either building in approving the grant funding.
Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated Council is approving a resolution to allow the City to apply
for a grant.
The Recreation and Parks Director stated Buildings 25 and 29 will be a major topic of
discussion for the DePave Park Master Plan process, which would be funded by the
grant if awarded.
Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft expressed support for an eventual new name for DePave Park.
On the call for the question, the motion carried by the following roll call vote:
Councilmembers Daysog: Aye; Herrera Spencer: Aye; Knox White: Aye; Vella: Aye; and
Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye. Ayes: 5.
(21-595) Public Hearing to Consider Introduction of Ordinance Amending Alameda
Municipal Code Chapter XXIV Public Health to Add Section 24-14 Prohibition on
Gasoline-Powered Leaf Blowers. Introduced.
The City Planner gave a brief presentation.
Councilmember Herrera Spencer inquired whether the City is still using gasoline
powered leaf blowers.
The City Planner responded in the negative; stated City contractors are not using
gasoline powered leaf blowers.
Councilmember Herrera Spencer stated that she received a complaint about City
contractors using gasoline powered leaf blowers at a park; requested clarification about
the use for City contractors.
The City Manager stated the City is converting from gasoline powered leaf blowers to
electric; contracts are being converted to be consistent with the ordinance.
Councilmember Herrera Spencer stated that she supports the matter; she hopes the
City will finish the conversion of contractors; the City should be the leader in such
matters.
Vice Mayor Vella moved introduction of the ordinance.
Councilmember Daysog seconded the motion.
Under discussion, Councilmember Knox White stated that he plans to support the
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
September 21, 2021
23",CityCouncil/2021-09-21.pdf
CityCouncil,2021-10-19,27,"Councilmember Herrera Spencer stated the resolution begins by stating for Council to authorize
issuance of one or more series of pension obligation bonds; the resolution contradicts the
current discussion; the resolution has more legal significance then being suggested.
Councilmember Knox White requested clarification be provided by the City Attorney.
The City Attorney stated Section 1 of the resolution exists, so that staff can validate and bring a
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
October 19, 2021
26",CityCouncil/2021-10-19.pdf
CityCouncil,2021-11-16,27,"(21-754) Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated a motion is needed to hear additional items past 11:00
p.m.
Councilmember Knox White stated November has a fifth Tuesday for the month; noted the
December 7th Council meeting agenda will be full; there is no way for Council to get through the
work; expressed support for calling a special meeting to hear the rest of the agenda.
Councilmember Knox White moved approval of hearing the parking management program
[paragraph no 21- 1 and any of the remaining Council Referrals, while ending the meeting at
midnight and continuing the remaining Regular Agenda items to a special meeting.
Councilmember Daysog seconded the motion.
Under discussion, Councilmember Daysog stated the Housing Element [paragraph no 21-
1
and General Plan [paragraph no 21-
should be heard at a special meeting.
Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft expressed concern about meeting near the Thanksgiving holiday.
Councilmember Herrera Spencer stated that she will not support the motion; expressed support
for starting the Housing Element discussion.
Vice Mayor Vella expressed support for a special meeting.
Councilmember Knox White withdrew his motion.
Councilmember Knox White moved approval of finishing the current matter, directing staff to find
a time that works for the most Councilmembers possible between now and December 7th to hold
a special meeting.
The City Clerk stated the date must be specified and the matters must be continued to the date
specific due to noticing requirements.
Councilmember Knox White stated the 11:00 p.m. vote is for hearing new matters after 11:00
p.m.; inquired whether the vote to continue items can occur after 11:00 p.m., to which the City
Clerk responded in the affirmative.
Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether consideration can be given to the proposal from
Councilmember Herrera Spencer related to starting the Housing Element discussion.
Councilmember Knox White responded that he does not see value in starting the discussion just
to stop at a random time and having public comment coming in sporadically.
Councilmember Herrera Spencer moved approval of continuing the meeting until midnight
hearing the agenda as-presented.
Vice Mayor Vella stated that she would prefer not to start the Housing Element.
Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the Housing Element can be continued to the Continued
Item section of the agenda on the next Council agenda, to which Vice Mayor Vella responded in
the affirmative.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
November 16, 2021
16",CityCouncil/2021-11-16.pdf
CityCouncil,2022-01-04,27,"MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL JOINT MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND
SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE
COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION (SACIC)
TUESDAY- - -JANUARY 4, 2022--6:59 P.M.
Mayor/Chair Ezzy Ashcraft convened the meeting at 7:01 p.m. Councilmember/Commissioner
Daysog led the Pledge of Allegiance.
ROLL CALL -
Present:
Councilmembers/Commissioners Daysog, Knox White,
Spencer and Mayor/Chair Ezzy Ashcraft - 4. [Note: The
meeting was held via Zoom.]
Absent:
Vice Mayor/Commissioner Vella - 1.
CONSENT CALENDAR
The City Clerk announced anyone wishing to comment on the Public Hearing [paragraph no.
*22-005 CC/22-02 SACIC] could comment at this time. There were no speakers.
Councilmember/Commissioner Knox White moved approval of the Consent Calendar.
Councilmember/Commissioner Daysog seconded the motion, which carried by the following roll
call vote: Councilmembers/Commissioners Daysog: Aye; Knox White: Aye; Spencer: Aye; and
Mayor/Chair Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye. Ayes: 4. [Absent: Vice Mayor/Commissioner Vella - 1.] [Items
so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk preceding the paragraph number.]
(*22-004 CC/22-01 SACIC) Minutes of the Special Joint City Council and SACIC Meetings Held
on November 16, 2021 and December 7, 2021. Approved.
(*22-005 CC/22-02 SACIC) Public Hearing to Consider City of Alameda Resolution No.
15855/SACIC Resolution No. 22-14 ""Approving the Development List of Affordable Housing
Projects and Funding Request for Such Projects as Requested by the Alameda Unified School
District."" Adopted; and
(*22-005A CC/22-02A SACIC) Recommendation to Authorize the City Manager to Submit the
Recognized Obligation Payment Schedule (ROPS) and Administrative Budget for the Period
from July 1, 2022 to June 30, 2023 to the Countywide Oversight Board. Accepted.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, Mayor/Chair Ezzy Ashcraft adjourned the meeting at 7:07 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Lara Weisiger, City Clerk
Secretary, SACIC
The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Sunshine Ordinance.
Special Joint Meeting
Alameda City Council and Successor Agency
to the Community Improvement Commission
1
January 4, 2022",CityCouncil/2022-01-04.pdf
CityCouncil,2022-02-01,27,"workshop during a regular Council meeting; it is untrue that Council must discuss
priorities at a workshop retreat; Council can start by reviewing prior Council priorities
and set the matter as a regular agenda item; all Councilmembers are available the first
and third Tuesday of the month.
Vice Mayor Vella stated that Council discusses priorities at workshops in order to allow
for a focus and deliberation on only the priorities; workshops have previously lasted
several hours; expressed concern about having full agendas; stated taking away from
the business of the City or ensuring the discussion does not occur at 11:00 p.m. is the
reason to have a separate workshop; she will not be supporting the motion.
Councilmember Daysog stated that he found the referral reasonable; the idea of having
a workshop during a Council meeting starting at 5:00 p.m. is reasonable; Council has
held workshops in areas which were not accessible or generally open to the public.
Councilmember Herrera Spencer requested the motion be re-stated.
The City Clerk stated the motion is to approve the referral to have the priority setting
workshop held at a regular City Council meeting.
On the call for the question, the motion failed by the following roll call vote:
Councilmembers Daysog: Aye; Herrera Spencer: Aye; Knox White: No; Vella: No; and
Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft: No. Ayes: 3. Noes: 2.
(22-093) Consider Having the City Council Address the Zoning of the Harbor Bay Club.
(Councilmember Herrera Spencer) Not heard.
(22-094) Consider Having the City Council Review Recreation and Parks Department
Community Events. (Councilmember Herrera Spencer) Not heard.
COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS
(22-095) Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft discussed the Vaccine Task Force's booster clinic at
Mastic Senior Center.
(22-096) Councilmember Daysog discussed the City Council/School Board
Subcommittee meeting; stated the School District will be placing a bond measure on the
June ballot.
(22-097) Councilmember Knox White discussed the AC Transit Interagency Liaison
Committee meeting; stated AC Transit Line 78 to the Seaplane Lagoon for the 1 year
pilot program is coming to the end; the pilot program cannot be extended; public
hearings will be held.
Councilmember Daysog noted AC Transit is also working with the City on a bus pass for
low income senior citizens and those with disabilities.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
February 1, 2022
27",CityCouncil/2022-02-01.pdf
CityCouncil,2022-02-15,27,"The Recreation and Parks Director responded that she has enough information to proceed;
stated staff will continue to meet with the ASPA Board of Directors.
Councilmember Herrera Spencer stated it is critical that the City work with ASPA and have
ASPA be the leader in the matter.
(22-120) Public Hearing to Consider Introduction of an Ordinance Amending Alameda Municipal
Code Chapter XXX to Implement Senate Bill 9 Regarding Two-Unit Housing Developments and
Urban Lot Splits in Single-Family Residential Zones. Continued to March 1, 2022.
CITY MANAGER COMMUNICATIONS
Not heard.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA
Not heard.
COUNCIL REFERRALS
(22-121) Consider Having the City Council Address the Zoning of the Harbor Bay Club.
(Councilmember Herrera Spencer) Not heard.
(22-122) Consider Having the City Council Review Recreation and Parks Department
Community Events. (Councilmember Herrera Spencer) Not heard.
(22-123) Consider Directing Staff to Bring the Rent Program ""In-House"" to the City Attorney's
Office. (Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft and Vice Mayor Vella) Not heard.
COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS
Not heard.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft adjourned the meeting at 12:44 a.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
February 15, 2022
25",CityCouncil/2022-02-15.pdf
CityCouncil,2022-05-03,27,"Under discussion, the City Attorney stated the motion to move the matter must be time-
specific.
The City Clerk stated the matter can be continued to 5:59 p.m. on May 10th.
Councilmember Knox White and Vice Mayor Vella accepted the amendment to the
motion.
Councilmember Herrera Spencer stated that she will not support the motion; the matter
should return on a Regular Council Agenda.
On the call for the question, the motion carried by the following roll call vote:
Councilmembers Daysog: No; Herrera Spencer: No; Knox White: Aye; Vella: Aye; and
Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye. Ayes: 3. Noes: 2.
Stated preserve the historic look and feel of Webster Street is important; increasing the
units in the area will dramatically change the neighborhood look and feel; discussed an
alternate WABA proposal; urged a more refined proposal be submitted: Lori Bilella,
Alameda.
Stated AAPS recommends the City remove the proposed blanket upzoning of R-2
through R-6 from the draft HE; the proposed upzoning is unnecessary and overkill; the
draft HE includes a 20% buffer; discussed ADUs; stated targeted upzoning can happen
in the future: Birgitt Evans, AAPS.
Stated that he is paying attention to neighboring cities since RHNA is regional; it is
important to show leadership across the East Bay; noted Berkeley is considering a 30%
buffer to ensure its goal is met; the defense of Article 26 does not go over well; the
region is trying to solve a housing problem; it is essential to meet RHNA numbers: Nico
Nagle, Oakland.
Stated that she objects to the proposed upzoning of residential neighborhoods
throughout Alameda; upzoning would eliminate Article 26 that was supported by a large
majority of voters; Council should support the voters and not indirectly void Article 26 in
supporting upzoning; expressed concern about the HE buffer and setbacks: Reyla
Graber, Alameda.
Showed a slide; expressed support for staff exploring alternate height strategies;
discussed density bonuses and ADUs; expressed concern about the proposed density
of north Park Street: Christopher Buckley, AAPS.
Stated adding more units might be a less expensive option versus building from the
ground up; questioned why the draft HE removed adding more units: Karen Miller,
Alameda.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
May 3, 2022
23",CityCouncil/2022-05-03.pdf
CommissiononPersonswithDisabilities,2017-04-12,27,"ITEM 2-B
COMMISSION ON DISABILITY ISSUES
MEETING MINUTES OF
Wednesday, April 12, 2017 6:30 p.m.
going to do it whether we do or not, I'm sure. But it just sounds like it would be better if it came from
us.
Beth Kenny: It does come from us.
Arnold Brillinger: Okay.
Beth Kenny: It does and Jody was interested in doing it, and so I made the decision to have her go
ahead and accept it on behalf, as a former commissioner of the Commission on Disability.
Arnold Brillinger: Okay. No problem.
Kerry Parker: That raises a great point. I do know that Tony was interested last year in having a
proclamation for White Cane Day.
Beth Kenny: Yes. White Cane Month which is also October.
Kerry Parker: Or month, which is also October, but we could include that in a proclamation
language. That gets in front of me every year, ""Is this what you want to say?"" And I looked at the
proclamation for Autism Awareness Month, as well. So if anyone wanted to take up the cause of If
there is any proclamations we would like in council, that's something that needs to be written,
scheduled, approved. Submit something to me, and I can look at what that schedule would look like.
They're not going to want a whole waterfall of proclamations, but if we spaced them out thoughtfully
we could certainly do that.
Beth Kenny: Yes, and also in October, we do have a proclamation that the city does annually for
Disability Employment Awareness Month which we can share the language with that with the
commission. Maybe we can send that out to everybody? Does anyone else have any announcements
they'd like to make?
Arnold Brillinger: Well, I'm not necessarily anyone else, but [chuckle] I just wanted to say, that I
think that Beth suggested to the Transportation group in Mastick, that I be on the committee that is
looking at the new contracts for the next four years for which provider to use. So, we've got our work
set out for us. We've got six different proposals from companies. I just want to say that Victoria
Williams who was here at our last meeting is working on the shuttle which is the Alameda Loop.
That's their new name that they've decided on. I've even got posters on the sides on my wheelchair
and stuff. ""Ride the Free Alameda Shuttle"" or ""Ride the Free Loop"" and things like that. People come
up and they say, ""What is that?' because they think I'm giving free rides on my wheelchair.
[chuckle]
Arnold Brillinger: I said, no. It's this bus that comes around here on Tuesdays, Wednesdays and
Thursdays, that no one really seems to see because it just blends in with everything else. At the last
meeting, we suggested that they do a like a bus wrap. Getting the word, ""free"" on it. Making it colorful
and so it stands out. Whatever. Myself, I've just taken it around a couple times. I went on the loop
that goes out to Alameda Landing and that area. The Westside, I believe. And like I reported to
05/24/17
Page 27 of 29",CommissiononPersonswithDisabilities/2017-04-12.pdf
CommissiononPersonswithDisabilities,2018-05-09,27,"COMMISSION ON DISABILITY
MEETING MUTES OF
Wednesday May 9, 2018 6:30 p.m.
However, I believe they're doing something on the seaplane new ferry terminal this Monday, so
hopefully I'll attend that. And then, I just want to make one comment about the event that We Are
Alameda at the Faction brewing, they had someone from Alameda Hospital who announced that we
just got, as of May 1st, Anthem Insurance in network there, which is huge, so I was excited to hear
that.
Beth Kenny: Commissioner Hall?
Lisa Hall: Ongoing issues with the housing authority. Unfortunately, no cause evictions are still
happening. And a senior disabled lady was in the family getting evicted, and the woman had a heart
attack and died. And you didn't really hear anything about that in the newspaper or anything else,
which is just a sad fact of what we're going through. Again, disabled and senior people are our most
vulnerable, and it's a crisis in our city. Many of the churches are trying to get together to set up a
warming center, which would help the homeless people at night, but also perhaps other people that
may end up needing it. It has a great model from the Midway Shelter, same people that run Midway
Shelter, and they have a warming center in San Leandro, and hopefully with a lot of support that
we've already got in Alameda, it looks like it's going to come together. Hopefully, we're going to
end up having a warming center for these people to go at nighttime. Hopefully that will happen.
Beth Kenny: Great, thank you. Commissioner Aghapekian?
Anto Aghapekian: And last thing is, it's been about half a year now, the Mastick Senior Center set
up a exercise courtyard, exercise equipment that anybody can use, and it's become very popular,
extremely popular, for who have issues moving their bodies. They do exercise, and it's a delight to
see. I help out with making the bocce ball court and the golf putting court accessible. They didn't
have any handrail over the curb. I worked with them on that and all credit should be given to the
Rec and Parks Administration. They're very conscientious assisting. And that's all I have to report. I
haven't been to the planning board meetings. I've been following them, but I haven't been
personally. The planning board, they start around 7:00, I think, and they keep going on and on and
on and on, and for topics that are absolutely of no interest to this commission. And so I try to follow
up on the minutes. And I have never been to a rec and park meeting. I know the guy there by the
name of Ron Limoges.
Jennifer Roloff: He might be the chair.
Anto Aghapekian: He's a friend of mine, we see each other very often and we do talk. But we're
friends, I haven't spoken with him about business, but if there is anything that I can do, let me know.
I'm more than happy, more than happy to help.
Jennifer Roloff: And also, as far as the city goes, Mastick rolls into Parks and Rec, so you can talk
to him directly about all of the Mastick stuff.
Anto Aghapekian: And I have a met Amy Wooldridge. She's the director. And I have a good
meeting. Anytime I can be of help. I'm dying to see that place.
Susan Deutsch: I brought my husband there after I saw it. I just had to visit the playground. He was
05/30/18
Page 27 of 32",CommissiononPersonswithDisabilities/2018-05-09.pdf
CommissiononPersonswithDisabilities,2018-07-11,27,"COMMISSION ON DISABILITY
MEETING MINUTES
Wednesday July 11, 2018 6:30 p.m.
number is 510-882-3404 and they're meeting again on Tuesday night. And I just wanted to share
that. Thank you.
Chair Beth Kenny: Great. Thank you, Commissioner Linton. So I think I misspoke a little bit
about the Kiwanis Club. What it is, is they're starting a service club within the Kiwanis Club that is
they're interested in getting people with disabilities to come join Kiwanis. So I think we should be
in touch with them and reaching out. And I would love to be a part of that. It's called the Aktion
Club and I encourage anyone who's interested to please check it out.
Anto Aghapekian: I know the person.
Chair Beth Kenny: That sounds great. So on the housing stuff that you were discussing, last night
at City Council, they approved a master plan for the Marina Shores Project, which is, I believe, part
of the Clement Street Corridor that you're talking about and the project would include 760 new
residential developments. So by my math, that's over 220 universally designed units that should be
part of this project, and that's 760 visitable units that will be part of this project, so I was pretty
excited about that.
Chair Beth Kenny: But the other thing that came up at City Council last night was, they were
discussing the rent control ordinance or ballot measure, rather. The current ordinance is going on
the ballot, and I just wanted to let you all know, because what the ballot measure basically does is
put the current ordinance in the City Charter and by putting that ordinance in the City Charter, it
means that no changes can be made to that ordinance, without a public vote. So, if we decide, ""Oh,
we really want to push to protect disabled people from no cause evictions,"" or ask for extra
relocation costs for people who are disabled, or extra relocation time.
Chair Beth Kenny: That would require, if this ballot measure passes, it would require a citywide
vote. So it would have to go on the ballot. And honestly, for very small things, if they wanted to
even change punctuation, it's my understanding that it would then have to go on a City ballot. And it
made me think we should be thinking about what our disabled population faces in terms of rent,
issues in rent stability, and certainly relocation if they have to move. I think there are some good
issues we can be thinking and making some recommendations to the City Council regarding that.
And I'd like it to be on our radar, and perhaps we can get an agenda speaker at some point to talk
about that.
Chair Beth Kenny: The November ballot has a ballot measure that is asking about, ""Should we put
the current rent control ordinance into the City Charter?"" Well, I don't think that we can address
really, the ballot measure. I wanted to let you guys know what that is, but it also sparked in me that
we should just kind of proceed with, whether the ballot measure goes through or not, it might be
something we should be looking at, protecting the disabled population who are renters in Alameda.
And what sort of recommendations, if we need to make recommendations, what kind of
recommendations we can make. Those are my announcements, and I think we'll go on to staff
communication.
6. STAFF COMMUNICATIONS
09/12/18
Page 27 of 29",CommissiononPersonswithDisabilities/2018-07-11.pdf
CommissiononPersonswithDisabilities,2018-11-28,27,"ITEM 2-A
COMMISSION ON DISABILITY
MEETING MINUTES
Wednesday, November 28, 2018, 6:30 PM
Acting Chair Jenn Barrett: You can report it to me.And then I'll spread the word.
Jennifer Roloff: Okay, thank you. That's all I have for today.
Acting Chair Jenn Barrett: Thank you so much. Commissioner Deutsch.
Susan Deutsch: So I went to the park and rec mission meeting, and I presented about inclusive
playgrounds. I thought they were very receptive. I heard that they liked my presentation, just from
somebody, randomly, who heard about it. So I think it really went well. They're, right now, in the
process of re-doing Littlejohn Park, and that park is going to have some inclusive aspects to it, but
it's not going to be totally inclusive; it's a small park. And I think they're going to be talking more as
they re-do other parks and build other parks. They're going to be talking more about how they can
make the playgrounds more inclusive from the conversations. So I could send out a copy of what
their plans are, for Littlejohn Park, but you really can't tell from the picture, really. But if everyone
wants that, I can send it to Laurie and she can send it out or however.
Acting Chair Jenn Barrett: Great. Are their plans pretty solidified at this point?
Susan Deutsch: For Littlejohn, yeah, yeah, that's S solidified, so we can't make changes for that.
Acting Chair Jenn Barrett: So maybe future parks we can try to get in early.
Susan Duetsch: Yeah, they're really open to it for future
Acting Chair Jenn Barrett: Oh, that's awesome, great.
Anto Aghapekian: I was speaking with one of the commissioners about your presentations, and he
said that he was very impressed as well as the other members of the commission, and they learned a
lot from your presentation, not only they would invest, but they're going to use some of the items
with the presentation in their future plans.
Susan Deutsch: Thank you. I had that impression from them.
Acting Chair Jenn Barrett: So Commissioner Morrison, just so you're aware that each year during
our retreat, we have specific organizations or Commissions within the city that we all attend. And so
during our retreat, we'll re-categorize who would like to be a representative for our commission and
attend meetings or events, etcetera, so that the city knows that we're available as a resource and that
we're able to get information from them and provide information to them, so it works out well.
Leslie Morrison: Great. Looking forward to participating.
Acting Chair Jenn Barrett: Great. Commissioner Anto.
Anto Aghapekian: I don't have much. The city was very quiet, I guess it was maybe because after
03/13/19
Page 27 of 32",CommissiononPersonswithDisabilities/2018-11-28.pdf
CommissiononPersonswithDisabilities,2019-03-13,27,"ITEM 3-A
COMMISSION ON DISABILITY
MEETING MINUTES
Wednesday, March 13, 2019, 6:30 PM
I'm gathering, is that they moved the entire classroom of probably middle school kids in special
education. But transitions are really difficult. And they're difficult for anyone, especially for
children and children that have disabilities. It can be very difficult. As well as considering how to
ready the new community to receive a classroom now of special education students. And did the
teachers follow?
Jenn Barrett: And maybe there's a statement that we can bring to the school board.
Jennifer Roloff: And I think what we talked about earlier. Where we can interject, where the city
can play, will also be part of the greater conversation, not necessarily this issue.
Jenn Barrett: Right. And because you've been nominated by our commission to speak on behalf of
our commission at the school board, there might be an ability for us to write a statement and have
that said by you at one of their meetings.
Jennifer Roloff: Okay, if you circulate something.
Leslie Morrison: Yes.
Jennifer Roloff: I can send some feedback and maybe just say enough.
Jenn Barrett: I think it's something that we should also bring up with the City Council as well.
Jennifer Roloff: Yes.
Jenn Barrett: I think it's very important.
Leslie Morrison: This article describes the children as some of them are non-verbal, some of them,
it sounds like they have moderate to severe cognitive impairments. So significant sensory issues, all
of which, those kinds of transitions would be something you'd want to plan more carefully.
Jenn Barrett: What I'm wondering, are they getting special transportation now to this different
location?
Leslie Morrison: I suspect that their transportation followed, so they were transporting them to
Lincoln and now they're transporting them to Wood. But the transition itself is
Jenn Barrett: Is hard.
Leslie Morrison: Hard.
Jenn Barrett: Definitely. Okay, thank you so much for bringing that to our attention. Really
important. So I will also bring that up with Laurie and see that we can do something prior to our
next meeting, because our next meeting is so far away.
03/13/19
Page 27 of 28",CommissiononPersonswithDisabilities/2019-03-13.pdf
GolfCommission,2018-02-15,27,"Corica Golf
2018 PREVIEW
Annual Plan
South Course Grand Opening - Summer 2018
Plans are in development to support the opening all 18-holes of South
course in May/June time frame. This includes finalizing rates, preview
events, staffing plans, press releases, course amenity package, marketing
and promotional campaigns.
Alameda Resident South Course Rates: A range of golf rates have been
reviewed with Golf Commission and received unanimous support. South
Course planned resident rates will be submitted for City approval in Feb.
South Course Golf Carts:
In conjunction with opening of the south course, a new golf fleet will be put
in place. The new fleet will be a premium color golf cart with fold down
windshields, sand bottles, GPS and onboard USB charging station.
Best New Course/Top 100 Course Submissions: Coria Park South Course
is being reviewed for Best New Course and Top Public Courses in America.
23",GolfCommission/2018-02-15.pdf
OpenGovernmentCommission,2015-02-02,27,"Commissioner Dieter stated the City Manager might make a statement that does not
necessarily represent the City.
Vice Chair Foreman added or the Mayor or a Councilmember or a member of the
Planning Board; stated they have a right to state their opinion, but questioned not to be
disciplined or reprimanded for it; someone can state any opinion on anything and it can
be as out in left field and prejudicial to the City, but if you state it as an individual, not as
a member of the body, it is not disciplined; there is case law about statements that can
be made and not be disciplined under freedom of speech; however, the language is
kind of carte blanche.
The Assistant City Attorney stated similar to the previous section, the issue is very
difficult and contentious; the courts bound around about whether or not a person is
bringing forth a matter that is of public concern, which one has the right to do,
notwithstanding the fact that the person is an employee, versus bringing forth something
that is really just complaining about one's job, which the person does not have the right
to do in a public forum; he is just trying to clarify the existing language; that is the only
purpose of making the amendments; he attempted to work with what was initially
adopted rather than trying to write a very nuanced dissertation about when an employee
can and cannot be disciplined.
Vice Chair Foreman stated his thoughts would be to not have the Section at all; leave it
to the courts to determine in individual situations because the cases are all over the
place.
The City Clerk stated the intent of the Sunshine Task Force adding the section was so
that employees or board and commission members would not feel like if they had an
opinion on a project as an individual, they could not come to a Council meeting [to
express the opinion]; people would be getting up as an individual and allowed to still
have an opinion on a specific project.
Vice Chair Foreman stated there is no such thing as the Mayor getting up in public and
making a statement about a City matter, but saying she is not doing it as Mayor.
The City Clerk noted the language used to say City board, commission or committee,
which could be changed back; specifying public employees, boards, commissions or
committees excluded the Council in the past; perhaps staff can provide that distinction;
stated just because a person on a City board does not want to feel like they are losing
their right to come, as an individual, and comment, which is the intent.
The Assistant City Attorney stated the idea is that it would be applicable to public
employees and policy bodies, other than the elected officials.
Vice Chair Foreman stated the language he does not like is: ""shall not be disciplined
for;"" ""nothing in this section shall be construed to provide rights to public employees or
policy board members beyond those recognized by law or agreement or create a new
Meeting of the
Open Government Commission
February 2, 2015
27",OpenGovernmentCommission/2015-02-02.pdf
RecreationandParkCommission,2019-09-12,27,"A sampling of the types of community uses this project could make available.
Events BenefitsAnnual Neptune Beach Summer Festival
Educational Benefits
Annual Halloween Haunted House
Weekly Historic Tours
Annual December Tree Lighting Event (participation / support)
Ongoing Educational Programming (Youth and Adult)
Annual December Arts & Craft Gift Show
Youth Summer Camps
Chinese New Year Festivities
Youth After-school Programs
Summer Outdoor Theater Events
Art Therapy and Special Ed Programs
Non-Paid City Events (12 per year included, others on request)
Alameda High School Community Access Television
36 Discount Community Events (others on request when available)
School Dances and Proms
Economic Benefits
School Graduation Ceremonies
Bat and Bar Mitzvahs, Confirmations, and other ceremonies
Networking
Quinceañeras
Skills, Knowledge, and Business Development
Weddings and Birthdays
Entrepreneurial Coaching and Courses
Corporate Events and Year-end Parties
Professional Internships
Public Town Halls and Meetings
Career Pathway Development
Open Mic Nights
Idea and Start Up Incubation
Karaoke Nights
Kickstarter Launchpad
Live Music Events
Youtube Content Producer Channel Recording Suites
Live Theatrical Productions
Audio and Video Recording Suites
Immersive Theater Experiences
Dress-up Dinner Theater Shows
Drive-in Shakespeare
And More
Please help us grow this list",RecreationandParkCommission/2019-09-12.pdf
RecreationandParkCommission,2021-03-11,27,"Full Name
Zip code
Email
Signature
Rhee Chen
9460
BALARYYASIGAL
Rio Lao
95127
Shak@hotmail.com
the
8499
keybya@yahoo.com M
94607
Philip Bernasek
94501
pbernaseke@gmail.com
Puly Benned
Jennifer Lau
94608
jenlan4@gmail.com
Lift
Cora Luben
8mail.
94501
Coraluber 6220
-can
manny Abellon
94606
EAbellon 12010 yoh
12
Jenna
94612
jensta27@gmail.com
IN
KEENIN
94606
namer
Siena Ramirez
94612
Sans papey
MichaelLy
94612
Molelfr
Jhoses GARCIA
94580
Jisi
Brian Middles
94612
Moneslder,
middle55egmail.com
Brandon
94608
del
manday
2465$
can
Tran
94519
th
Jean Lee
94501
Jean
Bhotnailicational
MICHAL SKB
94158
Ch
klood
xixixal @ genmilson
John Santas
94501
jsanto915@gmail
can
go
P",RecreationandParkCommission/2021-03-11.pdf