{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-01-04", "page": 1, "text": "MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING\nTUESDAY - -JANUARY 4, 2005 - -7:30 P.M.\nMayor Johnson convened the Regular Meeting at 7:53 p.m.\nROLL CALL -\nPresent :\nCouncilmembers Daysog, deHaan, Gilmore,\nMatarrese and Mayor Johnson - 5.\nAbsent :\nNone.\nAGENDA CHANGES\nNone.\nPROCLAMATIONS, SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY AND ANNOUNCEMENTS\n( 05-003 - ) Presentation on the basic requirements for an Indian\nTribe to operate a Casino in California.\nThe Assistant City Attorney provided a brief report on the basic\nrequirements to conduct tribal gaming.\nMayor Johnson stated that the purpose of the presentation was to\ninform the public on the required process for the Koi Tribe to\nobtain approval for a casino; stated that presentation tapes would\nbe available for public review and that the public should direct\nquestions to the City Attorney's office.\nMichael Scholtes, Bay Isle Pointe Home Owners Association, stated\nthat he opposes the proposed casino.\nMayor Johnson requested staff to place a resolution opposing the\nproposed casino on the next City Council agenda.\nRosemary Cambra, Mowekma Ohlone Tribe of the San Francisco Bay\nArea, submitted a handout and cautioned the Council on taking a\nstance against the proposed casino.\nCouncilmember Daysog stated that Council would need to exert\npressure and fight on behalf of the City.\nCONSENT CALENDAR\nMayor Johnson announced that the recommendation to approve\nAgreement between the Alameda Unified School District and the City\nof Alameda [paragraph no. 05-010], the Resolution Authorizing Open\nMarket Purchase [paragraph no. 05-012], and the Ordinance Amending\nthe Alameda Municipal Code [paragraph no. 05-016] were removed from\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n1\nJanuary 4, 2005", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-01-04.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-01-04", "page": 2, "text": "the Consent Calendar for discussion.\nCouncilmember Matarrese moved approval of the remainder of the\nConsent Calendar.\nCouncilmember Daysog seconded the motion, which carried by\nunanimous voice vote - 5.\n(*05-004) - Minutes of the Special and Regular City Council Meetings\nheld on December 21, 2004. Approved.\n(*05-005) Ratified bills in the amount of $4,037,089.03\n(*05-006) Recommendation to award Contract in the amount of\n$127,102.65 to Stewart & Stevenson for Ferry Vessel Reduction\nGears, No. P.W. 10-04-15. Accepted.\n(*05-007) Recommendation to terminate the Contract with J.W. Riley\n& Son, Inc. for Alameda Point Multi Use Field, No. P.W. 12-02-18\nand authorize project completion. Accepted.\n(*05-008 - ) Recommendation to award Contract in the amount of $45,000\nto Maze and Associates for Financial Modeling Services. Accepted.\n( *05-009) Recommendation to accept Annual Review of the Affordable\nHousing Ordinance. Accepted.\n(05-010) Recommendation to approve Agreement between the Alameda\nUnified School District and the City of Alameda for Use and\nDevelopment of Real Property at the K-8 School and Park site in the\nBayport Residential Development Project.\nMayor Johnson stated that the Agreement facilitates the goal for\nhaving the school and the park built near the Bayport residential\narea.\nCouncilmember deHaan inquired whether there is funding for the\nPreschool and Tiny Tots at the Community Building, to which the\nRecreation and Parks Director responded in the affirmative.\nCouncilmember Matarrese moved approval of the staff recommendation.\nVice Mayor Gilmore seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous\nvoice vote - 5.\n(*05-011) - Recommendation to accept the Bayport Residential Interim\n115Kv overhead power line improvements and authorize recording a\nNotice of Completion. Accepted.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n2\nJanuary 4, 2005", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-01-04.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-01-04", "page": 3, "text": "(05-012) - Resolution No. 13807, , \"Authorizing Open Market Purchase\nfrom Allied Sweepers, Inc., Pursuant to Section 3-15 of the Alameda\nCity Charter, of Green Machine Sidewalk Cleaning Equipment. \"\nAdopted.\nSherri Stieg, West Alameda Business Association (WABA) thanked the\nCouncil for their efforts with the Webster Street project.\nVice Mayor Gilmore stated that she was happy to see the project\nprogressing; she would like to see the trees replaced as soon as\npossible.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated that he is pleased with the progress;\nrequested periodic progress reports on the Streetscape Project.\nMayor Johnson stated schedule updates should continue to be\nprovided.\nCouncilmember Matarrese moved adoption of the resolution.\nVice Mayor Gilmore seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous\nvoice vote - 5.\n( *05-013 - ) Resolution No. 13808, \"Approving Parcel Map No. 8401\n(2340 and 2350 North Loop Road). \" Adopted.\n(*05-014) Resolution No. 13809, \"Reappointing T. David Edwards as\nTrustee of the Alameda County Mosquito Abatement District.\n\"\nAdopted.\n(05-015) Introduction of Ordinance Amending the Alameda Municipal\nCode by Amending Subsection 3-28.9 (Payment In-Lieu of Taxes -\nPILOT) ; Adding a New Subsection 3-28.10 (Return on Investment in\nEnterprise Funds) of Section 3-28 (Payment of Taxes) of Chapter III\n(Finance and Taxation) and Adding a New Subsection 18-4.10\n(Exemptions) of Section 18-4 (Sewer Service Charge) of Article I\n(Sewers) of Chapter XVIII (Sewer and Water) . Introduced.\nCouncilmember Daysog stated that increasing the Return on\nInvestment (ROI) to 3% could cause some impacts; encouraged the\nCouncil not to vote tonight and place the matter as an action item\nfor the next City Council meeting; $782,000 would be received from\nAlameda Power & Telecom (AP&T) by staying at the original proposal\nof 1% ROI; if the $782,000 is relayed back to the rate payer, the\nmonthly bill could be increased from $1.53 to $2.03.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n3\nJanuary 4, 2005", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-01-04.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-01-04", "page": 4, "text": "Councilmember Daysog moved introduction of the ordinance with\ndirection that the matter be brought back to Council if there would\nbe any cause for rate increases.\nCouncilmember deHaan seconded the motion, which carried by\nunanimous voice vote - 5.\n(*05-016 - ) Introduction of Ordinance Amending the Alameda Municipal\nCode by Adding a New Section 3-91 (City of Alameda Community\nBenefit Assessment Procedure Code) to Article VI (City of Alameda\nImprovement Procedure Code) of Chapter III (Finance and Taxation)\n.\nIntroduced.\nREGULAR AGENDA ITEMS\n(05-017) Recommendation to reappoint Mary Rudge as Alameda's Poet\nLaureat.\nThe Recreation and Parks Director outlined the nomination process.\nLisa Piatetsky, Executive Director Alameda City Art Council, stated\nthat she looks forward to having Ms. Rudge continue as Alameda's\nPoet Laureat.\nMary Rudge, Alameda, submitted a handout i outlined poet activities;\nthanked the Council for acknowledging and encouraging poetry.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n4\nJanuary 4, 2005", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-01-04.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-01-04", "page": 5, "text": "Nina Serrano, Alameda County Arts Commission, commended the Council\nfor having a Poet Laureat.\nMosetta Rose London, Alameda, thanked the Council for the\ndedication of the O'Club to Al DeWitt and for placing her poem on a\nplaque at the O 'Club; read a poem that she wrote.\nNanette Bradley Deetz, Alameda Island Poets, read a poem that she\nwrote about Alameda.\nKen Peterson, Vice President, Alameda Island Poets, stated the\nprogram has been a tremendous success for poetry and for the City.\nCouncilmember Daysog moved approval of the staff recommendation.\nCouncilmember Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by\nunanimous voice vote - 5.\n(05-018 ) Public Hearing to consider an Appeal of the Planning\nBoard's denial of Major Design Review DR04-0013 and Variances V04-\n0005, V04-0015, V04-0016, V04-0017 to permit the construction of a\nrear deck and garage addition that was completed without City\npermits. The rear deck measures thirty inches in height from grade\nto the top surface of the deck and is built up to the south (left\nside) and west (rear) property lines. The garage addition is an\nexpansion of the existing single-family dwelling up to the north\n(right side) and west (rear) property lines. The Applicant is\nrequesting four (4) Variances to permit the construction of the\nwork completed without permit including: 1) Variance to Alameda\nMunicipal Code (AMC) Subsection 30-5.7(c) (2) (6) to construct a rear\ndeck that measures thirty inches in height and is constructed up to\nthe south side and rear property line with zero setback, where a\nminimum three foot setback is required for decks measuring twelve\nto thirty inches in height; 2) Variance to AMC Subsection 30-\n5. 7 (e) (1) to construct an unenclosed stair and landing up to the\nsouth side property line with zero setback, where a minimum three\nfoot setback is required for unenclosed stairs and landings 3)\nVariance to AMC Subsection 30-4.4(d) (7) to construct an attached\ngarage addition that extends the main dwelling up to the rear\nproperty line with zero setback where a minimum twenty foot setback\nis required for rear yards 4) Variance to AMC Subsection 30-\n4. 4 (d) (6) to construct an attached garage addition that extends the\nmain dwelling up to the north side property line with zero setback\nwhere a minimum five foot setback is required for side yards. The\nsite is located at 913 Oak Street within an R-4, Neighborhood\nResidential Zoning District. Applicant/Appellant: Fred and Ursula\nHoggenboom and\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n5\nJanuary 4, 2005", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-01-04.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-01-04", "page": 6, "text": "(05-018A) Resolution No. 13810, \"Upholding the Planning Board's\nDenial of Major Design Review DR04-0013 and Variances, V04-005,\nV04-0015, V04-0016, V04-0017 for the Structural Expansion of a\nSingle-Family Residence and Construction of Rear Deck at 913 Oak\nStreet. \" Adopted.\nThe Supervising Planner provided a presentation on the background\nof the project.\nVice Mayor Gilmore inquired whether the garage was a two-story\nstructure connected to the house, to which the Supervising Planner\nresponded in the affirmative.\nVice Mayor Gilmore inquired whether the garage was intended to be\nmore than a one-car garage, to which the Supervising Planner\nresponded that the plans indicate a one-car garage with storage on\nthe left side.\nVice Mayor Gilmore inquired whether there was a proposal for the\nupstairs portion of the garage, to which the Supervising Planner\nresponded the photographs show an attic with a couple of chairs and\ntable.\nVice Mayor Gilmore stated the garage doors are smaller than the\nwidth of the driveway there is a vent pipe that comes down along\nthe side of the house and protrudes into the driveway which would\nmake it very difficult for a car to enter the garage.\nThe Supervising Planner stated many driveways are challenging in\nterms of access.\nVice Mayor Gilmore stated that she is concerned with the intent of\nusing the garage for the proposed use.\nThe Supervising Planner stated that the Parking Ordinance requires\nthat garages be kept free of structures to accommodate a vehicle.\nVice Mayor Gilmore stated that the garage could abut the property\nline if detached from the house; once the garage is attached to the\nhouse, there are side and backyard setback issues.\nThe Supervising Planner stated the Code allows for garages to abut\nboth the side and rear property lines under certain circumstances\nthe front of the garage needs to be 75 feet from the front property\nline and there needs to be a 5-foot separation between the main\nhouse and the garage a detached garage could comply with the 75-\nfoot regulation; she is not sure about compliance with the 5-foot\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n6\nJanuary 4, 2005", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-01-04.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-01-04", "page": 7, "text": "separation because there is a small addition at the rear of the\nhouse which might result in less than a 5-foot separation; a\nsmaller detached garage might require a modest variance.\nMayor Johnson inquired what was the square footage of the garage,\nto which the Supervising Planner responded approximately 300 square\nfeet.\nMayor Johnson inquired what was the square footage of a typical\ngarage, to which the Supervising Planner responded a one-car garage\nwould be approximately 200 square feet.\nMayor Johnson inquired why the garage was larger than a typical\ngarage, to which the Supervising Planner responded that the\nresidents wanted storage.\nMayor Johnson inquired when the original garage was demolished, to\nwhich the Supervising Planner responded possibly a few years ago.\nCouncilmember Matarrese inquired whether there was a deck variance\ninvolved.\nThe Supervising Planner responded that the deck required a variance\nbecause it is 28 inches from the grade decks 12 inches from the\ngrade or less are allowed to encroach into yards decks between 12\nand 30 inches require a -foot separation from the side and rear\nproperty line; there is an opportunity to modify the deck by either\nreducing the height, which would result in a deck that is not level\nwith the house, or by reducing the size of the deck to provide the\nrequired set back.\nMayor Johnson inquired whether there was a height limit on backyard\nfences, to which the Supervising Planner responded the limit is 6\nfeet for a solid fence and 8 feet for a fence with 2 feet of\nlattice on top.\nMayor Johnson inquired whether there was an 11-foot fence in the\nyard, to which the Supervising Planner responded that staff is not\nclear who owns the fences that surround the property.\nMayor Johnson inquired whether the fence issue would be pursued\nregardless of tonight's decision, to which the Supervising Planner\nresponded in the affirmative.\nMayor Johnson opened the Public Hearing.\nProponents (In favor of appeal) : Fred Hogenboom, Alameda, and\nUrsula Hogenboom, Alameda.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n7\nJanuary 4, 2005", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-01-04.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-01-04", "page": 8, "text": "Opponents (Opposed to appeal) : Raymond A. Pacovsky, Sr., Alameda;\nRaymond S. Pacovsky, Jr., Alameda, and Barbara Kerr, Alameda.\nMayor Johnson stated the initiation of construction without permits\nmakes the permitting process difficult; inquired whether the\nAppellant informed the Planning Board that the structure was over\nhis property line.\nThe Appellant responded in the negative; stated that the structure\nis well within the property line; the structure was moved 2 inches\ninward from the original garage.\nVice Mayor Gilmore inquired how tall the spa was from the floor of\nthe deck to the top of the spa, to which the Appellant responded\nthree and a half feet at the most.\nVice Mayor Gilmore stated that the Planning staff recommended\ndropping the deck approximately 12 inches; inquired whether the 12\ninches would equate to two steps.\nThe Appellant stated that he would need to put in three steps to\nlower the deck 12 inches.\nVice Mayor Gilmore inquired whether accommodating his wife was part\nof the reason for having the deck the same level as the house.\nThe Appellant responded that his wife has had two back surgeries\nand three hip replacements; stairs are difficult for her.\nVice Mayor Gilmore stated there is a two-foot hop to get into the\nspa which appears to be more difficult to navigate than the stairs\nout of the house.\nMayor Johnson stated that one of the reasons for deck height limits\nis because high decks and spas are an intrusion into neighbors'\nbackyards inquired how the footprint of the original garage was\nestablished.\nThe Supervising Planner responded that the Appellant submitted\nplans in 1991 for foundation work at the front of the house which\nindicate that there is a separation between the back of the house;\nthe then existing garage did not seem to be as close as the current\nplans show.\nMayor Johnson inquired whether the Appellant put siding on the\nneighbors' structures, to which the Appellant responded that he put\nsheet metal up to prevent rotting.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n8\nJanuary 4, 2005", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-01-04.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-01-04", "page": 9, "text": "Mayor Johnson inquired whether the Appellant asked the neighbors\nbefore putting up the sheet metal, to which the Appellant responded\nin the negative.\nMayor Johnson inquired what would happen if the variances are\ndenied, to which the Supervising Planner responded that two things\ncould happen; the Appellant could work with staff for a solution\nthat would allow a garage and deck that is either fully in\ncompliance or would require a more modest variance or the Appellant\ncould file a lawsuit against the City.\nMayor Johnson inquired whether the Appellant has paid fines, to\nwhich the Supervising Planner responded investigative fees and fees\nfor working without the proper planning permits have been charged.\nThere being no further speakers, Mayor Johnson closed the public\nportion of the Hearing.\nCouncilmember Daysog moved adoption of the resolution upholding the\nPlanning Board's decision and denying the Appeal.\nCouncilmember Matarrese seconded the motion.\nUnder discussion, Councilmember Matarrese stated there was only one\ndecision that the Planning Board could have made given the\ncircumstances; encouraged the owner to work with the Planning\nDepartment to salvage the intent of the project within the\nrequirements of the Code.\nVice Mayor Gilmore stated that she assumes that the Appellants had\nthe best of intentions; the Code clearly specifies detached garage\nand addition requirements; the project is attempting to be both an\naddition to the house and a garage stated future owners could\nconvert the garage into a living space.\nOn the call for the question, the motion carried by unanimous voice\nvote - 5.\n(05-019) - Discussion regarding assistance for tenants at Harbor\nIsland Apartments.\nMayor Johnson stated that rent control issues are not on the agenda\ntonight but that the public is free to speak under Oral\nCommunications\nThe Housing Authority Executive Director gave a brief presentation\nregarding the assistance provided to the Harbor Island Apartment\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n9\nJanuary 4, 2005", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-01-04.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-01-04", "page": 10, "text": "tenants.\nSpeakers John Sullivan, San Leandro, Mark Harney, Fifteen Asset\nManagement Group; Kathy Lautz, Apartment Owners' Association;\nLorraine Lilley, Harbor Island Tenant Association; Eve Bach, Arc\nEcology Tom Matthews, Renewed Hope; Steve Edrington, Renal Housing\nAssociation; Delores Wells, Harbor Island Tenant Association\n(submitted letter) ; Modessa Henderson, Harbor Island Tenant\nAssociation; Mary Green-Parks, Alameda; Gen Fujioka, Asian Law\nCaucus; Reginald James, Alameda; Michael Yoshii, Alamedal; and Bill\nSmith, Alameda.\nMayor Johnson inquired whether there are a total of 17 units\ncurrently occupied, to which Mr. Harney responded there are 17\nunits that are occupied by tenants with leases; there are 9 units\noccupied by tenants who have stopped paying rent.\nMayor Johnson inquired whether relocation assistance would still be\navailable to the remaining tenants with leases, to which Mr. Harney\nresponded in the affirmative.\nVice Mayor Gilmore inquired how many Harbor Island Apartment\ntenants remained in Alameda, to which Mr. Harney responded that he\nwas not certain; not all tenants provided forwarding information.\nCouncilmember deHaan requested information on the number of Section\n8\ntenants that remained in Alameda.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated that Council wants to know what the\nimmediate issues are in dealing with individuals who are still\noccupying units at the Harbor Island Apartments and what assistance\ncan be provided; inquired whether there are housing assistance\nopportunities for the remaining tenants through Community\nDevelopment programs or Sentinel Fair Housing.\nThe Community Development Manager responded that the Community\nDevelopment Block Grant (CDBG) Program contracts with Sentinel Fair\nHousing and the Red Cross; Sentinel Fair Housing has been involved\nwith a number of the tenants; CDBG funds are also being used to\nproduce new affordable housing units through the Substantial\nRehabilitation Program; several of the units would be available to\napplicants who previously resided at the Harbor Island Apartments\nsecurity deposit assistance programs have been funded in the past\nwhich allowed Housing Authority tenants to borrow money from the\nrevolving loan fund and repay over time; the fund was depleted as a\nresult of earlier Section 8 problems; another funding cycle would\nbecome available in July.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n10\nJanuary 4, 2005", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-01-04.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-01-04", "page": 11, "text": "Councilmember Matarrese inquired whether there was a way to work\nwith the Apartment Owners' Association to help the remaining\ntenants.\nThe Community Development Manager responded there could be some\ncoordination for specific interventions that may help the tenants\nthe cash to provide deposits is a longer-term consideration and\nmight be more difficult without reprogramming of funds.\nMayor Johnson requested staff to review loan possibilities.\nThe City Manager stated that he would work with staff to find\nsolutions.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated aggressive action is needed to help\nthe remaining tenants.\nCouncilmember Daysog stated that most families would like to remain\nat the Harbor Island Apartments but the courts have ruled otherwise\nand they must move; the City needs to see what can be done to\nfacilitate the situation in a manner that dignifies the tenants.\nthe Council needs to pursue the best policy that prevents the\nHarbor Island Apartment situation from happening again.\nORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA\n(05-020 - ) Michael John Torrey, Alameda, stated that the Webster\nStreet construction has posed a danger to bus passengers at the bus\nstops.\nThe Assistant City Manager stated that the construction work has\nbeen delayed because of the rain; stated he would discuss the\nsituation with the Public Works Director.\n(05-021) Reginald James, Alameda, encouraged the reappointment of\nMary Rudge as Alameda's Poet Laureat; stated that he was concerned\nabout a sign stating that there may be a possible reproductive\nharmful environment at the Harbor Island Apartments ; stated that\nthere should be another meeting of the Harbor Island Task Force.\n(05-022) Bill Smith, Alameda, discussed earthquakes.\nCOUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS\n(05-023) Councilmember Matarrese welcomed Interim City Manager,\nBill Norton.\nMayor Johnson welcomed the Interim City Manager to his first\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n11\nJanuary 4, 2005", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-01-04.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-01-04", "page": 12, "text": "Council Meeting.\nADJOURNMEN'T\n(05-024) - There being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned\nthe Regular City Council meeting at 11:15 in a moment of silence\nand sympathy for the tsunami victims in Southeast Asia.\nRespectfully submitted,\nLara Weisiger\nCity Clerk\nThe agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown\nAct.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n12\nJanuary 4, 2005", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-01-04.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-01-04", "page": 13, "text": "MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING\nTUESDAY - -JANUARY 4, 2005- - -6:30 P.M.\nMayor Johnson convened the Special Meeting at 6:30 p.m.\nRoll Call - Present : Councilmembers Daysog, deHaan, Gilmore,\nMatarrese, and Mayor Johnson - 5.\nAbsent :\nNone.\nThe Special Meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider:\n(05-001) Public Employment; Title: City Manager.\n(05-002) Public Employee Performance Evaluation; Title: City\nAttorney.\nFollowing the Closed Session, the Special Meeting was reconvened\nand Mayor Johnson announced that the Council discussed Public\nEmployment and recruitment of the new City Manager, and Public\nEmployee Performance Evaluation of the City Attorney.\nAdjournment\nThere being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the\nSpecial Meeting at 7:30 p.m.\nRespectfully submitted,\nLara Weisiger\nCity Clerk\nThe agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown\nAct.\nSpecial Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nJanuary 4, 2005", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-01-04.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-01-05", "page": 1, "text": "MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL JOINT CITY COUNCIL,\nCOMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION, AND\nALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING\nWEDNESDAY - - - JANUARY 5, 2005\n-\n-\n-\n5:31\nP.M.\nMayor/Chair Johnson convened the Special Joint Meeting at 6:05 p.m.\nRoll Call -\nPresent :\nCouncilmembers / Commissioners / Authority\nMembers Daysog, deHaan, Gilmore,\nMatarrese, and Mayor/Chair Johnson - 5.\nAbsent :\nNone.\nThe Special Joint Meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to\nconsider :\n(05-025CC/05-001CIC Conference with Real Property Negotiators;\nProperty : Alameda Naval Air Station, Fleet Industrial Supply\nCenter; Negotiating Parties City of Alameda, Community Improvement\nCommission, Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority, Alameda\nPoint Collaborative; Under Negotiations Price and terms.\nFollowing the Closed session, the Special Meeting was reconvened\nand Mayor/Chair Johnson announced that the Council/Commission/\nAuthority gave direction to follow the negotiating approach\nrecommended by the real property negotiator.\nAdjournment\nThere being no further business, Mayor/Chair Johnson adjourned\nthe Special Meeting at 7:10 p.m.\nRespectfully submitted,\nLara Weisiger, City Clerk\nSecretary, Community Improvement\nCommission\nThe agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown\nAct.\nSpecial Joint Meeting\nAlameda City Council, Community\nImprovement Commission and Alameda\nReuse and Redevelopment Authority\nJanuary 5, 2005", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-01-05.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-01-18", "page": 1, "text": "MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING\nTUESDAY- - -JANUARY 18, 2005 - -7:30 P.M.\nActing Mayor Gilmore convened the Regular Meeting at 7:45 p.m.\nRoll Call - Present Councilmembers Daysog, deHaan, Gilmore,\nMatarrese, and Mayor Johnson - 5.\n[Note: Mayor Johnson was present via teleconference from The\nCapital Hilton, 16th and K Street NW, Washington DC only for the\nResolution Opposing the Proposed Casino paragraph no. 05-037].\nAbsent :\nNone.\nAGENDA CHANGES\n(05-027) Councilmember Matarrese moved that the Public Hearing to\nconsider an Appeal of J. Barni [paragraph no. 05-034]; the Public\nHearing to consider amendment to Zoning Map [paragraph no. 05-035];\nand the Public Hearing to consider an Appeal of Rita Mohlen\n[paragraph no. 05-036] be moved to the Consent Calendar.\nCouncilmember Daysog seconded the motion, which carried by the\nfollowing voice vote: Ayes: Louncilmembers Daysog, deHaan,\nMatarrese and Acting Mayor Gilmore - 4. [Absent Mayor Johnson -\n1. ]\n(05-028) - Councilmember deHaan moved that discussion regarding\noptions for relocation assistance legislation [paragraph no. 05- -\n040] be heard first on the Regular Agenda.\nCouncilmember Daysog seconded the motion, which FAILED by the\nfollowing voice vote: Ayes Councilmembers Daysog and deHaan -2.\nNoes : Councilmember Matarrese and Acting Mayor Gilmore - 2.\n[Absent : Mayor Johnson - 1. ]\nPROCLAMATIONS, SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY AND ANNOUNCEMENTS\n(05-029 ) Proclamation declaring January as Blood Donor Month in\nthe City of Alameda.\nActing Mayor Gilmore read and presented the proclamation to Beth\nWren, Donor Recruitment Account Manager.\nMs. Wren thanked the Council for their support of the Red Cross and\nannounced that there will be a blood drive on Friday in San Leandro\nat the Creekside Community Church.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n1\nJanuary 18, 2005", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-01-18.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-01-18", "page": 2, "text": "Michael John Torrey, Alameda, commented on the importance of\ndonating blood.\n(05-030) Presentation by Peter Simon, Dean, College of Alameda and\nLiz Sullivan, Organizer with Oakland Community Organizations\nregarding the proposed Oakland Aviation High School at the Oakland\nAirport. Withdrawn by presenters.\n(05-031) Presentation of letters of appreciation to members of the\nAlameda Police Department by NC1 Danielle Carter, Recruiter, Naval\nReserve Recruiting Area Pacific.\nNC1 Randy Montrose, Recruiter in Charge, Naval Reserve Recruiting\nArea Pacific, presented letters of appreciation to members of the\nAlameda Police Department ; Sergeant Jill Ottaviano, Alameda Police\nDepartment, accepted the letters of appreciation on behalf of the\nAlameda Police Department.\nCONSENT CALENDAR\nCouncilmember Matarrese moved approval of the Consent Calendar,\nincluding continuing the Public Hearing to consider an Appeal of J.\nBarni to February 1; continuing the Public Hearing to consider\nAmendment to Zoning Map to February 1; and noticing the Public\nHearing to consider an Appeal of Rita Mohlen for a later date.\nCouncilmember Daysog seconded the motion, which carried by\nunanimous voice vote - 4. [Absent Mayor Johnson - 1. ]\n[Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk preceding\nthe paragraph number. ]\n(*05-032) Minutes of the Special Joint City Council and Community\nImprovement Commission (CIC) Meeting of December 21, 2004; the\nSpecial and Regular City Council Meetings held on January 4, 2005;\nand the Special Joint City Council, CIC and Alameda Reuse and\nRedevelopment Authority Meeting of January 5, 2005. Approved.\n(*05-033) Ratified bills in the amount of $3,049,755.31.\n(05-034) Public Hearing to consider an Appeal of the Planning\nBoard's approval of Design Review, DR04-0101, to allow a 5,300\nsquare foot new commercial building (veterinary hospital) to\nreplace approximately 2,000 square feet of commercial buildings,\nwith a parking lot expansion to 23 spaces; and adoption of related\nresolution. The property is located at 1410 Everett Street in the\nC-C Community Commercial and R-5 Hotel Residential Zoning\nDistricts. Appellant: J. Barni. Continued to February 1, 2005.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n2\nJanuary 18, 2005", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-01-18.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-01-18", "page": 3, "text": "(*05-035) Public Hearing to consider Amendment to Zoning Map to\nrezone approximately 7,800 square feet (1/5 acre) at 1410 Everett\nStreet, APN 070-170-15, from R-5 Hotel Residential to C-C Community\nCommercial and\n(*05-035A) - Introduction of Ordinance Amending the Zoning Map to\nDesignate APN 070-170-15, Approximately One-Fifth Acre, from R-5\nHotel Residential to C-C Community Commercial, on Central Avenue at\nEverett Street. Continued to February 1, 2005.\n(*05-036 - ) Public Hearing to consider an Appeal of the Planning\nBoard's denial of Variances, V04-0006, 0007, 0008 and 0010, and\ndenial of Major Design Review, DR04-0026, for all development\nprojects at 3017 Marina Drive; and adoption of related resolution.\nThe site is located within an R-1, Single-Family Residential Zoning\nDistrict. The development project includes expansion of the\nresidence into the estuary and installation of rear yard decks.\nApproval is being sought for the following: 1) Variance to AMC\nSubsection 30-4.1(d) (3) (Maximum Main Building Coverage exceeding\n48%) i 2) Variance to AMC Subsection 30-4.1(d) (7) and Section 30-2\n(Rear Yard) because the building extends across the rear property\nline into the estuary 3) Variance to AMC Subsection 30-5.7(a)\n(Roof Eaves) and 30-5.7(d) (Bay Windows) because the roof leaves\nabove the bay windows encroach to within 3 feet from the side\nproperty line and bay windows are not permitted to encroach into\nside yards; 4) Variance to AMC Subsection 30-5.7(c) (1) (Rear Yard) ,\nSubsection 30-2 (Definitions) (Yard-Rear) and Subsection 30-\n4. 1 (d) (7) (Rear Yard) because decks over 36-inches in height extend\ninto the required side and rear yard setbacks 5) Variance to AMC\nSubsection 30-5.14(c) (Barrier Heights) because the windscreens\naround the patios exceed the maximum permitted - -foot height. The\nPlanning Board found that the Variance for the bay window\nencroachment be withdrawn because encroachment is in compliance,\nsubject to Design Review approval. Applicant/Appellant: Rita\nMohlen. To be noticed for a later date.\nREGULAR AGENDA ITEMS\n( (05-037) Resolution No. 13811, \"Opposing the Proposed Lower Lake\nRancheria-Koi Nation Casino in the City of Oakland. \" Adopted.\nMichael John Torrey, Alameda, stated that it is important to make\nsure that the Rancheria-Koi Nation does not get the land trust.\nMelody Marr, Alameda Chamber of Commerce, stated that the Chamber\nsupports the Resolution; submitted a packet of information from the\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n3\nJanuary 18, 2005", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-01-18.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-01-18", "page": 4, "text": "Chamber's Town Hall Meeting.\nMayor Johnson stated that the Council needs to send a strong\nmessage in support of the Resolution opposing the Rancheria-Koi -\nNation proposed casino; Alameda's vote, along with the City of San\nLeandro, Alameda County, and the City of Oakland, will send a\nstrong message to the Bureau of Indian Affairs stated she had the\nopportunity to speak with Congressman Stark and that he will\nsupport Alameda in their efforts.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated that the casino proposal is not good\nfor Alameda, the adjoining wildlife refuge, the City of Oakland and\nis a false economy that he would oppose any casino by any tribe in\nany urban area; he hopes that there is unanimous support of the\nResolution.\nCouncilmember Matarrese moved adoption of the Resolution.\nCouncilmember deHaan seconded the motion.\nUnder discussion, Councilmember Daysog stated that he joins his\ncolleagues in opposing the casino; Council should consider joining\nthe City of Oakland in pursuing legal issues.\nMayor Johnson stated that she has spoken to the Interim City\nManager and meetings have already taken place Alameda is working\nwith San Leandro to jointly respond to the environmental documents;\nstaff is working with the City of Oakland; Alameda County should be\nincluded in pooling resources to save money in the battle opposing\nthe casino.\nCouncilmember Daysog stated that there should be an amendment to\nthe Resolution which would include directing the City Attorney to\nwork with colleagues in the surrounding jurisdictions to actively\noppose the proposed casino.\nMayor Johnson stated that the Resolution should be very strong,\nclear and precise regarding Alameda's position on the casino; that\nshe would prefer to give separate direction to staff to work with\nthe surrounding communities and Alameda County.\nActing Mayor Gilmore inquired whether Councilmember Daysog was\namicable to giving staff direction, to which Councilmember Daysog\nresponded in the affirmative.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated that he commends the Council in taking\nthe lead; the matter will be an uphill push involving federal\nregulations.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n4\nJanuary 18, 2005", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-01-18.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-01-18", "page": 5, "text": "Counci lmember Daysog stated that he opposes the proposed casino for\na number of reasons, including crime and the urban planning impacts\non Alameda and other cities. the proposed casino is only one of a\nwave of casinos to come which are inappropriate for the area.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated that the Oakland City Council wanted to\nensure that Alameda has no desire to have a casino.\nOn the call for the question, the motion carried by unanimous voice\nvote - 5.\n( 05-038) Public Hearing on Housing and Community Development needs\nfor Community Development Block Grant Annual and Five-Year Plans.\nThe Community Development Manager gave a brief presentation on the\nhousing and community development needs.\nCouncilmember Daysog requested an Off Agenda Report update on the\nSection 8 funding.\nJim Franz, American Red Cross, urged the Council to encourage the\ncontinuation of a balance of service provisions that provide a\nsafety net in the community.\nHugh Cavanaugh, Alameda Food Bank, stated there has been a 50%\ngrowth in the past three years and that he expects the growth to\ncontinue over the next few years.\nSteven Currie, Social Services Human Relations Board (SSHRB), read\na letter from SSHRB encouraging the Council to continue the safety\nnet services and programs that empower and support residents'\nefforts toward self-sufficiency.\nCouncilmember Matarrese thanked the Social Services Human Relations\nBoard for their work; stated that he looked forward to receiving\nthe Board's recommendations.\n(05-039) Report regarding Corrective and Preventive Plan in\nresponse to the Memorandum on Internal Control Structure.\nActing Mayor Gilmore stated that the matter was being discussed\nbecause Council requested staff to respond to questions resulting\nfrom the City's annual audit.\nCouncilmember Matarrese requested information on the amount of the\nfund balance deficit ; inquired whether the list of items in the\naudit recommendation regarding the budget represents surplus or\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n5\nJanuary 18, 2005", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-01-18.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-01-18", "page": 6, "text": "deficit.\nThe Finance Director responded that she would provide the\ninformation to Council.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated that he would like to have the\nrequested information coordinated with the budget information\nprovided in the first week of February.\nActing Mayor Gilmore stated that the City has become dependant on\nInformation Technology services system failure would result in\ncountless hours of lost productivity; Council should carefully\nreview the costs of addressing the issue and prioritize\naccordingly.\nCouncilmember Daysog stated that the Plan makes a lot of the\ninternal mechanisms of the City transparent; requested information\non the debt reserve compliance issues.\nCouncilmember deHaan inquired whether bonds are typically\nrefinanced without the qualification process.\nThe Finance Director responded there would be a competitive bid\nprocess if a bond is straight forward and uncomplicated;\ncomplicated bonds would be negotiated; the underwriters would\nrespond to the Request for Proposal (RFP) stating what could be\ndone at what price; staff would then recommend a selection to the\ngoverning body.\nCouncilmember Daysog requested that the bond bidding process be\nplaced on a future agenda for discussion; stated that it is\nimportant for Council to be involved in the bidding of bonds and in\nthe decision not to bid.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated that the City's retirement and\nhealth benefit costs have increased dramatically; the City's Public\nEmployee Retirement System (PERS) contribution increased 615% from\n2002 to 2004.\n(05-040) Discussion regarding options for relocation assistance\nlegislation and a temporary moratorium on all new construction,\ndemolition and condominium conversion in the \"West End Atlantic\nCorridor Area\" (bounded by Webster Street, Main Street, Pacific\nAvenue and Ralph J. Appezzato Memorial Parkway).\nThe Interim City Manager provided a brief outline of the Harbor\nIsland Apartment eviction process and staff's coordinating efforts\nto financially help the remaining tenants move.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n6\nJanuary 18, 2005", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-01-18.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-01-18", "page": 7, "text": "Acting Mayor Gilmore stated that the Council would not be taking\naction tonight; public testimony would be taken and the matter\nwould be continued to the February 1, 2005 City Council Meeting\n;\nthe two meeting nights constitute one meeting; stated speakers can\nspeak at tonight's meeting or on February 1, but not at both.\nProponents: Regina Tillman, Alameda; Steven Garner, Alameda; Frank\nSkiles, Alameda Gretchen Lipow, Alameda; Ron Salsig, Alameda;\nWendy Horikoshi, Alameda; Janet Gibson, Alameda Unified School\nDistrict; Reginald James, Alameda; Eve Bach, Alameda; Carl Halpern,\nAlameda;Mary Green Parks, Alameda.\nOpponents: Dominic Pasanisi, Alameda; Barbara Kerr, Alameda; Fern\nWallace, Alameda; Bernie Fitzgerald, Alameda; Melinda Samuelson,\nAlameda; Steven Edrington, Alameda [submitted handout] ; Carol\nMartino, Realty World Martino Associates; John Sullivan, San\nLeandro; Kathy Lautz, Apartment Owners Association; Thomas S.\nCooke, Manager, Bonanza Apartments; Carmen Lasar, Alameda: and,\nMonica Getten, Alameda.\nCouncilmember Matarrese requested that the City Attorney provide an\nanalysis of existing State law which might overlap with the\nproposed ordinance, particularly landlord and tenant relationships\nstated that there is plenty of State law protecting individual\ntenants in contracts with landlords; he is concerned that there is\nnot much protection for the community; there is significant impact\non the community and the schools when owners choose to wipe out a\nlarge complex; the matter is not about rent control he has never\nsupported rent control, which has always been a failure; there has\nnever been a complaint about rent being too high, only complaints\nthat rent is too high for the services not being delivered.\nActing Mayor Gilmore requested information on how many properties\nhave 40 units or more and the total number of units in the \"West\nEnd Atlantic Corridor Area\", and requested staff to provide\ninformation on how the ordinance would work in the absence of rent\ncontrol.\n(05-041) Ordinance No. 2934, \"Amending the Alameda Municipal Code\nby Amending Subsection 3-28.9 (Payment In-Lieu of Taxes -PILOT) ;\nAdding a New Subsection 3-28.10 (Return on Investment in Enterprise\nFunds) of Section 3-28 (Payment of Taxes) of Chapter III (Finance\nand Taxation) and Adding a New Subsection 18-4.10 (Exemptions) of\nSection 18-4 - (Sewer Service Charge) of Article I (Sewers\nof\nChapter XVIII ( Sewer and Water) \" Finally passed.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated the Ordinance provides some hope to\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n7\nJanuary 18, 2005", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-01-18.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-01-18", "page": 8, "text": "close the gap in the budget shortfall; moved final passage of the\nOrdinance.\nCouncilmember Daysog seconded the motion.\nUnder discussion Councilmember Daysog, stated that he was concerned\nabout the possibility of a charge on either cable or electric\nbills; it is important to be upfront with the public regarding the\n$750,000 and the possibility of recouping the money through rate\ncharges.\nThe Interim City Manager stated impacts would be determined through\nthe Alameda Power and Telecom (AP&T) budget processi stated that\nthere are always trade offs in the budget.\nCouncilmember Daysog stated that he supports the Ordinance, which\nis the more conservative approach given the different options\npresented.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated that there is a good likelihood that\nsomething would need to be massaged; AP&T should not go through a\ndisproportionate adjustment.\nOn the call for the question, the motion carried by unanimous voice\nvote - 4. [Absent: Mayor Johnson - 1. ]\n(05-042) Ordinance No. 2935, \"Amending the Alameda Municipal Code\nby Adding a New Section 3-91 (City of Alameda Community Benefit\nAssessment Procedure Code) to Article VI (City of Alameda\nImprovement Procedure Code) of Chapter III (Finance and Taxation) . \"\nFinally passed.\nCouncilmember Matarrese moved final passage of the Ordinance.\nCouncilmember deHaan seconded the motion, which carried by\nunanimous voice vote - 4. [Absent: Mayor Johnson - 1.\n]\nORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA\nNone.\nCOUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS\n(05-043 - ) Councilmember deHaan inquired whether the budget review\nprocess would take two months.\nThe Interim City Manager outlined the budget adoption process and\nstated the mid-year budget review addresses expenditures and\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n8\nJanuary 18, 2005", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-01-18.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-01-18", "page": 9, "text": "revenues through the end of December and should be addressed at the\nfirst or second meeting in February.\nADJOURNMENT\nThere being no further business, Acting Mayor Gilmore adjourned the\nRegular Meeting at 10:02 p.m.\nRespectfully Submitted,\nLara Weisiger\nCity Clerk\nThe agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown\nAct.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n9\nJanuary 18, 2005", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-01-18.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-01-18", "page": 10, "text": "MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING\nTUESDAY- - -JANUARY 18, 2005 - -6:30 P.M.\nActing Mayor Gilmore convened the Special Meeting at 6:33 p.m.\nRoll Call - Present : Councilmembers Daysog, deHaan, Matarrese,\nand Acting Mayor Gilmore - 4.\nAbsent :\nMayor Johnson - 1.\nThe Special Meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider:\n(05-026) - Conference with Labor Negotiators; Agency Negotiators :\nHuman Resources Director and Craig Jory; Employee Organizations :\nManagement and Confidential Employees Association and Police\nAssociation Non-Sworn.\nFollowing the Closed Session, the Special Meeting was reconvened\nand Acting Mayor Gilmore announced that the Council gave directions\nto labor negotiators.\nAdjournment\nThere being no further business, Acting Mayor Gilmore adjourned the\nSpecial Meeting at 7:15 p.m.\nRespectfully submitted,\nLara Weisiger\nCity Clerk\nThe agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown\nAct.\nSpecial Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nJanuary 18, 2005", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-01-18.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-01-18", "page": 11, "text": "MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION MEETING\nTUESDAY - JANUARY 18, 2005 - - - 6:55 P. M.\nActing Chair Gilmore convened the Special Meeting at 7:15 p.m.\nRoll Call - Present : Commissioners Daysog, deHaan, Matarrese,\nand Acting Chair Gilmore - 4.\nAbsent :\nChair Johnson - 1.\nThe Special Meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider:\n(05-002) Conference with Legal Counsel - Anticipated Litigation;\nInitiation of litigation pursuant to subdivision (c) of Section\n54956.91 Number of cases: One.\nFollowing the Closed Session, the Special Meeting was reconvened\nand Acting Chair Gilmore announced that the Commission obtained\nbriefing from staff.\nAdjournment\nThere being no further business, Acting Chair Gilmore adjourned the\nSpecial Meeting at 7:32 p.m.\nRespectfully submitted,\nLara Weisiger\nSecretary, Community Improvement\nCommission\nThe agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown\nAct.\nSpecial Meeting\nCommunity Improvement Commission\nJanuary 18, 2005", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-01-18.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-01-18", "page": 12, "text": "MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION MEETING\nTUESDAY - JANUARY 18, 2005 - - - 7:25 P. M.\nActing Chair Gilmore convened the Special Meeting at 7:42 p.m.\nCommissioner Daysog led the Pledge of Allegiance.\nROLL CALL -\nPresent : Commissioners Daysog, deHaan, Matarrese,\nand Acting Chair Gilmore - 4.\nAbsent :\nChair Johnson - 1.\nMINUTES\n(05-003) Minutes of the Special Community Improvement Commission\n(CIC) Meetings of December 7, 2004; the Special Joint City Council\nand CIC Meeting of December 21, 2004; and the Special Joint City\nCouncil, CIC and Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority Meeting\nof January 5, 2005. Approved.\nCommissioner Matarrese moved approval of the minutes.\nCommissioner Daysog seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous\nvoice vote - 4. [Absent : Chair Johnson - 1. ] Note: Commissioner\ndeHaan abstained from voting on the December 7 and 21, 2004\nMinutes.\nAGENDA ITEM\n(05-004) Recommendation to approve a contract with Michael Stanton\nArchitecture for design review services for the proposed Historic\nAlameda Theatre, Parking Structure and Cinema Multiplex Project in\nan amount not to exceed $92,500.\nCommissioner Matarrese stated the contract is one step closer to\ngetting the theatre; moved approval of the staff recommendation.\nCommissioner deHaan seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous\nvoice vote - 4. [Absent Chair Johnson - 1.\n]\nADJOURNMENT\nThere being no further business, Acting Chair Gilmore adjourned the\nSpecial Meeting at 7:45 p.m.\nRespectfully submitted,\nLara Weisiger\nSecretary\nAgenda for meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act.\nSpecial Meeting\nCommunity Improvement Commission\nJanuary 18, 2005", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-01-18.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-01-31", "page": 1, "text": "MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING\nTUESDAY- - -JANUARY 17, 2006--7:30 P.M.\nMayor Johnson convened the Regular Meeting at 8:11 p.m.\nROLL CALL - Present : Councilmembers Daysog, deHaan, Gilmore,\nMatarrese, and Mayor Johnson - 5.\nAbsent :\nNone.\nAGENDA CHANGES\nNone.\nPROCLAMATIONS, SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY AND ANNOUNCEMENTS\n(06-029) - Mayor Johnson encouraged the Alameda High School students\nand Troup 73 Boy Scouts attending the meeting to learn about local\ngovernment; stated the City has good job opportunities.\n(06-030) Proclamation declaring February 3, 2006 as \"Wear Red for\nWomen\" Day in Alameda.\nMayor Johnson read the proclamation; stated the proclamation would\nbe forwarded to the American Heart Association.\nCONSENT CALENDAR\nCouncilmember Matarrese moved approval of the Consent Calendar.\nCouncilmember deHaan seconded the motion, which carried by\nunanimous voice vote - 5.\n[Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk preceding\nthe paragraph number. . ]\n( *06-031) - Minutes of the Regular City Council Meeting held on\nJanuary 3, 2006. Approved.\n( *06-032) Ratified bills in the amount of $1,585,271.93.\n( *06-033) Recommendation to accept the City of Alameda Investment\nPolicy. Accepted.\n(*06-034) Recommendation to authorize the City Manager to execute\nthe fifth amendment to the Measure B Funding Agreement and fourth\namendment to the Measure B Project Implementation Agreement by and\nbetween the City of Alameda, the Alameda County Transportation\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n1\nJanuary 17, 2006", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-01-31.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-01-31", "page": 2, "text": "Authority, the Port of Oakland, and the City of Oakland for the\nCross Airport Roadway Project (Ron Cowan Parkway) Accepted.\n( *06-035) - Recommendation to accept and authorize recording a Notice\nof Completion for the Bayport Stormwater Pump Station System\nImprovements. Accepted.\n(*06-036) Recommendation to authorize execution of a lead-based\npaint hazard reduction Grant Agreement with Alameda County Lead\nPoisoning Prevention Program. Accepted.\n(*06-037) Resolution No. 13920, \"Approving the Application for\nCalifornia Cultural and Historical Endowment (CCHE) under the\nCalifornia Clean Water, Clean Air, Safe Neighborhood Parks and\nCoastal Protection Act of 2002. \" Adopted.\nREGULAR AGENDA ITEMS\n(06-038) Resolution No. 13921, \"Appointing Michael B. Cooper as a\nmember of the City Recreation and Park Commission. Adopted and\n(06-038A) Resolution No. 13922, \"Appointing Dora J. Dome as a\nmember of the City Social Services and Human Relations Board.\n\"\nAdopted.\nCouncilmember Matarrese moved adoption of the resolutions.\nVice Mayor Gilmore seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous\nvoice vote - 5.\nThe City Clerk administered the Oath and presented a certificate of\nappointment to Ms. Dome.\n(06-039) Resolution No. 13923, \"Commending Alameda Police\nLieutenant Bob Cranford for his contributions to the City of\nAlameda. \" Adopted.\nCouncilmember Matarrese moved adoption of the resolution.\nVice Mayor Gilmore seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous\nvoice vote - 5.\nMayor Johnson read the Resolution.\nThe Acting Police Chief accepted the Resolution on behalf of\nLieutenant Cranford and expressed Lieutenant Cranford's\nappreciation for the Resolution.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n2\nJanuary 17, 2006", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-01-31.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-01-31", "page": 3, "text": "(06-040) Recommendation to adopt Plans and Specifications and\nauthorize Call for Bids for Bayport Alameda Community Building and\nPark Project.\nThe Redevelopment Manager provided a brief presentation.\nThe Acting Recreation and Park Director presented drawings\noutlining the schematics for the proposed park site.\nVice Mayor Gilmore inquired whether the restrooms would be separate\nfrom the community building.\nThe Acting Recreation and Park Director responded that the\nrestrooms would be separate for park access.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated the adjacent school property area has\nasphalt; inquired whether the area would be accessible at all\ntimes, to which the Acting Recreation and Park Director responded\nin the affirmative.\nCouncilmember Matarrese inquired whether the proposed trees are\nappropriate for the climate, to which the Acting Recreation and\nPark Director responded in the affirmative.\nMayor Johnson inquired whether there would be adequate drainage.\nThe Acting Recreation and Park Director responded in the\naffirmative; stated adequate drainage has been stressed throughout\nthe design process.\nMayor Johnson inquired whether sprinkler systems would cover the\ninfield area.\nThe Acting Recreation and Park Director responded that the\nspecifications would address specific sprinkler systems for the\nsite.\nVice Mayor Gilmore stated that the older parks have a lot of tree\nroot issues; inquired whether root guards were considered.\nThe Acting Recreation and Park Director responded in the\naffirmative stated the design team was very conscience of tree\ntype and placement.\nCouncilmember deHaan inquired what was the square footage of the\nmulti-purpose room, to which the Acting Recreation and Park\nDirector responded 1,700 square feet.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n3\nJanuary 17, 2006", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-01-31.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-01-31", "page": 4, "text": "Councilmember deHaan inquired whether other multi-purpose rooms\nwere comparable in size.\nThe Acting Recreation and Park Director responded the proposed\nmulti-purpose room would be larger than most.\nCouncilmember Daysog inquired what are the anticipated uses for\nthe baseball and softball fields.\nThe Acting Recreation and Park Director responded the use would\ndepend on the age of the participants; stated two practices could\nbe held at the same time for age groups under 12.\nCouncilmember deHaan requested an explanation of funding sources.\nThe Redevelopment Manager responded the funding sources come from\nproject revenues such as land sale proceeds, residential profit\nparticipation, and tax increment.\nMayor Johnson inquired whether adequate benches would be provided.\nThe Acting Recreation and Park Director responded in the\naffirmative; stated the play areas would have benches also.\nMayor Johnson stated that the Joint Use Agreement was a great\nsuccess; the City and School District benefit when resources are\npulled together.\nThe Acting Recreation and Park Director noted the new park would be\nthe first park built since Tilden Park in 1993.\nCouncilmember Daysog moved approval of the staff recommendation.\nCouncilmember Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by\nunanimous voice vote - 5.\n(06-041) Introduction of Ordinance Amending the Alameda Municipal\nCode by Adding Section 2-18 (Alameda Film Commission) to Chapter II\n(Administration), Establishing an Alameda Film Commission, and\nPrescribing Membership and Duties of Said Commission. Introduced.\nThe Development Services Director provided a brief report.\nCouncilmember deHaan inquired whether neighborhoods, business\ndistricts, and areas at Alameda Point had filming opportunities in\nthe past, to which the Development Services Director responded in\nthe affirmative.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n4\nJanuary 17, 2006", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-01-31.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-01-31", "page": 5, "text": "Councilmember deHaan stated that he is concerned with having only\none neighborhood representative; he would prefer to have two at- -\nlarge neighborhood representatives neighborhoods are impacted\nbusiness district representatives might not be Alameda residents.\nMayor Johnson stated that she understood the Commission's role to\nbe marketing, not daily management.\nThe Development Services Director stated the permitting process\nwould not change deposits are provided for police services.\nMayor Johnson stated that times were restricted when filming was\ndone on the bridge; police officers were present; pedestrians were\nnotified of detours; the Commission's role should not be\ncoordinating the activities.\nThe Development Services Director stated that the Business\nDevelopment Division Coordinator would work as the staff liaison to\ncoordinate various activities; the Commission would help with\ninquiries and marketing; the State has developed a program to\neducate neighborhoods and raise awareness.\nVice Mayor Gilmore stated filming has been done on her street over\nthe last few years; the film production company sent someone out to\nexplain the filming process; stated that the experience was\npositive.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated that his neighborhood had mixed reviews\nwith the filming processi the neighborhood needs to be involved\nwith handling location requests.\nMayor Johnson stated having someone familiar with the historical\nareas of Alameda is important.\nThe Development Services Director suggested reducing the number of\nmembers with working knowledge of the film/video industry to three,\nadding a resident with knowledge of historic districts, and\nchanging the \"neighborhood member or Alameda Victorian Preservation\nSociety representative\" to \"neighborhood member\"\nCouncilmember Matarrese suggested all members be Alameda residents,\nexcept business representatives.\nVice Mayor Gilmore stated some film industry people work for\nemployers in town and should be able to be considered; the bulk of\nthe Commission should be Alameda residents.\nMayor Johnson stated that the majority of the Commission should be\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n5\nJanuary 17, 2006", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-01-31.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-01-31", "page": 6, "text": "Alameda residents.\nThe Development Services Director stated that the initial terms\ncould be shortened to no longer than two years.\nCouncilmember deHaan concurred with the Development Services\nDirector; stated the terms should be staggered and reviewed; the\nnumber of business representatives could be reduced; he would\nprefer to eliminate the Chamber of Commerce representative.\nThe City Attorney outlined the sections of the ordinance to be\nrevised.\nMayor Johnson clarified that the terms should be a maximum of two\nyears.\nThe Development Services Director stated terms could be for one and\ntwo years.\nCouncilmember deHaan noted he would like the membership brought\ndown to nine members.\nCouncilmember deHaan moved introduction of the ordinance with the\nproposed amendments : [1) reduce the number of members with working\nknowledge of the film/video industry to three; 2) change the\n\"neighborhood member or Alameda Victorian Preservation Society\nrepresentative\" to \"neighborhood member; 3) add a neighborhood\nmember with knowledge of historic districts; 4) require that the\nmajority of the commissioners be Alameda residents; and 5) shorten\nterms to one and two year staggered terms)\nCouncilmember Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by\nunanimous voice vote - 5.\n(06-042 - ) Public Hearing on Housing and Community Development needs\nfor the Community Development Block Grant Annual Plan.\nThe Development Services Director provided a brief report.\nMayor Johnson opened the public portion of the hearing.\nDoug Biggs, Alameda Point Collaborative (APC) , stated that he\nsupports the recommendations of staff and the Social Services Human\nRelations Board (SSHRB) ; APC is building the capacity of the\ncommunity; Americans with Disability Act (ADA) compliance is a\ngrowing issue.\nJim Franz, Alameda, stated he supports continued funding for safety\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n6\nJanuary 17, 2006", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-01-31.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-01-31", "page": 7, "text": "net services special consideration should be given to\norganizations that provide education along with services; a\ndisaster preparedness kit should be provided to low-income\nfamilies.\nRobert Bonta, SSHRB, stated the SSHRB was pleased to weigh in on\nthe public service needs employment, transportation, and child\ncare are needed in addition to improving access to affordable\nhousing; services are not being maximized; he hopes that SSHRB'S\nfour focus areas guide in the decision making.\nMichael John Torrey, Alameda, stated that extraordinary maintenance\nissues are coming up for the Housing Authority facilities the\nfinal Town Hall Meeting is scheduled for Thursday.\nMayor Johnson inquired whether the meeting's focus was to gather\ninformation about extraordinary maintenance.\nMr. Torrey responded that extraordinary maintenance is part of the\nfocus information on proposed improvements is provided to\nresidents; resident input is requested.\nThere being no further speakers, Mayor Johnson closed the public\nportion of the hearing.\nMayor Johnson inquired whether extraordinary maintenance funding\nwas available.\nThe Acting Assistant City Manager responded in the affirmative;\nstated Housing Authority reserves and bond funds would pay for\nhousing complex repairs; a physical needs assessment was conducted\nand approved; the physical needs assessment determines the type of\nimprovements needed over the next 20 years.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated that the SSHRB did a terrific job in\ndeveloping criteria; the criteria used to measure the performance\nof the organizations receiving the grants should align with the\nSSHRB's four focus areas to ensure that the money is well spent and\ngoals have been achieved; improving access to affordable housing\nshould include upholding anti-discrimination laws individuals need\nto be provided with an avenue to bring discrimination issues to the\nproper authorities; SSHRB'S criteria needs to be incorporated into\nthe measurement of success to ensure that contractors know what is\nexpected.\nCouncilmember deHaan inquired whether any feedback was available on\nthe Sentinel issue.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n7\nJanuary 17, 2006", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-01-31.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-01-31", "page": 8, "text": "The Development Services Director responded staff was working on a\nnew scope of work and information would be provided to Council.\nCouncilmember deHaan inquired whether there was a possibility to\nreceive more than the $1.3 million grant.\nThe Development Services Director responded next year's total\nbudget will be approximately $1.5 million with recaptured funds\nfrom loans; the outright grant will be approximately $1.3 million;\nprogram revenues and reclaimed dollars will be approximately\n$200,000.\nCouncilmember deHaan inquired whether the CDBG funding takes care\nof the Housing Authority's needs, to which the Acting Assistant\nCity Manager responded in the affirmative.\nCouncilmember deHaan inquired whether the Development Services\nDepartment's funding portion takes care of housing over and above\nthe Housing Authority.\nThe Development Services Director responded in the affirmative;\nstated the majority of CDBG funding is for housing and rental\nrehabilitation.\nThe Acting Assistant City Manager stated that the Housing Authority\nhas used CDBG, HOME, and redevelopment funds in the past but does\nnot plan to use the funding this year.\nMayor Johnson inquired whether anyone's needs would be left out\nwith the proposed Action Plan, to which the Development Services\nDirector responded in the negative.\nCouncilmember deHaan inquired whether community service needs are\nreviewed periodically.\nThe Development Services Director responded in the affirmative;\nstated Alameda goes beyond what is required; stated safety net\nprovider participation is unbelievable.\nMayor Johnson thanked the SSHRB and staff for all the hard work.\nCouncilmember Daysog moved approval of the staff recommendation.\nCouncilmember deHaan seconded the motion, which carried by\nunanimous voice vote - 5.\nORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n8\nJanuary 17, 2006", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-01-31.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-01-31", "page": 9, "text": "(06-043) Brien Burroughs, Glass Eye Media, stated that he is\nproducing an independently financed television pilot at City Hall\non Thursday and Friday barriers sometimes come up when filming at\ngovernment sites; all his contacts in Alameda have been great ;\nstated he appreciates the support.\n(06-044) Patrick Lynch, Alameda, stated there is corruption in the\nPlanning Department a resolution was passed by the Council on June\n21, , 2005 which required the owner of a vacant lot adjacent to his\nhome to conduct a specific soil test prior to receiving design\nreview; the testing was submitted; the design review was approved\nand has been appealed to the Planning Board; he is unable to get a\nfair hearing with the Planning Board; staff refuses to provide\naccurate information; the City denies using the wrong section of\nthe California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) in approving the\ndevelopment; he received a $100 invoice to file a new form with the\nState; he received a $1600 invoice, which includes over five hours\nto discuss the project with City Attorney's office; the facts are\nundisputable; urged members of the Council to appeal the decision\nof the Planning Board.\nMayor\nJohnson stated that Mr. Lynch should communicate his concerns\nwith the City Manager.\nMr. Lynch stated that he spoke with the Acting Assistant City\nManager on Thursday and has not received a reply.\nThe Acting Assistant City Manager stated that he spoke to Mr.\nLynch, the Planning Department staff, and City Attorney's office\nlast week; he still has one more person to contact; he will get\nback to Mr. Lynch.\nCOUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS\n(06-045\n-\n)\nConsideration of Mayor's nomination for appointment to\nthe Economic Development Commission. Continued.\n(06-046) Councilmember deHaan stated streetscape funding was\ndiscussed at the last Council meeting he hopes that electrical\nprovisions have been included to allow for embedded pedestrian\nlights [ on Park Street] between Central Avenue and Santa Clara\nAvenue when funding is available.\n(\n(06-047) Councilmember deHaan stated a lot of homes have been fire\ndamaged over a period of time; inquired whether remediation is\nrequired within a certain amount of time; stated areas are an\neyesore and a nuisance.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n9\nJanuary 17, 2006", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-01-31.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-01-31", "page": 10, "text": "Mayor Johnson stated that she was concerned with the building at\nthe corner of Central Avenue and Park Street the boards are down,\nbut nothing is being done; inquired whether more controls are\nneeded to ensure that owners remedy buildings within a certain\namount of time.\nCouncilmember deHaan requested information on applicable\nordinances.\nThe City Manager stated that information would be provided to the\nCouncil.\n(06-048) - Councilmember Matarrese stated that a vehicle inventory\nwas discussed a few months ago; he would like Council to consider\nestablishing a vehicle use resolution or policy so that the City\ncan set an example; the resolution should include how vehicles are\npurchased, where to purchase alternative fuel vehicles such as\nnatural gas and electric, and City vehicle use to reduce the number\nof single occupancy trips; requested that the use policy be brought\nback to the Council for consideration; the purchase of vehicles\nshould follow.\n(06-049) Councilmember deHaan stated vehicle inventory is\nimportant ; he would prefer a separate line item in the budget to\nindicate the amount spent up front excess vehicles were auctioned\nover the last three or four months; a number of vehicles are no\nlonger usable; the number of excess vehicles and future needs\nshould be reviewed; uniform vehicle markings are extremely\nimportant.\nThe City Manager stated that the replacement criteria were being\nreviewed; a general policy for alternative fuel would be provided\nto Council.\nCouncilmember deHaan congratulated Alameda Power and Telecom for\nusing hybrid cars; stated an inventory should be established\nvehicles should be replaced in a logical manner.\n(06-050 - ) Mayor Johnson stated that the athletic facilities' use\npolicy should be brought to the Council for adoption by resolution\nor ordinance; the current policy is not compliant.\nThe City Manager stated that staff is in the process of rewriting\nthe policy.\nMayor Johnson stated that she would prefer a formalized Council\nresolution.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n10\nJanuary 17, 2006", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-01-31.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-01-31", "page": 11, "text": "ADJOURNMENT\n(06-051) - There being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned\nthe Regular Meeting at 9:40 p.m. in a moment of silence for City\nEmployee Matt Plumlee's family loss.\nRespectfully submitted,\nLara Weisiger\nCity Clerk\nThe agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown\nAct.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n11\nJanuary 17, 2006", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-01-31.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-01-31", "page": 12, "text": "MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING\nTUESDAY- - -JANUARY 17, 2006- -6:05 p.m.\nMayor Johnson convened the Special Meeting at 6:05 p.m.\nRoll Call - Present : Councilmembers Daysog, deHaan, Gilmore,\nMatarrese, and Mayor Johnson - 5.\n[Note : Councilmember Daysog arrived at 6:35 p.m. ]\nAbsent :\nNone.\nThe Special Meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider :\n(06-025) - Conference with Legal Counsel - Existing Litigation; Name\nof case : Citizens for a Megaplex-Free Alameda V. City of Alameda.\nRosemary McNally stated that she was not a party to the lawsuit,\nbut had followed the Cineplex project since the Historical Advisory\nBoard meeting in 2005; cited the Indemnificatior Clause in the\nDisposition and Development Agreement with the developer, Kyle\nConnor questioned why the City is paying for Mr. Connor's defense\ncosts when the City says it does not have enough money for\nservices.\nThe City Attorney responded that the developer has his own\nattorney; the City has a large investment risk in the project and\nchose to retain its own counsel in order to best protect its own\ninterests in the project.\nMs. McNally thanked the Council for clarification and submitted\ncopy of her statement for the record.\n(06-026) Conference with Labor Negotiators - Agency Negotiators :\nCraig Jory and Human Resources Director; Employee Organizations :\nAlameda City Employees Association, International Brotherhood of\nElectrical Workers, and Management and Confidential Employees\nAssociation.\n***\nMayor Johnson called a recess at 7:55 p.m. and reconvened the\nSpecial Meeting at 9:45 p.m.\n(06-027) Conference with Labor Negotiators - Agency Negotiators:\nMarie Gilmore and Frank Matarrese; Employee: City Attorney. .\nFollowing the Closed Session, the Special Meeting was reconvened\nSpecial Meeting\n1\nAlameda City Council\nJanuary 17, 2006", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-01-31.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-01-31", "page": 13, "text": "and Mayor Johnson announced that regarding Conference with Legal\nCounsel, the Council discussed the case and stated staff would\nprovide an Off-Agenda Report on the upcoming process; regarding\nAlameda City Employees Association, International Brotherhood of\nElectrical Workers, and Management and Confidential Employees\nAssociation, the Council obtained briefing from labor negotiators;\nregarding City Attorney, the Council gave direction to labor\nnegotiators.\nAdjournment\nThere being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the\nSpecial Meeting at 10:05 p.m.\nRespectfully submitted,\nLara Weisiger\nCity Clerk\nThe agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown\nAct.\nSpecial Meeting\n2\nAlameda City Council\nJanuary 17, 2006", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-01-31.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-01-31", "page": 14, "text": "MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING\nTUESDAY- - -JANUARY 17, 2006 -7:29 P.M.\nMayor Johnson convened the Special Meeting at 8:02 p.m.\nCouncilmember Matarrese led the Pledge of Allegiance.\nRoll Call -\nPresent :\nouncilmembers Daysog, deHaan, Gilmore,\nMatarrese, and Mayor Johnson - 5.\nAbsent : None.\nAgenda Item\n(06-028) Resolution No. 13919, \"Authorizing Open Market Purchase\nPursuant to Section 3-15 of the Alameda City Charter for the Repair\nof the Bay Farm Island Seawall Dike, along Shoreline Park, and\nAuthorizing the City Manager to Enter into Such an Agreement. \"\nAdopted.\nCouncilmember Matarrese inquired whether the requested funding was\nfor interim repair, to which the Public Works Director responded in\nthe affirmative.\nCouncilmember Matarrese inquired when full repair would be\ncompleted and what the plan was for preventive maintenance.\nThe Public Works Director responded the schedule for the full\nrepair was being reviewed; larger ripraps would be added to\nstrengthen the armoring of the slope; the design process would take\napproximately two to three months because a lot of surveying is\nrequired; funding is the big issue; the estimate is approximately\n$2 million for the riprap.\nMayor Johnson inquired whether information has been provided to the\npublic.\nThe Public Works Director responded the area has been barricaded,\nand warning signs have been posted.\nMayor Johnson requested that additional signs be posted along\nShoreline Park to provide information on the seawall restoration\nand to thank the public for their patience.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated the damage occurred because of high\ntides ; inquired whether further deterioration was evident.\nSpecial Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n1\nJanuary 17, 2006", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-01-31.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-01-31", "page": 15, "text": "The Public Works Director stated the entire length of the seawall\nhas been inspected; the interim repair would take care of\nsignificant deterioration; the intent is to beat the high tides\nforecasted for the end of the month.\nCouncilmember deHaan inquired whether erosion occurred in other\nareas.\nThe Public Works Director responded the $500,000 should cover all\nareas that need repair.\nMayor Johnson inquired whether periodic inspections are conducted.\nThe Public Works Director responded in the negative; stated future\nperiodic inspections are being considered.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated that the Governor added Alameda\nCounty to the disaster list; inquired whether funding would be\navailable for the repairs.\nThe Public Works Director responded that staff was working with the\nCounty and Office of Emergency Services (OES) to secure Federal\nEmergency Management Agency (FEMA) funds.\nCouncilmember deHaan inquired whether the deterioration was\nstandard or the result of circumstances.\nThe Public Works Director responded that the current situation is\nextremely accelerated; a resident raised the issue in March; staff\nexamined the area in April and determined that immediate attention\nwas not needed.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated hopefully budget issues would not\nprevent performing a temporary fix if the City witnessed some\ndeterioration.\nMayor Johnson stated that issues should be called to the Council's\nattention if something similar arises.\nCouncilmember deHaan thanked the Public Works Director for planting\ntrees in front of Alameda College on Appezzato Parkway.\nCouncilmember Matarrese moved adoption of the resolution.\nVice Mayor Gilmore seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous\nvoice vote - 5.\nSpecial Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n2\nJanuary 17, 2006", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-01-31.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-01-31", "page": 16, "text": "Adjournment\nThere being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the\nSpecial Meeting at 8:11 p.m.\nRespectfully submitted,\nLara Weisiger\nCity Clerk\nThe agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown\nAct.\nSpecial Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n3\nJanuary 17, 2006", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-01-31.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-02-01", "page": 1, "text": "MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING\nTUESDAY- - -FEBRUARY 1, 2005 - -7:30 P.M.\nMayor Johnson convened the Regular Meeting at 8:21 p.m.\nROLL CALL - Present : Councilmembers Daysog, deHaan, Gilmore,\nMatarrese, and Mayor Johnson - 5.\nAbsent :\nNone.\nAGENDA CHANGES\nNone.\nPROCLAMATIONS, SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY AND ANNOUNCEMENTS\n(05-047 - ) Proclamation declaring January 30, 2005 through April 4,\n2005 as A Season for Nonviolence in the City of Alameda.\nMayor Johnson read the Proclamation and presented it to Pat Dilks\nof the Children's Learning Center representing the Youth\nCollaborative.\nMs. Dilks thanked the Council for their support.\n(05-048) - Update on the new main library project.\nThe Project Manager submitted a timeline and provided an update on\nthe project.\nMayor Johnson inquired when the construction budget would be\nsubmitted, to which the Project Manager responded that the\nconstruction budget was set by the $17.4 million contract.\nMayor Johnson inquired when the spending schedule would be\nprovided, to which the Project Manager responded that a schedule\nwould be provided this month.\nVice Mayor Gilmore inquired whether the steel prices were locked in\nbefore the end of 2004, to which the Project Manager responded in\nthe affirmative; stated the rebar subcontractor withdrew because of\nbankruptcy.\nCONSENT CALENDAR\nMayor Johnson announced that the minutes [paragraph no. 05-049],\nand the Resolution Authorizing the Application to the Metropolitan\nTransportation Commission [paragraph no. 05-054] were removed from\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n1\nFebruary 1, 2005", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-02-01.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-02-01", "page": 2, "text": "the Consent Calendar for discussion.\nCouncilmember deHaan moved approval of the remainder of the Consent\nCalendar.\nCouncilmember Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by\nunanimous voice vote - 5.\n[Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk preceding\nthe paragraph number . ]\n(05-049) Minutes of the Special and Regular City Council meetings\nheld on January 18, 2005.\nMayor Johnson requested that the minutes of the Regular City\nCouncil Meeting should be revised to reflect that she was not\nabsent.\nCouncilmember Matarrese moved approval of the Special City Council\nMeeting and revised Regular City Council Meeting.\nCouncilmember deHaan seconded the motion, which carried by\nunanimous voice vote - 5.\n(*05-050) Ratified bills in the amount of $4,627,942.61.\n(*05-051) Recommendation to accept the Quarterly Investment Report\nfor period ending December 31, 2004. Accepted.\n(*05-052) Recommendation to approve Agreement with Ameresco Half\nMoon Bay, LLC for the purchase of power from Landfill Gas\nGeneration. Accepted.\n(*05-053) Resolution No. 13812, \"Authorizing the Application to\nCalTrans for a Bicycle Transportation Account Grant for\nImprovements to the Bay Farm Island Bicycle Bridge Approach.\nAdopted.\n(05-054) Resolution No. 13813, \"Authorizing the Application to the\nMetropolitan Transportation Commission for a Regional Bicycle and\nPedestrian Program Grant for the Cross Alameda Trail Phase I.\"\nAdopted.\nCouncilmember deHaan inquired whether the purchase of the right-of-\nway for the linear park was part of the Alameda Belt Line property,\nto which the Public Works Director responded in the affirmative.\nThe City Attorney stated that the Alameda Belt Line litigation\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n2\nFebruary 1, 2005", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-02-01.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-02-01", "page": 3, "text": "involves the exercise of the right to purchase the entire Alameda\nBelt Line property, not just the 22-acre site.\nMayor Johnson stated that the purchase of the right-of-way for the\nlinear park was separate from the down zoned area [Measure D,\n2000].\nCouncilmember deHaan inquired whether the curb on Ralph Appezzato\nMemorial Parkway was under the City's jurisdiction, to which the\nPublic Works Director responded the street from curb to curb is\nwithin the public right-of-way\nCouncilmember deHaan inquired whether improvements have been made\nto the area, to which the Public Works Director responded that\nthere were no improvements on the south side of Appezzato Memorial\nParkway because the City only owns the area to the curb; the\nAlameda Belt Line property runs from the back of the curb to the\nfence line.\n ouncilmember deHaan moved adoption of the Resolution.\nCouncilmember Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by\nunanimous voice vote - 5.\n(*05-055) Resolution No. 13814, \"Approving Submittal of a Revised\nApplication, Incorporating a Flat Parking Lot and Budget\nAdjustments, to the Office of Library Construction Under the\nCalifornia Reading and Literacy Improvement and Public Library\nConstruction and Renovation Bond Act of 2000. Adopted.\nREGULAR AGENDA ITEMS\n( 05-056) - Public Hearing to consider an Appeal of the Planning\nBoard's approval of Design Review, DR04-0101, to allow a 5,300\nsquare foot new commercial building (veterinary hospital) to\nreplace approximately 2,000 square feet of commercial buildings,\nwith a parking lot expansion to 23 spaces; and adoption of related\nresolution. The property is located at 1410 Everett Street in the\nC-C Community Commercial and R-5 Hotel Residential Zoning\nDistricts. Appellant: John Barni, Jr. Applicant : Park Centre\nAnimal Hospital.\nThe Supervising Planner provided a brief overview of the project.\nVice Mayor Gilmore inquired whether rezoning from R-5 to C-C would\nmake the existing property conform to the General Plan designation,\nto which the Supervising Planner responded in the affirmative.\nMayor Johnson opened the Public Hearing.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n3\nFebruary 1, 2005", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-02-01.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-02-01", "page": 4, "text": "4\nFebruary 1, 2005", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-02-01.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-02-01", "page": 5, "text": "receive notification live within 300 feet regardless of the Everett\nStreet or Central Avenue address.\nVice Mayor Gilmore inquired whether someone would be unaware that\nCentral Avenue was involved if they did not review the plans, to\nwhich the Supervising Planner responded in the affirmative.\nCouncilmember Matarrese inquired whether use permits run with the\ncurrent proprietor or with the property, to which the Supervising\nPlanner responded that use permits run with the land; stated use\npermits do not change the zoning.\nMayor Johnson inquired whether the notice is valid, to which the\nCity Attorney responded that the notice complies with the\nrequirements of the Municipal Code and the current practices of the\nPlanning Department.\nCouncilmember deHaan requested clarification on the dog walking\npractices.\nMr. Busse stated that currently the dogs are walked on the existing\nbank property as well as in the neighborhood.\nCouncilmember deHaan inquired whether dogs are boarded, to which\nMr. Busse responded in the affirmative.\nCouncilmember deHaan inquired whether there is design latitude on\nthe Central Avenue side, to which Mr. Busse responded enhancements\nhave been made; additional latticework is being added.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated he was concerned with trees covering\nthe sign.\nCouncilmember Matarrese inquired whether landscaping was one foot\nfrom the lot line and five feet from the edge of the sidewalk.\nMr. Busse responded that there would be a five foot two inch\nlandscape buffer from the existing sidewalk.\nMayor Johnson stated that she supports the project Design Review\nis the only issue before the Council; good improvements have been\nmade.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated that he is concerned about the\nnotification.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated that the project should be re-\nnoticed, and Design Review should be sent back to the Planning\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n5\nFebruary 1, 2005", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-02-01.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-02-01", "page": 6, "text": "Board.\nVice Mayor Gilmore stated that she would like to go on record as\nliking the design, especially the changes the architect has made\n;\nshe is concerned about the noticing issue.\nMayor Johnson stated that she concurs with Vice Mayor Gilmore; not\nincluding the address on Central Avenue in the notice may have\ncaused confusion; she feels badly for the business because of the\nproject delay.\nCouncilmember Daysog stated that speakers mentioned that the design\ndoes not fit the residential character of the neighborhood;\narguments could be made that the design is an improvement over the\nexisting structure; the project is a positive step.\nCouncilmember deHaan moved that the matter be sent back to the\nPlanning Board for proper notification.\nCouncilmember Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by\nunanimous voice vote - 5.\nCouncilmembers Matarrese, Gilmore, Daysog, and Mayor Johnson went\non record that the only reason the matter was being sent back to\nthe Planning Board was to allow proper notification.\n(05-057 - ) Public Hearing to consider Amendment to Zoning Map to\nrezone approximately 7,800 square feet (1/5 acre) at 1410 Everett\nStreet, APN 070-170-15, from R-5 Hotel Residential to C-C Community\nCommercial; and\n(05-057A) Introduction of Ordinance Reclassifying and Rezoning\nCertain Property within the City of Alameda by Amending Zoning\nOrdinance No. 1277, N.S., from R-5 (General Residential Zoning\nDistrict to C-C (Community Commercial Zoning District, for that\nProperty Located at 2507 Central Avenue at Everett Street. Not\nintroduced.\nMayor Johnson opened the Public Hearing.\nProponents (In favor of rezoning) : Robb Ratto, Park Street Business\nAssociation; Steve Busse, Park Centre Animal Hospital.\nOpponents (Not in favor of rezoning) : John Barni, Alameda.\nThere being no further speakers, Mayor Johnson closed the public\nportion of the hearing.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n6\nFebruary 1, 2005", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-02-01.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-02-01", "page": 7, "text": "Vice Mayor Gilmore moved that the matter be sent back to the\nPlanning Board for proper notification.\nCouncilmember deHaan seconded the motion, which carried by\nunanimous voice vote - 5.\nMayor Johnson called a recess at 10:05 p.m. and reconvened the\nRegular City Council Meeting at 10:21 p.m.\n*\nMayor Johnson announced that the recommendation to direct the City\nManager to prepare an ordinance [paragraph no. 05-058] would be\nheard before the discussion regarding options for relocation\nassistance [paragraph no. 05-059].\n(05-058 - ) Recommendation to direct the City Manager to prepare an\nordinance establishing a Theatre Combining District in Chapter XXX,\nDevelopment Regulations.\nLars Hanson, Park Street Business Association (PSBA) , stated that\nPSBA supports establishment of the ordinance.\nMayor Johnson announced that the following speakers are in favor\nbut would not comment Pauline Kelley, Alameda Abigail Wade,\nRegency Antiques; Nick Petrulakis, Books Inc. ; Elizabeth Pinkerton,\nDog Bone Alley; Gene Oh, Alameda Bicycle, Robb Ratto, PSBA.\nCouncilmember deHaan moved to approval of the staff recommendation.\nCouncilmember Matarrese seconded the motion.\nUnder discussion, Councilmember Daysog inquired whether accepting\nthe staff recommendation allows the Central Cinema to continue\noperating, to which the City Attorney responded in the affirmative.\nOn the call for the question, the motion carried by unanimous voice\nvote - 5.\n(05-059) Discussion regarding options for relocation assistance\nlegislation and a temporary moratorium on all new construction,\ndemolition and condominium conversion in the \"West End Atlantic\nCorridor Area\" (bounded by Webster Street, Main Street, Pacific\nAvenue and Ralph J. Appezzato Memorial Parkway).\nProponents : Mosetta Rose London, Alameda; Donald Cummingham,\nAlameda ; Modessa Henderson, Harbor Island Tenant Association\n(HITA) ; Motoe Yamada, Alameda; Emily, Lin; Michael Wharton, Alameda\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n7\nFebruary 1, 2005", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-02-01.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-02-01", "page": 8, "text": "Unified School District i Gerbrehiwot Tesfandrias, Alameda Michael\nJohn Torrey, Alameda. Samya Ahmed, HITA; David de la Torre,\nAlameda; Lorraine Lilley, HITA; Tom Matthews, Renewed Hope; Lynette\nLee, Renewed Hope; Isolina Cadle, HITA; Michael Yoshii, Buena Vista\nUnited Methodist Church; Judge Richard Bartalini, Alameda; Arnold\nFong, Alameda resident and RPO; Lily Lueng, Alameda.\nNeutral Dr. Mary Abu-saba, Alameda; Deborah James, Alameda; Craig\nMiott, Alameda.\nOpponents: Jack Sullivan, Alameda resident and Rental Property\nOwner (RPO) i Jun Saraspi, RPO; John Goerl, RPO; Shirley Green,\nAlameda resident and RPO; Paul Anders, Alameda resident and RPO;\nMerle Pagel, Alameda resident and RPO; Maewood Zarback, Alameda\nresident and RPO; Roger Armstrong, RPO; Rosemary McNally, Alameda\nresident and RPO; Angela McIntyre, Alameda Association of Realtors;\nHarry McMillan, RPO; Ann O'Rourke, Alameda resident and RPO; former\nCouncilmember Hadi Monsef, Alameda; Chris Mazala, Mason Management\nDon Camara, Alameda resident and RPO; Lisa Fowler, Gallagher and\nLindsey Eileen Walker, Alameda resident and President of Alameda\nAssociation of Realtors; Ann Bracci, Alameda; Dave Gallagher, RPO;\nHanna Fry, Alameda resident and RPO; Mark Palmer, Alameda resident\nand RPO; Ellen Purdy, Harbor Bay Realty; Ed Murphy, Alameda\nresident and RPO; Arch Woodliff, Alameda resident and RPO; Suha\nErdem, Alameda resident and RPO; Cynthia Ridenour, Alameda resident\nand RPO; former Councilmember Barbara Kerr, Alameda; Thomas Cooke,\nBonanza Apartments; Carol Martino, Realty World Martino Associates;\nKathy Lautz, Apartment Owners Association; Steve Edrington, Rental\nHousing Association of Northern Alameda County.\n(05-060) After speaker Cynthia Ridenour, Councilmember Matarrese\nmoved that the Regular Meeting be continued past midnight.\nVice Mayor Gilmore seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous\nvoice vote - 5.\nCouncilmember Daysog stated that as a graduate student he worked on\na project analyzing the impacts of rent control in Berkeley and\nSanta Monica; in both cases, rent control laws did not help the\npeople; he is concerned that someone would use the proposed\nordinance to file a lawsuit for reasons having little or nothing to\ndo with the Harbor Island Apartment situation; the emphasis of the\nproposed ordinance is wrong by focusing on landlord/tenant\nrelations; involvement in landlord/tenant relations is done\ninformally via the Rent Review Advisory Committee; requested that\nstaff, landlords and residents work together to develop something\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n8\nFebruary 1, 2005", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-02-01.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-02-01", "page": 9, "text": "other than an ordinance that speaks to short notice mass evictions\nand voluntary relocation assistance.\nMayor Johnson requested staff to determine how local and State\nstatutes could be put to better use; stated the maintenance and\nquality of life issues at the Harbor Island Apartments could have\nbeen handled better.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated that he has not met one person who\nhas defended the 15 Asset Management Group's action; requested\nstaff to review whether there is a hole in the condominium\nconversion ordinance and whether there is an attempt to circumvent\nthe ordinance; the proposed ordinance does not address the impact\nof not providing a reasonable, fair amount of public notice for\nvacating the complex completely; the Alameda Unified School\nDistrict is trying to close a gap of over a million dollars ;\nperhaps the 15 Asset Management Group should pay an impact fee; the\nHarbor Island Apartment issue will not be resolved soon; encouraged\ninvestment and improvement in the West End; stated process should\ninclude social impacts.\nVice Mayor Gilmore stated the goal should be preventing a Harbor\nIsland Apartment situation from happening again; the question is\nhow to go about it; the City needs to work to enforce current laws\nthe former residents suffered greatly; West End residents need to\nknow that they are just as important as residents in other sections\nof the City; landlords have stated that the proposed ordinance will\nnot work from their standpoint i challenged the landlords to work\nwith the City and the residents and come up with a way of\npreventing the situation from happening again; stated steps need to\nbe put in place to have it happen sooner rather than later.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated that redeveloping the West End will\ncause displacement; a good social eye is needed for what is\noccurring the City knew that something was going astray; a wedge\nhas been driven between the landlords and tenants; the size of the\nHarbor Island Apartments makes it difficult to manage; the property\ncannot afford to be kept out of the rental market; that he does not\nbelieve the ordinance or moratorium are the answer.\nCouncilmember Daysog stated the concerns that people had regarding\nmandatory relocation assistance could be the same concerns\nregarding mandatory impacts; the City needs to be creative in\nfollowing through with a voluntary relocation program.\nMayor Johnson stated that she had no expectation that the Council\ncould create an ordinance tonight ; she does not think the drafted\nordinances are the answers; stated that she concurs with Vice Mayor\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n9\nFebruary 1, 2005", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-02-01.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-02-01", "page": 10, "text": "Gilmore's challenge to have property owners and residents work\ntogether and provide suggestions; no one in Alameda has not been\noffended by the actions of 15 Asset Management Group.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated that he is looking for some type of\nquantifiable action in going forward; over the last year and a\nhalf, Council had knowledge of the crime situation around the\ncomplex; Housing Authority reports stated Section 8 units were\nbeing decertified because standards were not being met; requested\nthe City Manager to compile indicators such as crime, Code\nEnforcement complaints, and Housing Authority Section 8 de-\ncertification which would allow Council to set a policy on how to\nreact should there be another large complex that is spinning in the\nsame fashion as the Harbor Island Apartments situation.\nMayor Johnson requested an inventory of ordinances that have not\nbeen strongly enforced to allow Council to set a policy on\nenforcement.\nCouncilmember Matarrese requested staff to review the Harbor Island\nApartments in relation to Alameda Municipal Code Section 13-11.3\nMayor Johnson requested an inventory of ordinances that apply to\nAlameda, whether State or local.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated that he would like to review how other\ncities have utilized the State ordinances and whether other cities\nhave been effective.\nMayor Johnson stated that it is important for the Council to set a\npolicy utilizing existing ordinances.\nCouncilmember Daysog requested feedback from staff on his draft\nvoluntary relocation assistance.\nVice Mayor Gilmore stated that going through the process has raised\npublic\nawarenessi a committee of tenant and landlord\nrepresentatives should be formed to keep the momentum going and\ndiscuss the issues; landlords have been reactionary to tenants'\nideas; landlords and tenants should work more cooperatively in\ndeveloping ideas for preventing the situation from occurring again.\nMayor Johnson requested that suggestions on the framework of the\ncommittee be brought back to Council at the next City Council\nmeeting.\nVice Mayor Gilmore moved that staff follow up on direction provided\ntonight.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n10\nFebruary 1, 2005", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-02-01.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-02-01", "page": 11, "text": "Counci lember Matarrese clarified that the motion was to direct\nstaff to: 1) provide a compilation of indicators relating to crime,\nCode Enforcement, and Housing Authority Section 8 de-certification\nwhich would enable the Council to develop a policy on how to react,\nand 2) provide a framework for a committee which would include\ndefining what happened at the Harbor Island Apartments and how to\nprevent the situation from happening again.\nMayor Johnson stated Councilmember Daysog's voluntary relocation\nassistance draft should be included.\nCounci lmember Daysog stated the proposed committee could review his\nsuggestion.\nCouncilmember Daysog seconded the motion, which carried by\nunanimous voice vote -5.\nORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA\n(05-061) Former Councilmember Barbara Kerr, Alameda, stated the\nCity Attorney received a copy of the State law on rentals two years\nagoi noted Committees, except those she has chaired, often do not\nsunset on time; stated landlords would get together to respond to\nCouncilmember Gilmore's challenge [to come up with a something to\nprevent a Harbor Island Apartment situation from happening again]\n.\n(05-062) Judge Richard Bartalini, Alameda, thanked Councilmember\nDaysog for returning property he left in the Chambers at a previous\nmeeting.\n(05-063) Steve Edrington, Rental Housing Association, stated that\nhe could provide Council with copies of the rental housing laws.\n(05-064) Arch Woodliff, Alameda, noted that he chaired the\ncommittee which dealt with rent in 1974 and first founded the Rent\nReview Advisory Committee.\nCOUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS\n(05-065) Consideration of Mayor's nomination for appointment to the\nSocial Service Human Relations Board. [Partial term expiring June\n30, 2007]\nMayor Johnson nominated Dennis Hanna for appointment to the SSHRB.\n(05-066) - ) Vice Mayor Gilmore request staff to provide information on\nthe cost for filing an appeal; stated Mr. Barni indicated his\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n11\nFebruary 1, 2005", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-02-01.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-02-01", "page": 12, "text": "Lara Weisiger\nCity Clerk\nThe agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown\nAct.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n12\nFebruary 1, 2005", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-02-01.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-02-01", "page": 13, "text": "MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING\nTUESDAY- - -FEBRUARY 1, 2005 -6:45 P.M.\nMayor Johnson convened the Special Meeting at 6:45 p.m.\nRoll Call - Present : Councilmembers Daysog, deHaan, Gilmore,\nMatarrese, and Mayor Johnson - 5.\nAbsent :\nNone.\nThe Special Meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider :\n( 05-044) Conference with Legal Counsel - Existing Litigation; Name\nof case : Younger-Wunar, Inc. V. City of Alameda.\n(05-045) Conference with Legal Counsel - Existing Litigation; Name\nof case: Gallagher & Burke, Inc. V City of Alameda.\nFollowing the Closed Session, the Special Meeting was reconvened\nand Mayor Johnson announced that regarding Younger-Wunar Inc. V.\nCity of Alameda, the Council obtained briefing and instructions\nwere given to Legal Counsel; and regarding Gallagher & Burke, Inc.\nV. City of Alameda, the Council obtained briefing and instructions\nwere given to Legal Counsel.\nAdjournment\nThere being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the\nSpecial Meeting at 7:10 p.m.\nRespectfully submitted,\nLara Weisiger\nCity Clerk\nThe agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown\nAct.\nSpecial Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nFebruary 1, 2005", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-02-01.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-02-01", "page": 14, "text": "MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL JOINT CITY COUNCIL,\nCOMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION AND\nALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING\nTUESDAY- - - -FEBRUARY 1, 2005- -7:27 P.M.\nMayor/Chair Johnson convened the Special Meeting at 8:05 p.m.\nROLL CALL -\nPresent : Councilmembers/Commissioners/Board Members\nDaysog, deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese, and\nMayor/Chair Johnson - 5.\nAbsent :\nNone.\nAGENDA ITEMS\nJOINT ACTION:\n(05-046CC/05-005CIC) Recommendation to accept the Quarterly\nFinancial Report and approve mid-year budget adjustments.\nThe Interim City Manager/Executive Director stated that the report\nshows the revenues and expenditures for the first six months of the\nFiscal Year and recommended adjustments.\nThe Finance Director stated the report provides a snapshot view;\nmatters could get better or worse; the amended budget has a $4.8\nmillion deficit; a report on closing the deficit would be presented\nat the February 15 City Council Meeting; 45% of the estimated\nrevenues have been received; expenditures are at 43.5% of budget\nthe estimated fund balance is based on estimated revenues and\nappropriations.\nCouncilmember/Commissioner/Board Member Daysog inquired how much of\nthe projected $13.4 million fund balance is designated, to which\nthe Finance Director responded approximately $8.5 million.\nCouncilmember/Commissioner/Board Member Matarrese inquired whether\nthere would be a budget adjustment due to the 43.5% run rate.\nThe Interim City Manager/Executive Director responded that a budget\nadjustment would be made that would equal the estimated overrun of\n$4.8 million.\nMayor/Chair Johnson stated the budget situation is a very serious\nproblem.\n  ouncilmember/Commissioner/Board Member Daysog moved acceptance of\nthe staff recommendation.\nSpecial Joint Meeting\nAlameda City Council, Community\n1\nImprovement Commission and Alameda\nReuse and Redevelopment Authority\nFebruary 1, 2005", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-02-01.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-02-01", "page": 15, "text": "Councilmember/Commissioner/BoardMember Matarrese seconded the\nmotion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.\nCOMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION ACTION:\n05-006CIC) Resolution #05-133, \"Approving and Authorizing\nExecution of an Assigment and Assumption Agreement and First\nAmendment to Exclusive Negotiation Agreement between MovieTECS,\nInc. and the Community Improvement Commission of the City of\nAlameda. (2305 Central Avenue, Video Maniacs) Adopted.\nLars Hanson, President of the Park Street Business Association\n(PSBA), stated that PSBA supports the resolution; adoption of the\nresolution would be the first step toward restoring the historic\nAlameda theatre.\nDuane Watson encouraged building the parking structure.\nDebbie George, Alameda, urged adoption of the resolution.\nRobb Ratto, PSBA, thanked the Council for taking a historic step in\nmoving forward with the parking structure, the restoration of the\nAlameda theatre, and the new theatre complex.\nCommissioner Matarrese moved adoption of the Resolution.\nCommissioner deHaan seconded the motion.\nUnder discussion, Commissioner deHaan stated that the theatre\nproject has been a long time coming.\nChair Johnson stated that many people still do not believe that the\ntheatre project is moving forward; affirmative steps need to be\ntaken to let people know that the theatre is going to reopen.\nOn the call for the question, the motion carried by unanimous voice\nvote - 5.\nADJOURNMENT\nThere being no further business, Mayor/Chair Johnson adjourned the\nspecial meeting at 8:20 p.m.\nRespectfully submitted,\nLara Weisiger, City Clerk\nSecretary,\nCommunity\nImprovement\nCommission\nSpecial Joint Meeting\nAlameda City Council, Community\n2\nImprovement Commission and Alameda\nReuse and Redevelopment Authority\nFebruary 1, 2005", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-02-01.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-02-01", "page": 16, "text": "Agenda for meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act.\nSpecial Joint Meeting\nAlameda City Council, Community\n3\nImprovement Commission and Alameda\nReuse and Redevelopment Authority\nFebruary 1, 2005", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-02-01.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-02-01", "page": 17, "text": "MINUTES OF THE ANNUAL ALAMEDA PUBLIC\nIMPROVEMENT CORPORATION MEETING\nTUESDAY - -FEBRUARY 1, 2005- -7:25 P.M.\nChair Johnson convened the Annual Meeting at 8:03 p.m.\nROLL CALL -\nPresent :\nBoard Members Daysog, deHaan, Gilmore,\nMatarrese, and Chair Johnson - 5.\nAbsent :\nNone.\nMINUTES\n(05 5-01) - Minutes of the Annual Alameda Public Improvement\nCorporation Meeting of February 3, 2004.\nBoard Member Daysog moved approval of the minutes.\nBoard Member Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by the\nfollowing voice vote: Ayes : Board Members Daysog, Gilmore,\nMatarrese and Chair Johnson - 4. Abstentions : Board Member deHaan -\n1.\nORAL COMMUNICATIONS\nNone.\nBOARD COMMUNICATIONS\nNone.\nADJOURNMENT\nThere being no further business, Chair Johnson adjourned the Annual\nMeeting at 8:04 p.m.\nRespectfully submitted,\nLara Weisiger\nSecretary, Alameda Public Improvement\nCorporation\nThe agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown\nAct.\nAnnual Meeting\nAlameda Public Improvement Corporation\nFebruary 1, 2005", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-02-01.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-02-15", "page": 1, "text": "MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING\nTUESDAY - -FEBRUARY 15, 2005- -7:30 P.M.\nMayor Johnson convened the Regular Meeting at 7:37 p.m.\nCouncilmember deHaan led the Pledge of Allegiance.\nROLL CALL -\nPresent : Councilmembers Daysog, deHaan, Gilmore,\nMatarrese and Mayor Johnson - 5. [Note:\nMayor Johnson left the meeting at 9:02\np.m. to travel on City business. ]\nAbsent :\nNone.\nAGENDA CHANGES\nNone.\nPROCLAMATIONS, SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY AND ANNOUNCEMENTS\n(05-072) Proclamation supporting the Navy League's efforts to\ndesignate the City of Alameda as an official \"Coast Guard City. \"\nMayor Johnson read the proclamation and presented it to Hadi Monsef\nand Barbara Price representing the Alameda Council of the Navy\nLeague. Ms. Price presented a book on the history of the Coast\nGuard to the Mayor and City on behalf of Coast Guard Admiral\nBreckenridge.\nCONSENT CALENDAR\nCouncilmember Matarrese moved approval of the Consent Calendar with\na correction to the February 1, 2005 regular meeting minutes.\nCouncilmember deHaan seconded the motion, which carried by\nunanimous voice vote - 5.\n[ Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk preceding\nthe paragraph number . ]\n( *05-073) Minutes of the Special and Regular City Council Meetings\nheld on February 1, 2005. Approved.\nCouncilmember Matarrese requested that the February 1 regular\nmeeting minutes adjourn time be corrected to indicate a.m. instead\nof p.m.\n( *05-074) - Ratified bills in the amount of $2,200,868.59.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n1\nFebruary 15, 2005", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-02-15.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-02-15", "page": 2, "text": "(*05-075) Recommendation to accept the Quarterly Sales Tax Report\nfor the second calendar quarter of 2004. Accepted.\n( *05-076) Resolution No. 13815, \"Appointing an Engineer and an\nAttorney for Island City Landscaping and Lighting District 84-2. \"\nAdopted.\n(*05-077) Resolution No. 13816, \"Appointing an Engineer and an\nAttorney for Maintenance Assessment District 01-01 (Marina Cove) .\nAdopted.\n(*05-078) Resolution No. 13817, \"Amending the International\nBrotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW) Salary Schedule by\nEstablishing a Salary Range for the Position of Inventory Control\nClerk. \" Adopted.\nREGULAR AGENDA ITEMS\n(05-079) Resolution No. 13818, \"Appointing Dennis J. Hanna as a\nMember of the Social Service Human Relations Board.' Adopted.\nCouncilmember Matarrese moved adoption of the resolution.\nCouncilmember Daysog seconded the motion, which carried by\nunanimous voice vote - 5.\nThe City Clerk administered the Oath of Office and presented Mr.\nHanna with a Certificate of Appointment.\n(05 -080 - ) Introduction of Ordinance Amending the Alameda Municipal\nCode to Increase the Composition of the Golf Commission from Five\nto Seven Members by Amending Subsections 2-9.1 (Commission Created;\nComposition), 2-9.2 (Membership; Appointment; Removal) and 2-9.3\n(Voting) of Section 2-9 (City Golf Commission). Introduced.\nMayor Johnson stated that she suggested the membership increase\nbecause there is a lot of upcoming activity at the golf course,\nincluding the new clubhouse; having two more members would help\nwith the workload; the Golf Commission Chair supports the idea.\nThe Interim City Manager stated the golf course has become a large\noperation; the golf budget is over $5 million; there will be major\nchanges at the golf course that require financial overview in the\nnext few years.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated the Transportation Commission was\nlowered from nine to seven members; the Recreation and Park\nCommission has five members; inquired whether the membership of the\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n2\nFebruary 15, 2005", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-02-15.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-02-15", "page": 3, "text": "Recreation and Park Commission should be reviewed.\nMayor Johnson stated the matter could be reviewed; commissions are\nestablished by ordinance and Council has flexibility to make\nchanges boards established by Charter would be difficult to\nchange.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated having seven members provides\nflexibility to bring people with different expertise aboard.\nMayor Johnson concurred the matter should be reviewed.\nVice Mayor Gilmore moved introduction of the ordinance.\nCouncilmember Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by\nunanimous voice vote - 5.\n(05-081) Recommendation to award Contract in the amount of\n$2,110,000, including contingencies to Ghilotti Brothers, Inc. for\nPark Street Streetscape and Town Center Project, Phase I, No. P. W.\n10-02-13, and authorize the allocation of additional funds from the\nMerged Areas Bond Issuance of 2003.\nRobb Ratto, Park Street Business Association (PSBA). stated the new\nstreetlights will look like 1927 streetlights on the outside, but\nare state-of-the-art inside; hopefully, a later phase to complete\nAlameda Avenue will happen quickly; urged Council to approve the\nContract.\nMayor Johnson stated that she is pleased with how well the Webster\nStreet Streetscape project is going; that she has not received any\ncomplaints.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated the City decided to replace the entire\nsidewalk on Webster Street; inquired how the decision was made\nregarding Park Street.\nThe Public Works Director responded the entire sidewalk on Park\nStreet is not being replaced due to cost and basements extending\ninto the public right of way; stated replacing the Park Street\nsidewalks would require roofs to be built above basements, which\nwould be very expensive; PSBA agrees with the approach.\nCouncilmember Daysog moved approval of the staff recommendation.\nVice Mayor Gilmore seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous\nvoice vote - 5.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n3\nFebruary 15, 2005", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-02-15.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-02-15", "page": 4, "text": "money by the end of March; the City can deposit the money and begin\nearning interest to mitigate the reduction.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated the City would sell bonds inquired\nhow the liability would be covered.\nThe Interim City Manager responded there would be no liability to\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n4\nFebruary 15, 2005", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-02-15.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-02-15", "page": 5, "text": "the City because the bondholders would demand insurance to cover\nany State default; Covenants and Conditions of the bond will state\nthe bondholders recourse is not to any cities involved, but to the\nState.\nMayor Johnson inquired whether a default on the bonds would have no\nimpact on the cities, to which the City Manager responded in the\naffirmative.\nVice Mayor Gilmore congratulated staff for the creative solution to\ndeal with the budget deficit for the current year and next year.\nMayor Johnson noted that Assemblywoman Chan thought the idea was\nvery interesting and a good strategy.\nCouncilmember Matarrese moved adoption of the resolution.\nCouncilmember Daysog seconded the motion, which carried by\nunanimous voice vote - 5.\n( (05-083) Recommendation to accept budget adjustments to revenue\nand appropriations.\nThe Interim City Manager gave an overview of the budget\nadjustments.\nMayor Johnson inquired why there is a cost to be part of the\nAlameda County Emergency Medical Services (EMS) system.\nThe Interim City Manager responded the cost is for providing\nemergency medical coordination.\nThe Deputy Fire Chief stated the County provides quality assurance\noverview; every city in the County pays a fee to the County EMS,\nwhich is the medical authority responsible for administering\nlicenses, classes, and protocol the fee is for overhead and\nquality assurance.\nMayor Johnson inquired whether the City reviews the County EMS\nbudget, to which the Deputy Fire Chief responded the City receives\na copy of the budget.\nMayor Johnson inquired whether every city pays $500,000, to which\nthe Interim City Manager responded the fee charged is per parcel.\nMayor Johnson inquired whether the City has to pay for training, to\nwhich the Deputy Fire Chief responded in the affirmative.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n5\nFebruary 15, 2005", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-02-15.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-02-15", "page": 6, "text": "Mayor Johnson inquired whether the County sets policy.\nThe Deputy Fire Chief responded in the affirmative; stated the\nCounty reviews compliance with protocols and licensing.\nMayor Johnson stated the City should review the County's budget to\ndetermine why it is so expensive to be part of the system.\nThe Interim City Manager stated staff could provide a report with\nmore detailed information and obtain a copy of the budget.\nMayor Johnson inquired whether the City provides more assistance in\nmutual aid outside Alameda or whether Alameda receives more mutual\naid assistance from outside agencies.\nThe Deputy Fire Chief responded the County requires the City to\nenter into a mutual aid Contract to have American Medical Response\n(AMR) provide backup AMR comes into town to backup Alameda and\nAlameda provides backup for AMR; the amount of assistance provided\nand received is probably about even; yesterday, paramedics were in\nOakland nine times because the trauma center was on bypass; often\ntimes it goes the other way; if paramedics are at a fire scene, AMR\ntakes all medical calls; noted when Alameda was ramping up the\nAdvanced Life Support (ALS) system, the City was receiving money\nback from the County contract.\nMayor Johnson stated the amount that the City can charge for\nambulance service is set by the County contract the City should\ncharge as much as insurance companies pay, which is often higher\nthan the cap set by the County the City should review the rates\ncharged for ambulance services and request the flexibility to\ncharge more to recover service costs from users.\nThe Deputy Fire Chief stated that the County sets the maximum\ncharge for transport and equipment used; the City is allowed to\ncharge a little more since Alameda is unique and citizens do not\npay a paramedic assessment; however, historically the City has not\ncharged more and only charges a prevailing rate.\nThe Interim City Manager continued reviewing budget adjustments.\nIn response to Councilmember Daysog's inquiry whether an increased\npermit fee could be charged for providing premium service since\nthere is such a high demand, the Interim City Manager stated there\nis an expedited permit fee and some developers have paid for an\noutside contract service that the City administers.\nThe Interim City Manager continued his review.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n6\nFebruary 15, 2005", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-02-15.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-02-15", "page": 7, "text": "Counci lmember Daysog inquired whether neighborhood park directors\nwould remain, to which the Interim City Manager responded in the\naffirmative.\nThe Interim City Manager completed his review; stated the total\nreduction in department budgets is $2,770,363; added to reductions\nin non-departmental areas, the total reduction is $6,295,983 the\nbudget expenditure cuts and decreased revenues have no impact on\nthe General Fund reserves for the fiscal year.\nMayor Johnson stated there was a $1.2 million deficit in December;\ninquired how the deficit has reached $4.8 million.\nThe Finance Director responded the budget adopted July 20 had\nexpenditures exceeding revenues by $1.6 million; revenues decreased\nanother $2 million because the 911 fee and Payment In Lieu of Taxes\n(PILOT) Return on Investment (ROI) were not adopted by the Council,\nresulting in a $3.2 million deficit; Council actions to appropriate\nfunds for the City Manager recruitment, Interim City Manager,\nChinatown agreement, and other activities had an approximately\n$256,000 impact.\nCouncilmember deHaan inquired whether hiring additional\nFirefighters would have an impact on overtime.\nThe Interim City Manager responded that the five Firefighters would\nstart the academy March 15; there would be a cost of $322,000 in\nsalaries for the five Firefighters in the academyi there will not\nbe a net benefit for the current fiscal year.\nCouncilmember deHaan inquired whether there would be an impact in\nfuture years, to which the Interim City Manager responded in the\naffirmative.\nCouncilmember deHaan inquired the amount of the reserve that was\nrequired to be set aside.\nThe Interim City Manager responded there is a $2,453,743 set aside\nfor accrued vacation and $1,444,000 for post employment health; the\ntotal accrued liability is about $3.5 million of the reserves.\nMayor Johnson inquired whether the general reserves are about $10\nmillion.\nThe Interim City Manager responded that after removing the $3.5\nmillion required in set aside and removing loans to other funds,\nthe amount remaining is $8.9 million; if action is not taken, the\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n7\nFebruary 15, 2005", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-02-15.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-02-15", "page": 8, "text": "reserves could be used in 2 years; the federal and State\ngovernments have deficits other cities are making staff\nreductions, doing furloughs and closing City Hall one day per\nmonth; Alameda's financial problems are not unique the problem is\ndue to the State taking property taxes and the large increase in\nthe PERS contribution for retirements; since CalPERS investments\nhave not done well in the last few years, contributions have to be\nraised significantly.\nKevin Kennedy, City Treasurer, stated significant cuts are being\nmade without cutting services that citizens find vital; there has\nbeen a dramatic shift in the State's economy ; the budget has to be\nbrought in line with economic realities; the City might face\nequally or more difficult choices in the next budget the City\nneeds to focus on core services; the ten-year budget forecast will\nbe integral in forming the next budget the reserves do not allow\nthe City to postpone dealing with the situation.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated Department Heads would have to\nimplement budget changes the budget would evolve over the next\nfour or five years; the City needs to be prepared.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated additional police dispatchers were\nneeded; inquired whether the positions are being filled to prevent\novertime and short staffing issues.\nThe Interim City Manager responded that he authorized filling two\npositions in dispatch; one or two more people might be hired, but\nhe is holding off until he is convinced additional staff is\nabsolutely required.\nCouncilmember Matarrese inquired whether the open positions in\npolice and fire constitute a reduction in public safety out in the\nstreets.\nThe Interim City Manager responded that positions cannot be reduced\nin a department without recognizing that there will be an impact;\nboth the Fire Chief and Police Chief have made a concerted effort\nto have the least amount of impact to the citizens, such as a delay\nin processing abandoned vehicles; when the City does not backfill\nfollowing officer promotions, there will be an impact.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated the public should hear about the\nimpacts; there will be ramifications to service; five Firefighters\nwould be hired instead of eleven; inquired whether other vacancies\nare projected in the Fire Department.\nThe Interim City Manager responded only eleven vacancies are known.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n8\nFebruary 15, 2005", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-02-15.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-02-15", "page": 9, "text": "9\nFebruary 15, 2005", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-02-15.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-02-15", "page": 10, "text": "Councilmember Matarrese stated that he is reluctant that the City\nhas to take these stepsi requested that staff monitor service\nlevels: if damage is being done and appropriations are needed,\ninformation should be brought to Council before the situation is an\nemergency the City is starting to nick away at the meat of its\nservices; that he does not differentiate between hard and soft\npriorities; Council has laid out priorities the park and library\nservices are intangibles that prevent the need for additional\npolice officers in some cases; the situation should be monitored to\nensure the City is not putting itself into an unrecoverable hole.\nActing Mayor Gilmore complimented staff for the clarity and brevity\nof the report; commended the Alameda Journal for top coverage of\nthe issue; stated citizens need to be aware; Council is making the\nbest decision given the resources available; the City needs to\ncontinue to get out the word because sooner or later the average\ncitizen will be impacted.\nCouncilmember Matarrese requested that the Council consider\ndirection to review terminating the police boat water services;\nstated upwards of 3,500 berths are occupied by boats that pay\nproperty taxes; that he assumes the fire boat is in jeopardy as\nwell; that he would like to have options to help find an\nalternative funding source, whether it be a surcharge per slip or\nsome other service levy that can be presented to the public; the\nmatter should be brought back to the Council.\nCouncilmember Daysog requested a report on the ARRA $2.5 million\nbudget for public safety; stated that he understands the one-time\nexpenditure will end June 30; in addition to the $1. 4 million hole\nin the City's budget, there will be a $2.5 million hole in the ARRA\nbudget next year; that he understands the Interim City Manager is\nreviewing alternatives.\nThe Interim City Manager stated staff is very concerned about the\nARRA budget; that he has discussed the matter with the Development\nServices Director; steps are being taken to pare down the ARRA\nbudget as much as possible, as soon as possible; the current ARRA\nbudget cannot be sustained; one or two months into the next fiscal\nyear, keeping the operation going will be problematic.\nCouncilmember Daysog stated problems in the ARRA budget could seep\ninto to General Fund budget.\nCouncilmember deHaan inquired whether there would be a review of\nthe ARRA budget shortly, to which the Interim City Manager\nresponded in the affirmative.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n10\nFebruary 15, 2005", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-02-15.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-02-15", "page": 11, "text": "ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA\n(05-084) - Michael John Torrey, Alameda, noted a Calgrant workshop\nwould be held February 22 and a community meeting would be held\nFebruary 23 to discuss extraordinary maintenance projects around\nthe West End.\n(05-085) Robb Ratto, Park Street Business Association, encouraged\nresidents and workers in Alameda to shop in Alameda stated sales\ntax revenues need to increase.\n(05-086) Reginald James, West Alameda Teen Club, invited everyone\nto attend the West Alameda Teen Club black history basketball event\nFebruary 24 from 6:00 to 9:00 p.m. at Chipman Middle School.\nCOUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS\n(05-087) Acting Mayor Gilmore stated an Association of Bay Area\nGovernments meeting on April 28 in San Francisco is about Casinos\non the Bay Area Landscape; suggested that a Councilmember attend\nthe meeting or staff attend, if a Councilmember cannot, to listen\nto the discussion.\n(05-088 ) Councilmember Daysog stated the last representative to\nthe League of California Cities was Barbara Kerr; that he has been\ninvolved in the East Bay Division employer subcommittee; that he\nwould be willing to be the City's representative.\nActing Mayor Gilmore stated the matter would have to be placed on a\nfuture agenda.\nADJOURNMENT\nThere being no further business, Acting Mayor Gilmore adjourned the\nRegular Meeting at 9:18 p.m.\nRespectfully submitted,\nLara Weisiger\nCity Clerk\nThe agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown\nAct.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n11\nFebruary 15, 2005", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-02-15.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-02-15", "page": 12, "text": "MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL JOINT CITY COUNCIL AND\nCOMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION MEETING\nTUESDAY - -FEBRUARY 15, 2005- -6:10 P.M.\nActing Mayor/Chair Gilmore convened the Special Joint Meeting at\n6:20 p.m.\nRoll Call - Present : Councilmember/Commissioners\nDaysog,\ndeHaan, Matarrese, and Acting Mayor/Chair\nGilmore - 4.\nAbsent :\nMayor/Chair Johnson - 1.\nThe Special Meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider :\n(05-070CC/05-007CIC Conference with Legal Counsel - Existing\nLitigation Name of cases Alameda Belt Line V. City of Alameda,\nAlameda Belt Line V. City of Alameda, and City of Alameda V.\nAlameda Belt Line.\nPrior to the Regular City Council Meeting, Mayor/Chair Johnson\nannounced that a briefing was given by the City Attorney's office.\nAdjournment\nThere being no further business, Acting Mayor/Chair Gilmore\nadjourned the Special Joint Meeting at 6:45 p.m.\nRespectfully submitted,\nLara Weisiger, City Clerk\nSecretary, Community Improvement\nCommission\nThe agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown\nAct.\nSpecial Joint Meeting\nAlameda City Council and\nCommunity Improvement Commission\nFebruary 15, 2005", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-02-15.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-02-15", "page": 13, "text": "MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING\nTUESDAY - -FEBRUARY 15, 2005- -6:30 P.M.\nActing Mayor Gilmore convened the meeting at 6:45 p.m.\nRoll Call - Present : Councilmembers Daysog, deHaan, Matarrese\nand Acting Mayor Gilmore - 4.\nAbsent :\nMayor Johnson - 1.\nThe Special Meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider:\n(05-071) Conference with Labor Negotiator; Agency Negotiators:\nHuman Resources Director and Craig Jory Employee Organizations:\nManagement and Confidential Employees Association, International\nBrotherhood of Electrical Workers, and Police Association Non-\nSworn.\nPrior to the Regular City Council Meeting, Mayor Johnson announced\nthat the Council obtained a briefing and instructions were given to\nLabor Negotiators.\nAdjournment\nThere being no further business, Acting Mayor Gilmore adjourned the\nmeeting at 7:25 p.m.\nRespectfully submitted,\nLara Weisiger\nCity Clerk\nThe agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown\nAct.\nSpecial Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nFebruary 15, 2005", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-02-15.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-03-01", "page": 1, "text": "MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING\nTUESDAY - -MARCH 1, 2005- -7:30 P. .M.\nMayor Johnson convened the meeting at 8:08 p.m.\nROLL CALL - Present : Councilmembers Daysog, deHaan, Gilmore,\nMatarrese and Mayor Johnson - 5.\nAbsent :\nNone.\nAGENDA CHANGES\n(05-091) - Mayor Johnson announced that the Resolution Approving\nParcel Map 8574 [paragraph no. 05-096] would be addressed at\na\nlater date.\nPROCLAMATIONS, SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY AND ANNOUNCEMENTS\nNone.\nCONSENT CALENDAR\nCouncilmember Matarrese moved approval of the Consent Calendar,\nexcluding the Resolution Approving Parcel Map 8574 [paragraph no.\n05-096].\nCouncilmember deHaan seconded the motion, which carried by\nunanimous voice vote - 5.\n[Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk preceding\nthe paragraph number . ]\n( *05-092) Minutes of the Special Joint City Council, Community\nImprovement Commission (CIC) and Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment\nAuthority Meeting held on February 1, 2005; and the Special Joint\nCity Council and CIC Meeting, the Special City Council Meeting and\nthe Regular City Council Meeting held on February 15, 2005.\nApproved.\n( *05-093) Ratified bills in the amount of $2,312,454.99.\n(*05-094) Recommendation to accept the Quarterly Sales Tax Report\nfor the third calendar quarter of 2004. Accepted.\n(\n*05-095) Recommendatior to authorize the Mayor, City Manager\nand/or designee to send letters opposing the proposed elimination\nof the Community Development Block Grant Program and related\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nMarch 1, 2005\n1", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-03-01.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-03-01", "page": 2, "text": "federal programs in the Administration's 2006 budget. Accepted.\n(05-096) Adoption of Resolution Approving Parcel Map No. 8574 for\na Sixteen Lot Subdivision at Harbor Bay Business Park. Not heard.\nREGULAR AGENDA ITEMS\n(05-097) - Resolution No. 13820, \"Commending Recreation and Park\nDirector Suzanne Ota for Her Contributions to the City of Alameda.\nAdopted.\nCouncilmember Daysog moved adoption of the Resolution.\nVice Mayor Gilmore seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous\nvoice vote - 5.\nMayor Johnson read the Resolution and presented it to Suzanne Ota;\nstated that Ms. Ota has done an outstanding job.\nThe Interim City Manager presented Ms. Ota with flowers.\nVice Mayor Gilmore stated that she started her service to the City\nworking with the Recreation and Park Department she always\nappreciated Ms. Ota's enthusiasm, energy and \"can do\" spirit.\nCouncilmember Daysog stated that Ms. Ota brings so much joy to so\nmany parts of the community.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated that the City would miss Ms. Ota; as\na citizen as well as a Councilmember, he appreciates the great job\nthat Ms. Ota has done.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated that Ms. Ota should feel very\ncomfortable in her accomplishments.\n(05-098) Public Hearing to consider rezoning ZA 05-0001/R 05-0001\nZoning Text Amendment/Reclassification to add a Theater Overlay\nDistrict and rezoning certain properties to include the Theater\nOverlay Districti and\n(05-098A) Introduction of Ordinance Amending the Alameda Municipal\nCode by Amending Section 30-2 (Definitions) ; Amending Subsection\n30-3.2 (Combining Districts) ; Adding a New Subsection 30-4.22 (T-\nTheater Combining District) ; and Repealing Subsection 30-6.23(2) (b)\nof Chapter XXX (Development Regulations) and Reclassifying and\nRezoning Certain Properties Within the City of Alameda to Include\nthe Theater Combining District. Continued to March 15, 2005.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nMarch 1, 2005\n2", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-03-01.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-03-01", "page": 3, "text": "(05-099) Establishment of a Task Force that will propose strategies\nto prevent future mass evictions from rental housing complexes in\nthe City of Alameda.\nThe Interim City Manager outlined the suggested structure and\nmission of the Task Force; stated the Task Force would meet on a\nregular basis and report back to the Council within 90 days.\nCarol Martino, Alameda, stated that she would like to serve on the\nTask Force.\nSteven Edrington, Rental Housing Association, stated that the\nmatter should not overly politicized to ensure progress is made and\nthere is a balanced committee.\nKathy Lautz, Apartment Owners Association, volunteered to serve on\nthe Task Force.\nLorraine Lilley, Harbor Island Tenants Association, stated that new\nlaws are necessary to protect tenants; suggested that the committee\nhave two Harbor Island Tenant Association representatives and two\nar-large tenants.\nCouncilmember deHaan inquired how the nominations would be made.\nMayor Johnson responded that she would like to receive input from\nCouncil; that Council should submit names for potential Task Force\nmembers.\nCouncilmember Daysog stated there should be a specific period of\ntime for application submittals.\nMayor Johnson inquired whether the Task Force would be an informal\ncommittee, to which the Assistant City Attorney responded in the\naffirmative.\n(05-100) Ordinance NO. 2936, \"Amending the Alameda Municipal Code\nto Increase the Composition of the Golf Commission from Five to\nSeven Members by Amending Subsections 2-9.1 (Commission Created\nComposition), 2-9.2 (Membership Appointment ; Removal) and 2-9.3\n(Voting) of Section 2-9 (City Golf Commission) Finally passed.\nCouncilmember deHaan moved final passage of the ordinance.\nCouncilmember Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by\nunanimous voice vote - 5.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nMarch 1, 2005\n3", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-03-01.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-03-01", "page": 4, "text": "ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA\n(05-101) Martin White stated that the Development Services\nDepartment provided moderate income housing for the Bayport housing\ndevelopment at 110% of the median income but cut off at 80% of the\nmedian income; redevelopment law does not allow for cut offs;\nstated he met with the Director of Development Services about the\nmatter.\nMayor Johnson requested staff to provide Council with a report on\nthe matter.\nCouncilmember Daysog stated that moderate income, by definition, is\n80% to 110% of median.\n(05-102) - Hallemariam Alema, Alameda, stated that he won the\nlottery for moderate income housing in the Bayport housing\ndevelopment; he has an income of $64,000 and has been disqualified.\nMr. Alema's wife stated that the Development Services Director is\nunable to provide reasons for the disqualification.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated that the couple won the lottery; the\nrange for moderate income is 110%; $64,000 is below the range and\nis the reason for disqualification.\nCOUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS\n(05-103) Selection of Councilmember and alternate to serve as the\nLeague of California Cities East Bay Division representative.\nMayor Johnson stated that Councilmember Daysog has volunteered to\nserve as the City's representative and Vice Mayor Gilmore has\nvolunteered to serve as the alternate.\nlouncilmember Matarrese moved that Councilmember Daysog serve as\nthe City's S representative for the League of California Cities East\nBay Division and that Vice Mayor Gilmore serve as the alternate.\nMayor Johnson seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice\nvote - 5.\nCouncilmember Daysog stated that the East Bay Division meeting he\nattended two weeks ago was very nice.\n(05-104) - Councilmember Matarrese stated that he looks forward to\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nMarch 1, 2005\n4", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-03-01.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-03-01", "page": 5, "text": "providing Council with a report on the AC Transit Council Liaison\nCommittee Meeting held last Thursday.\n(05-105) - Mayor Johnson inquired whether Councilmember deHaan\nwanted the matter of increasing the number of members on the\nRecreation and Parks Commission brought back to Council.\nCouncilmember deHaan responded that the Commission could address\nthe matter.\n(05-106) Councilmember deHaan stated that he is pleased that trash\ncontainers are being changed at bus stops and throughout the\nbusiness districts; inquired what was the reason for the change and\nwho provides the maintenance; that he is concerned that the\nsurfaces could be graffitied.\nThe Interim City Manager responded that City staff maintains the\ncontainers.\nCouncilmember deHaan inquired whether maintenance is part of the\ngarbage contract, to which the Interim City Manager responded the\ngarbage contractor empties the containers.\n(05-107) Mayor Johnson requested that the theatre design\nguidelines and schedule update be brought back to Council at the\nnext City Council Meeting.\nADJOURNMENT\nThere being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the\nmeeting at 8:47 p.m.\nRespectfully submitted,\nLara Weisiger\nCity Clerk\nThe agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown\nAct.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nMarch 1, 2005\n5", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-03-01.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-03-01", "page": 6, "text": "MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING\nTUESDAY MARCH 1, 2005 - - 6:30 P.M.\nMayor Johnson convened the Special Meeting at 6:40 p.m.\nRoll Call - Present : Councilmembers Daysog, deHaan, Gilmore,\nMatarrese and Mayor Johnson - 5.\nAbsent :\nNone.\n(05 5-089 - ) Conference with Real Property Negotiators - Property: 1429\nOak Street; Negotiating parties : City of Alameda and County of\nAlameda; Under negotiation: Price and terms.\nFollowing the Closed Session, the Special Meeting was reconvened\nand Mayor Johnson announced that the Council gave direction to the\nReal Property negotiators.\nAdjournment\nThere being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the\nSpecial Meeting at 6:50 p.m.\nRespectfully submitted,\nLara Weisiger\nCity Clerk\nThe agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown\nAct.\nSpecial Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nMarch 1, 2005", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-03-01.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-03-01", "page": 7, "text": "MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION MEETING\nTUESDAY - - MARCH 1, 2005 - - - 6:40 P. M.\nChair Johnson convened the Special Meeting at 6:50 p.m.\nRoll Call - Present : Commissioners Daysog, deHaan, Gilmore,\nMatarrese and Chair Johnson - 5.\nAbsent :\nNone.\n(05-008) Conference with Real Property Negotiators - Property: 1435\nWebster Street (Webster Parking Lot D - APN 074-0427-005-01) ;\nNegotiating parties : John E. Farrar Living Trust and Community\nImprovement Commission Under negotiation: Price and terms.\nFollowing the Closed Session, the Special Meeting was reconvened\nand Chair Johnson announced that the Commission gave direction to\nReal Property negotiators.\nAdjournment\nThere being no further business, Chair Johnson adjourned the\nSpecial Meeting at 6:55 p.m.\nRespectfully submitted,\nLara Weisiger\nSecretary,\nCommunity\nImprovement\nCommission\nThe agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown\nAct.\nSpecial Meeting\nCommunity Improvement Commission\nMarch 1, 2005", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-03-01.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-03-01", "page": 8, "text": "MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL JOINT CITY COUNCIL AND\nHOUSING AUTHORITY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS MEETING\nTUESDAY - - - MARCH 1, 2005 - - - 6:50 P.M.\nMayor/Chair Johnson convened the Special Joint Meeting at 6:55 p.m.\nRoll Call - Present : Councilmembers/Commissioners\nDaysog,\ndeHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese, Commissioner\nTorrey, and Mayor/Chair Johnson - 6.\nAbsent :\nNone.\nThe Special Joint Meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to\nconsider:\n( 05-090 - ) Conference with Legal Counsel - Existing Litigation; Name\nof cases : Housing and Urban Development [Claim No. 178760 and\n177448]\nFollowing the Closed Session, the Special Joint Meeting was\nreconvened and Mayor/Chair Johnson announced that the\nCouncil/Commission gave direction to Legal Counsel.\nAdjournment\nThere being no further business, Mayor/Chair Johnson adjourned the\nSpecial Meeting at 7:25 p.m.\nRespectfully submitted,\nLara Weisiger\nCity Clerk\nThe agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown\nAct.\nSpecial Joint Meeting\nAlameda City Council and\nHousing Authority Board of Commissioners\nMarch 1, 2005", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-03-01.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-03-01", "page": 9, "text": "MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION MEETING\nTUESDAY - -MARCH 1, 2005--7:27P.M.\nChair Johnson convened the meeting at 8:02 p.m.\nROLL CALL -\nPresent : Commissioners Daysog, deHaan, Gilmore,\nMatarrese and Chair Johnson - 5.\nAbsent :\nNone.\nMINUTES\n(05-009) Minutes of the Special Community Improvement Commission\n(CIC) Meetings of January 18, 2005; the Special Joint City Council,\nCIC and Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority Meeting of\nFebruary 1, 2005; and the Special Joint City Council and CIC\nMeeting of February 15, 2005. Approved.\nCommissioner Matarrese moved approval of the minutes.\nCommissioner deHaan seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous\nvoice vote - 5. [Note: Chair Johnson abstained from voting on the\nJanuary 18 Minutes. ]\nAGENDA ITEM\n(05-010) Recommendation to award a grant in an amount not to exceed\n$5,000 from Business and Waterfront Improvement Project tax\nincrement funds for the purchase of a used vehicle to tow the Green\nMachine operated by the West Alameda Business Association for the\ncleaning of the public sidewalk and to authorize the Executive\nDirector to execute a standard grant agreement.\nChair Johnson stated that Robb Ratto, Park Street Business\nAssociation (PSBA) requested that she convey that PSBA is in full\nsupport of the staff recommendation.\nSherri Stieg, West Alameda Business Association (WABA) , urged\nsupport of the staff recommendation; stated that additional areas\nwould be cleaned; noted there will be a Farmer's Market every\nThursday from 4:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m. starting June 8, 2005.\nChair Johnson congratulated WABA for the success of the streetscape\nproject.\nCommissioner Matarrese moved approval of the staff recommendation.\nCommissioner Gilmore seconded the motion, which carried by\nSpecial Meeting\nCommunity Improvement commission\nMarch 1, 2005", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-03-01.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-03-01", "page": 10, "text": "unanimous voice vote - 5.\nADJOURNMEN'T\nThere being no further business, Chair Johnson adjourned the\nmeeting at 8:08 p.m.\nRespectfully submitted,\nLara Weisiger\nSecretary,\nCommunity\nImprovement\nCommission\nThe agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown\nAct.\nSpecial Meeting\nCommunity Improvement commission\nMarch 1, 2005", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-03-01.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-03-15", "page": 1, "text": "MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING\nTUESDAY - - MARCH 15, 2005 - - 7:30 P.M.\nMayor Johnson convened the Regular Meeting at 7:32 p.m.\nRoll Call - Present : Councilmembers Daysog, deHaan, Gilmore,\nMatarrese, and Mayor Johnson - 5.\nAbsent :\nNone.\nAGENDA CHANGES\n(05-110) - Mayor Johnson presented the Resolution Commending Captain\nRich McWilliams [paragraph no. 05-112] prior to the Consent\nCalendar.\nPROCLAMATIONS, SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY AND ANNOUNCEMENTS\n(05-111) Proclamation declaring March 2005 as Red Cross Month.\nMayor Johnson read and presented the Proclamation to Jim Franz,\nAmerican Red Cross.\nMr. Franz stated that the Red Cross has a wonderful partnership\nwith the City; noted that Mayor Johnson accepted the Good Neighbor\nAward for the City's support of the Red Cross a couple of months\nago.\nREGULAR AGENDA ITEM\n(05-112) Resolution No. 13821, \"Commending Alameda Police\nDepartment Captain Rich McWilliams for His Contributions to the\nCity of Alameda. \" Adopted.\nMayor Johnson read and presented the Resolution to Captain Rich\nMcWilliams.\nCaptain McWilliams thanked the Council for the kind words; stated\nthat it has been a pleasure to work for the City.\nCouncilmember Matarrese moved adoption of the Resolution.\nVice Mayor Gilmore seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous\nvoice vote - 5.\nCONSENT CALENDAR\nMayor Johnson announced that the recommendation to adopt Zoning\nRegular Meeting\n1\nAlameda City Council\nMarch 15, 2005", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-03-15.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-03-15", "page": 2, "text": "Ordinance Text Amendment ZA03-0003 [paragraph no. [05-115 ] was\nremoved from the Consent Calendar for discussion.\nVice Mayor Gilmore moved approval of the remainder of the Consent\nCalendar.\nCouncilmember Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by\nunanimous voice vote - 5.\n[ Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk preceding\nthe paragraph number . ]\n(*05-113 - ) Minutes of the Special City Council Meeting, the Special\nJoint City Council and Housing Authority Board of Commissioners\nMeeting, and Regular City Council Meeting held on March 1, 2005.\nApproved.\n(*05-114) Ratified bills in the amount of $6,660,114.93.\n(05-115) Recommendation to adopt Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment,\nZA03-0003, - Citywide Guide to Residential Design.\nRichard W. Rutter, Alameda, stated that the guidelines are a good\ntool for the public and staff to utilize; urged adoption.\nElizabeth Krase, Alameda Architectural Preservation Society (AAPS) ,\nstated that the guidelines are long overdue; urged adoption.\nKevin Frederick, AAPS, urged adoption of the guidelines.\nJanelle Spatz, AAPS, stated that AAPS supports and encourages\nadoption of the guidelines.\nRoss Dileo, Alameda, urged endorsement of the guidelines.\nChristopher Buckley, AAPS, urged adoption of the guidelines.\nDenise Brady, AAPS, stated that the guidelines have been in the\nworks for a very long time; urged adoption.\nCouncilmember Daysog moved approval of the staff recommendation.\nCouncilmember deHaan seconded the motion.\nUnder discussion, Councilmember Matarrese thanked staff for\ndeveloping the guidelines; stated the guidelines are very\ncomprehensive and provide some good guidance; noted that the window\nsection of the guidelines prohibits use of aluminum windows stated\nRegular Meeting\n2\nAlameda City Council\nMarch 15, 2005", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-03-15.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-03-15", "page": 3, "text": "certain materials should not be prohibited as technology and\nmaterials progress; the focus should be on the design and\nappearance criteria, not the material.\nThe Supervising Planner stated that a new fiberglass window has\nbeen manufactured which is superior to the wood clad windows in\nmany ways; the guidelines are intended to be a living document and\ncan be amended; staff is recommending adoption of the guidelines\nfor a year.\nVice Mayor Gilmore thanked staff and the community for the time,\nenergy, and effort given to the guidelines stated that the\nguideline pictures are useful for understanding what is and is not\npermitted.\nThe Supervising Planner thanked AAPS for all of their input.\nMayor Johnson stated that staff was working on the guidelines when\nshe was on the Planning Board years ago; stated a voice vote,\nrather than ordinance, is a good process.\nOn the call for the question, the motion carried by unanimous voice\nvote - 5.\n(*05-116) - Recommendation to authorize the Mayor, City Manager\nand/or Designee to send letters opposing the proposed suspension of\nmandated cost reimbursements. Accepted.\n(*05-117) Resolution No. 13822, \"Upholding the Planning Board's\nDecision to Readopt ZA04-0002 to the Webster Street Design\nGuidelines, Known Henceforth as the Webster Street Design Manual. \"\nAdopted.\nCouncilmember deHaan commended the West Alameda Business\nAssociation (WABA) for taking the lead; urged the Park Street\nBusiness Association (PSBA) to adopt a similar guideline.\nREGULAR AGENDA ITEMS\n(05-118) Public Hearing to consider an Appeal of the Planning\nBoard's denial of Major Design Review DR04-0082 and Variance V04-\n0014 to permit the conversion of an existing detached garage to be\nused as a dwelling unit. The site is located at 1608 Santa Clara\nAvenue within the R-4, Neighborhood Residential District.\nApplicant/Appellant Michele and Frank Mulligan; and\n(05-118A) - Resolution No. 13823, \"Upholding the Planning Board's\ndenial of Major Design Review DR04-0082 and Variance V04-0014 to\nRegular Meeting\n3\nAlameda City Council\nMarch 15, 2005", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-03-15.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-03-15", "page": 4, "text": "permit the conversion of an existing detached garage to be used as\na dwelling unit. \" Adopted.\nThe Supervising Planner gave a brief oral report.\nCouncilmember Matarrese inquired whether the Planning Board made a\nrecommendatior to Council, to which the Supervising Planner\nresponded that the Planning staff denied the variances.\nMayor Johnson opened the public portion of the Hearing.\nProponents ( In favor of Appeal) : Frank Mulligan, Appellant\n(submitted handout) i Jeff Kassow, Alameda: Walter DeCalle, Alameda;\nChristina Locklear, Alameda.\nOpponent (Not in favor of Appeal) : Leo Beaulieu, Alameda.\nAfter Mr. Mulligan's comments, Councilmember deHaan inquired how\nMr. Mulligan obtained the referenced photo album, to which Mr.\nMulligan responded that the trustee provided him with the album.\nCouncilmember deHaan inquired whether the permit provided to\nCouncil is the one on file with the Planning Department, to which\nthe Supervising Planner responded in the affirmative; stated the\n\"SFD\" notation on the permit is for the use of the lot.\nVice Mayor Gilmore inquired whether there was anything at the\nlocation before the structure was built.\nMr. Mulligan responded that he did not know; stated there may have\nbeen a garage, but no driveway.\nCouncilmember deHaan inquired whether there are any records that\nindicate that there was a previous garage, to which the Supervising\nPlanner responded there was a permit for demolition of a garage\ndated April 1984; a second permit for a new garage was issued in\nJune of 1984 and finaled in October 1984.\nCouncilmember Matarrese inquired whether the City issued plumbing\nand mechanical permits which would be necessary for a kitchen and a\nbathroom, to which the Supervising Planner responded in the\nnegative.\nMayor Johnson stated that a dwelling unit could not have been built\non a zero property line in 1984; inquired whether building a\ndwelling unit with a garage permit would have been legal in 1984,\nto which the Supervising Planner responded in the negative; the\npermit would lack the rear and side set back and separation between\nRegular Meeting\n4\nAlameda City Council\nMarch 15, 2005", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-03-15.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-03-15", "page": 5, "text": "dwelling unit requirements.\nThere being no further speakers, Mayor Johnson closed the public\nportion of the Hearing.\nMayor Johnson stated that the Planning Board was concerned that the\nstructure did not meet building codes; inquired what would happen\nif Council denied the variances.\nThe Supervising Planner responded that the property owner would\nneed to re-institute the garage use that was approved in 1984,\nextend the driveway to the garage, remove the French doors, install\na garage door, and remove the kitchen and bathroom.\nMayor Johnson inquired whether a garage could have a residential\nunit, to which the Supervising Planner responded in the negative.\nVice Mayor Gilmore stated the structure does not comply with the\nset backs for a dwelling unit; noted that garages are allowed to\nsit on two property lines; stated placing a dwelling unit on two\nproperty lines would never have been approved in 1984; that she has\nseen countless situations where people apply for a permit, the\ninspector finals the permit, and then plumbing and electrical are\ninstalled after the fact; she has a great deal of sympathy for the\nproperty owners, but approval of the appeal would send a message\nthat the permitting process does not need to be followed.\nCouncilmember Matarrese inquired whether the appraisal form was in\nerror, to which the Supervising Planner responded that she has not\nseen the appraisal form.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated there might be safety factors\ninvolved because plumbing, electrical and mechanical permits were\nnot obtained; that he has sympathy for the property owners ; the\nreal estate agent and appraiser are at fault.\nMayor Johnson stated that she also has sympathy for the property\nowners; Council would be very arbitrary to approve the construction\nafter the fact.\nCouncilmembel deHaan inquired whether the structure could stay in\nplace as a legal garage.\nThe Supervising Planner responded in the affirmative; there may be\nsome openings that are too close to the property lines and may need\nto be closed; some of the plumbing may need to come out.\nMayor Johnson inquired whether the external type plumbing would\nRegular Meeting\n5\nAlameda City Council\nMarch 15, 2005", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-03-15.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-03-15", "page": 6, "text": "have been permitted in 1984, to which the Supervising Planner\nresponded that she did not know.\nCouncilmember Daysog stated that he wished the rules were\notherwise; it is difficult to make things right for the property\nowners.\nVice Mayor Gilmore moved adoption of the resolution denying the\nappeal and upholding the decision of the Planning Board.\nCouncilmember Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by\nunanimous voice vote - 5.\n(05 -119 - ) Public Hearing to consider Zoning Text Amendment ZA05- -\n0001 and Rezoning R05-0001 to create a Theater Overlay District and\nrezone certain properties to the Theater Overlay District; and\n(05-119A) Introduction of Ordinance Amending the Alameda Municipal\nCode by Amending Section 30-2 (Definitions) ; Amending Subsection\n30-3.2 (Combining Districts) ; Adding a New Subsection 30-4.22 (T-\nTheater Combining District) ; and Reclassifying and Rezoning Certain\nProperties Within the City of Alameda to Include the Theater\nCombining District.\nThe Management Analyst provided a brief report.\nMayor Johnson opened the public portion of the Hearing.\nMayor Johnson stated that Melody Marr, Chamber of Commerce,\nsubmitted a letter stating that the Chamber is in favor of Zoning\nText Amendment ZA05-0001 and Rezoning R05-0001.\nProponent (In favor of ordinance) : Robb Ratto, PSBA.\nOpponent (Not in favor or ordinance) : Gary McAffe, Alameda.\nAfter Mr. Ratto's comments, Mayor Johnson inquired whether the\nproposed ordinance would have an impact on the Central Cinema, to\nwhich the Management Analyst responded in the negative; stated the\nproposed ordinance pertains to multi-screen cinemas.\nThere being no further speakers, Mayor Johnson closed the public\nportion of the Hearing.\nCouncilmember Daysog moved introduction of the ordinance.\nCouncilmember Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by\nunanimous voice vote - 5.\nRegular Meeting\n6\nAlameda City Council\nMarch 15, 2005", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-03-15.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-03-15", "page": 7, "text": "(05-120) Public Hearing to consider a Citywide Zoning Text\nAmendment ZA04-0001 to review and revise Alameda Municipal Code\nSection 30-6, Sign Regulations, clarifying current regulations and\nestablishing internal consistency with various Alameda Municipal\nCode sections with the primary focus on regulations pertaining to\nWindow Signs and\n(05-120A) Introduction of Ordinance Amending the Alameda Municipal\nCode by Amending Section 30-2 (Definitions) of Article I (Zoning\nDistricts and Regulations) of Chapter XXX (Development Regulations)\nby Adding a New Section 30-6 (Sign Regulations) to Chapter XXX\n(Development Regulations) Introduced.\nThe Supervising Planner gave a brief report.\nCouncilmember Daysog inquired whether a medical office not in a\ncommercial area is allowed to have a temporary sign, to which the\nSupervising Planner responded A-frame and I-frame signs are not\npermitted anywhere in Alameda.\nCouncilmember deHaan inquired whether the proposed ordinance was\nfor all retail areas, to which the Supervising Planner responded in\nthe affirmative.\nMayor Johnson opened the public portion of the Hearing.\nProponents: (In favor of ordinance) : Robb Ratto, PSBA; and Sherri\nStieg, WABA.\nVice Mayor Gilmore stated that the City does not have the resources\nto walk down each business district street to enforce the\nordinance; the City is counting on and expecting PSBA and WABA to\nhelp clean up the signage in town.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated that some of the retailers are going to\nhave a rude awakening; enforcement of the proposed ordinance needs\nto be implemented fairly.\nCouncilmember Daysog inquired whether the proposed ordinance is\nprimarily for signs facing outward and not inside signs, to which\nthe Supervising Planner responded that signs which are part of the\ninterior d\u00e9cor would not be considered to be a sign.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated that tonight is monumental; thanked\nstaff for all of their work.\nVice Mayor Gilmore moved introduction of the ordinance.\nRegular Meeting\n7\nAlameda City Council\nMarch 15, 2005", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-03-15.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-03-15", "page": 8, "text": "Councilmember Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by\nunanimous voice vote - 5.\n(05-121) - Recommendation to approve the Theatre Design Guidelines\nand presentation of conceptual parking structure designs.\nThe Development Services Director provided a brief summary.\nMayor Johnson inquired how wide the sidewalks are on Central\nAvenue, to which the Development Services Director responded 14\nfeet i stated sidewalks on Oak Street are 8 feet.\nMayor Johnson stated that the design guidelines provide a sense of\nwhat the community would like to see when the architects come back\nwith actual plans.\nCouncilmember Matarrese inquired about the timeline.\nThe Development Services Director responded the design guidelines\ncould be attached to the Disposition and Development Agreement\n(DDA) ; the DDA should be finalized within the next couple of days\nfor public display and a hearing in April; noted that the public\nhearing notice for a DDA is extensive and lengthy.\nCouncilmember Matarrese inquired the impact of not including the\nguidelines in the DDA.\nThe Development Services Director responded having the guidelines\nas part of the DDA gives it more importance.\nThe City Attorney stated that the DDA does not have to have any\nattachments.\nMayor Johnson stated if the guidelines are not adopted tonight,\nthey would not be attached to the DDA or the DDA would be delayed.\nThe Development Services Director stated Council could adopt the\nguidelines separately.\nMayor Johnson stated that she would prefer to have the guidelines\nattached; that she is prepared to go forward with the approval of\nthe design guidelines.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated that the scope of the architect's\ndesires should not be limited; inquired whether there would be two\nor three different design concepts.\nRegular Meeting\n8\nAlameda City Council\nMarch 15, 2005", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-03-15.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-03-15", "page": 9, "text": "The Development Services Director responded that the developer\nwould start with conceptual plans, submit an application to the\nPlanning Department, and the design review process would begin; she\nis not expecting multiple concepts to be submitted.\nMayor Johnson noted that Melody Marr, Chamber of Commerce,\nsubmitted a letter stating that the Chamber is in favor of the\nTheatre Design Guidelines.\nRichard W. Rutter, Alameda, stated that it appears there will be a\ntraffic impact on Oak Street; suggested considering making Oak\nStreet be increased to 60 feet wide.\nNick Petrulakis, Alameda, urged moving forward with the guidelines.\nScott Brady, Alameda, stated that he was concerned that the\nguidelines are overly specific in terms of architectural design\nelements.\nChristopher Buckley, AAPS, stated that the preliminary review is a\ngood idea; outlined AAPS's suggested changes to the guidelines.\nChuck Millar, Alameda, stated that he was concerned with the\nproposed contemporary design.\nMayor Johnson requested the Development Services Director to\nrespond to the design issue.\nThe Development Services Director stated the design was done by an\nenvironmental group to study the mass and make a judgment about\nwhether or not it fits within the contexts and is consistent with\nthe Secretary of Interior standards; stated there has been a lot of\ncommunity concern because of the image the environmental planner\ncreated to do basic evaluation.\nCouncilmember Daysog inquired whether a review by the State was\nrequired to determine impacts on surrounding historical areas.\nThe Development Services Director responded a review would not be\nneeded if Federal funding were not used.\nCouncilmember Daysog stated the Historical Advisory Board and other\ninterested groups should have input.\nElizabeth Krase, AAPS, submitted a handout ; stated that she\nwelcomes the rehabilitation of the historic theatre with\nreservations. ; she is concerned with the projected overhangs.\nRegular Meeting\n9\nAlameda City Council\nMarch 15, 2005", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-03-15.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-03-15", "page": 10, "text": "Councilmember Daysog inquired whether the projected overhangs would\noverwhelm the historic theatre, to which Ms. Krase responded in the\naffirmative.\nKevin Frederick, Alameda, stated that no consideration, thought, or\nrespect has been given to Alameda; noted the proposed design is\nbizarre.\nMayor Johnson inquired whether there have been any designs from the\narchitect, to which the Development Services Director responded in\nthe negative.\nMayor Johnson inquired whether designs were presented at last\nnight's Planning Board meeting, to which the Development Services\nDirector responded the developer had his architect work on some of\nthe concepts to clarify questions.\nJon Spangler, Alameda, stated the community is reacting to the mass\nof the structure; noted overhangs would block the views down the\nstreet.\nDebbie George, Alameda, stated the theatre is positive for Alameda;\nurged moving forward.\nAl\nWright, Alameda, stated that he was extremely happy to have a\ntheatre in Alameda soon.\nRobb Ratto, PSBA, stated the public has had ample opportunity to\nprovide input; urged the process not be delayed and adoption of the\nguidelines.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated that he would like to take out the\nword \"contemporary\" from the guidelines he does not see the need\nto give that type of general guidance; without the Cineplex, the\ntheatre would rot in place; stated nothing is lost by taking out\nthe word \"contemporary.\nMayor Johnson concurred with Councilmember Matarrese; inquired\nwhether omitting the word \"contemporary\" has any negative impact,\nto which the Development Services Director responded in the\nnegative.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated there is ample time to massage the\ndesign once the true design is presented; that he can accept the\ndesign guidelines.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated that he is the strongest advocate of\nthe theatre; inquired whether the retail spaces would be part of\nRegular Meeting\n10\nAlameda City Council\nMarch 15, 2005", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-03-15.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-03-15", "page": 11, "text": "the developer's operation.\nThe Development Services Director responded that there are two\nprojects: 1) the potential historic restoration project conducted\nby the City, and 2) the multiplex and retail stores, which would be\nconstructed and owned by the developer; the developer would own and\nlease the retail spaces.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated the mass must remain for the theatre;\ninquired whether there would be the ability to design without the\nprotrusions by removing retail square footage.\nThe Acting City Manager responded that staff would need to review\nthe matter and return to Council.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated that he does not believe that there is\nany need for signage other than the renovated marquee  noted that\nvertical accent latitude should be left to the architect.\nVice Mayor Gilmore stated that the community and staff have taken\ntheir best shot at the design guidelines; design guidelines are not\ngoing to be perfect, especially in the abstract.\nVice Mayor Gilmore moved approval of the staff recommendation with\nremoving the word \"contemporary\" from the Theatre Design\nGuidelines.\nCouncilmember Matarrese seconded the motion.\nUnder discussion, Councilmember Daysog stated that he sees the\ndesign guidelines as a platform that allows more discussions\ninvolving members of the Historical Advisory Board; the guidelines\ndo not lock the City into bad design; there is a major challenge\nahead in trying to have an economically viable theatre which\nminimizes the projection problem at the same time.\nMayor Johnson stated that the Council has been working on the\ntheatre project for years and has been very supportive; thanked\nstaff for all of their work.\nOn the call for the question, the motion carried by unanimous voice\nvote - 5.\nVice Mayor Gilmore requested that the Transportation Commission\nreview traffic issues on Oak Street and provide Council with\nrecommendations as soon as possible.\nRegular Meeting\n11\nAlameda City Council\nMarch 15, 2005", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-03-15.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-03-15", "page": 12, "text": "ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA\n(05-122) Mina Talebzadeh, Alameda, requested the City to recognize\nSpring Equinox as a day of peace and harmony.\nMayor Johnson requested Ms. Talebzadeh to provide language for a\nproclamation\nGina Mariani was not present but wanted to be on record in support\nof Ms. Talebzadeh's request.\n(05-123) Michael J. McGhee, Volunteer Veterans Advocate, submitted\na letter; stated that the City currently offers services for\nveterans but there is no office or City official assigned to\ncoordinate the services urged the City to appoint a committee to\ninvestigate veterans' services, to clarify the City's jurisdiction\nover veteran programs, and create a City office of Veterans Affairs\nfor benefits.\n(05-124) Jon Spangler, Alameda, stated that he and Audrey Lord\nHausman, co-founder of Pedestrian Friendly Alameda, will be\ntraining at a conference in April; stated that it is wonderful to\nsee the Alameda Police Department enforcing pedestrian rights and\nsafety.\n(05-125) Al Wright, Alameda, stated that on several occasions the\nAmerican flag has been improperly displayed in front of City\nbuildings flags flown at the Police Department are not consistent\nwith City Hall; stated that he objects to the American flag being\nflown at half mast to honor local citizens; stated that all flags\non City property should be in compliance with when the President of\nthe United States directs the flag to be flown at half mast ;\nrequested that Council direct staff to issue appropriate directives\nto all departments.\nCOUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS\n(05-126) Councilmember Daysog stated that the Chipman Middle School\nDrum and Flag Corps requested a City flag for display in parades.\n(05-127) Councilmember Daysog stated there is a professor at the\nUniversity of California, Berkeley who is moving forward with an\ninitiative regarding urban casinos; requested staff to analyze the\ninitiative and provide a recommendation as to whether Council\nshould support the initiative.\n(05-128) - Councilmember deHaan requested that the Transportation\nCommission and Public Works Department provide the Council with\nRegular Meeting\n12\nAlameda City Council\nMarch 15, 2005", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-03-15.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-03-15", "page": 13, "text": "information on transportation remediation efforts at Bayport.\nCouncilmember Daysog noted data indicates that transportation\nsolutions have to be citywide.\nADJOURNMENT\nThere being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the\nRegular Meeting at 10:25 p.m.\nRespectfully submitted,\nLara Weisiger\nCity Clerk\nThe agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown\nAct.\nRegular Meeting\n13\nAlameda City Council\nMarch 15, 2005", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-03-15.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-03-15", "page": 14, "text": "MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION MEETING\nTUESDAY - - MARCH 15, 2005 - - - 6:35 P. M.\nChair Johnson convened the Special Meeting at 6:35 p.m.\nRoll Call - Present : Commissioners Daysog, deHaan, Gilmore,\nMatarrese and Chair Johnson - 5.\nAbsent :\nNone.\nThe Special Meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider :\n(05-011) Conference with Legal Counsel - Existing Litigation; Name\nof case Community Improvement Commission V. Rite Aid Corporation,\nThrifty, Payless, Inc.\nFollowing the Closed Session, the Special Meeting was reconvened\nand Chair Johnson announced that the Commission obtained briefing\nfrom Legal Counsel and instruction was given.\nAdjournment\nThere being no further business, Chair Johnson adjourned the\nSpecial Meeting at 7:00 p.m.\nRespectfully submitted,\nLara Weisiger\nSecretary, Community Improvement\nCommission\nThe agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown\nAct.\nSpecial Meeting\nCommunity Improvement Commission\nMarch 15, 2005", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-03-15.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-03-15", "page": 15, "text": "MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING\nTUESDAY- - -MARCH 15, 2005- -7:00 P.M.\nMayor Johnson convened the Special Meeting at 7:00 p.m.\nRoll Call - Present : Councilmembers Daysog, deHaan, Gilmore,\nMatarrese and Mayor Johnson - 5.\nAbsent :\nNone.\nThe Special Meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider:\n(05-108) Conference with Real Property Negotiator - Property: 2900\nMain Street; Negotiating Parties City of Alameda and Alameda\nGateway, Ltd; Under Negotiation Price and terms.\nFollowing the Closed Session, the Special Meeting was reconvened\nand Mayor Johnson announced that the Council obtained briefing and\ninstructions were given to Real Property negotiators.\nAdjournment\nThere being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the\nSpecial Meeting at 7:25 p.m.\nRespectfully submitted,\nLara Weisiger\nCity Clerk\nThe agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown\nAct.\nSpecial Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nMarch 15, 2005", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-03-15.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-03-15", "page": 16, "text": "MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL JOINT CITY COUNCIL AND\nCOMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION MEETING\nTUESDAY - - - MARCH 15, 2005 - - - 7:27 P.M.\nMayor/Chair Johnson convened the Special Joint Meeting at 7:30 p.m.\nROLL CALL - Present :  ouncilmembers/Commissioners\nDaysog,\ndeHaan,\nGilmore,\nMatarrese\nand\nMayor/Chair Johnson - 5.\nAbsent :\nNone.\nCONSENT CALENDAR\nlouncilmember/Commissioner Matarrese moved approval of the Consent\nCalendar.\nCouncilmember/Commissioner Gilmore seconded the motion, which\ncarried by unanimous voice vote - 5.\n[\nItems so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk preceding\nthe paragraph number. ]\n(\n5-109CC/*05-012CIC) Recommendation to approve a form of\nAssignment and Assumption Agreement between University Avenue\nHousing and Alameda Point Collaborative. Approved.\nAGENDA ITEMS\nNone.\nADJOURNMENT\nThere being no further business, Mayor/Chair Johnson adjourned the\nSpecial Joint Meeting at 7:31 p.m.\nRespectfully submitted,\nLara Weisiger, City Clerk\nSecretary,\nCommunity\nImprovement\nCommission\nThe agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown\nAct.\nSpecial Joint Meeting\nAlameda City Council and\nCommunity Improvement Commission\nMarch 15, 2005", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-03-15.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-03-15", "page": 17, "text": "MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING\nTUESDAY- - -MARCH 15, 2005- -7:34 P.M.\nMayor Johnson convened the Special Meeting at 10:30 p.m.\nRoll Call - Present : Councilmembers Daysog, deHaan, Gilmore,\nMatarrese and Mayor Johnson - 5.\nAbsent :\nNone.\nThe Special Meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider:\n(05-129) Public Employee Performance Evaluation - Title: City\nManager.\nFollowing the Closed Session, the Special Meeting was reconvened\nand Mayor Johnson announced that the Council discussed the\nperformance of the City Manager.\nAdjournment\nThere being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the\nSpecial Meeting at 11:00 p.m.\nRespectfully submitted,\nLara Weisiger\nCity Clerk\nThe agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown\nAct.\nSpecial Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nMarch 15, 2005", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-03-15.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-03-15", "page": 18, "text": "MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING\nTUESDAY- - -MARCH 15, 2005- -7:35 P.M.\nMayor Johnson convened the Special Meeting at 11:00 p.m.\nRoll Call - Present : Councilmembers Daysog, deHaan, Gilmore,\nMatarrese and Mayor Johnson - 5.\nAbsent :\nNone.\nThe Special Meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider:\n(05-130) Public Employment - Title: City Manager.\nFollowing the Closed Session, the Special Meeting was reconvened\nand Mayor Johnson announced that the Council discussed recruitment\nof the new City Manager.\nAdjournment\nThere being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the\nSpecial Meeting at 11:45 p.m.\nRespectfully submitted,\nLara Weisiger\nCity Clerk\nThe agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown\nAct.\nSpecial Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nMarch 15, 2005", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-03-15.pdf"}