{"body": "RecreationandParkCommission", "date": "2005-06-09", "page": 1, "text": "MINUTES OF\nRECREATION AND PARK COMMISSION\nALAMEDA\nRECREATION & PARKS\nMEETING OF JUNE 9, 2005\n2226 Santa Clara Avenue\nAlameda, CA 94501\n(510) 747-7529\nDATE:\nThursday, June 9, 2005\nTIME:\n7:00 p.m.\nPLACE:\nCity Hall, 2263 Santa Clara Ave., Third Floor, Room 360\nAlameda, CA 94501\n1.\nROLL CALL\nPresent:\nChair Jay Ingram, Vice Chair Jo Kahuanui, Commissioners Christine\nJohnson, and Georg Oliver\nStaff:\nDale Lillard, Acting Director (AD)\nJohn McDonald, Park Manager (PM)\nAbsent:\nCommissioner Reeves\n2.\nAPPROVAL OF MINUTES\nApprove Minutes of May 12, 2005 Recreation and Park Commission Meeting.\nM/S/C\nOLIVER/KAHUANUI\n(approved)\nIn Favor (4) -\nIngram, Johnson, Kahuanui, Oliver\nAbsent (1) -\nReeves\n3.\nORAL COMMUNICATIONS, AGENDA\n(Any person may address the Commission in regard to any matter over which the\nCommission has jurisdiction or of which it may take cognizance that is not on the agenda.)\n4.\nWRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS\n-\nLetter from Babe Ruth in support of the Field Use Fee.\n5.\nNEW BUSINESS\nA.\nConsideration of Request to Provide Mobile Beverage Services at Washington\nPark Dog Park - (Discussion/Action Item)\n1\nRecreation & Park Commission Mtg.\nMinutes\nThursday, June 9, 2005\nDedicated to Excellence, Committed to Service", "path": "RecreationandParkCommission/2005-06-09.pdf"}
{"body": "RecreationandParkCommission", "date": "2005-06-09", "page": 2, "text": "Chair Ingram stated that this item will be for discussion only tonight as more of a public\nprocess is needed.\nMr. Ensminger, business person, is seeking to operate a mobile coffee business at the\nWashington Park Dog Park and also other parks including Shoreline Drive. AD Lillard\nasked Mr. Ensminger to be specific with regard to which parks he would be selling the\nbeverages. Mr. Ensminger stated that he would be at all of the parks. Ideally he would\nbegin at Washington Park and branch out from there. The mobile beverage truck is self\ncontained. AD Lillard asked if Mr. Ensminger was talking about doing a few hours at\nWashington Park and then a few hours at another park. Mr. Ensminger stated yes.\nCommissioner Oliver asked if Mr. Ensminger had a Use Permit to operate in the City of\nAlameda. Mr. Ensminger stated no, not currently.\nChair Ingram asked Mr. Ensminger for clarification on what happened at the Council\nMeeting. Mr. Ensminger stated that there is an Ordinance in Alameda that is being\namended which will allow mobile beverage/coffee businesses to operate in the City of\nAlameda.\nAD Lillard stated that Mr. Ensminger applied for a Use Permit and Planning told him that his\nrequest needed to first go before the Recreation and Park Commission for approval. Also,\nthere is an ordinance in place that is approximately 100 years old that does not allow rolling\nstores with the exception of peanuts, rock candy, etc. There are two ways for Mr.\nEnsminger to proceed. Mr. Ensminger could go through the process of putting his mobile\ntruck in the park or amending the Ordinance to where Mr. Ensminger could operate on the\nstreet.\nMike Guerrero stated that this whole idea came about when Mr. Guerrero was in a meeting\nwith Doug Siden, EBRPD Board Member, and Mr. Siden mentioned that it would be nice to\nget a cup of coffee at the Dog Park. Mr. Guerrero then mentioned that Mr. Ensminger had\na mobile coffee business and since the City (Alameda Recreation & Parks) owns the\nparking lot of the park Mr. Ensminger needed to get permission from the Recreation and\nPark Commission.\nAD Lillard stated that at the Council Meeting, Council asked that this item be brought back\nto them for further consideration before it is approved. This item may fall under the Long-\nTerm Park Use Policy.\nCommissioner Johnson asked what the cons would be in having this type of service. AD\nLillard stated that one of the things that could come up would be that ARPD would be\ninundated with requests from similar vendors (e.g., sno-cone vendors, hot dog vendors,\netc.). The Commission would need to deicide how future requests would be handled. AD\nLillard stated that he would not want to see ARPD lose a large portion of the parking lot to\nmultiple vendors because park users would be displaced.\n2\nRecreation & Park Commission Mtg.\nMinutes\nThursday, June 9, 2005\nDedicated to Excellence, Committed to Service", "path": "RecreationandParkCommission/2005-06-09.pdf"}
{"body": "RecreationandParkCommission", "date": "2005-06-09", "page": 3, "text": "Commissioner Oliver stated that once you open it up for one vendor then you will receive\nmultiple requests and soon you could have many vendors wanting to provide the service.\nMr. Guerrero stated that this was an interim deal until Mr. Siden could get a permanent\nstructure built on EBRPD land. AD Lillard stated that this was the first time he had heard of\nthe idea. Mr. Guerrero stated that it would be somewhere, but not sure where. AD Lillard\nstated that EBRPD property starts at the dog park fence and goes toward the beach and\nOtis Drive.\nMr. Guerrero stated that Mr. Siden stated that the project could possibly take a year or two,\nbut he would like to have an interim spot. AD Lillard stated that this was the first time he\nhad heard that this would be an interim spot until there is a permanent structure on the\nEBRPD property. Mr. Guerrero stated that Mr. Siden stated that they (EBRPD) would like\nto build a store similar to mud puppies operation but it would take a year or two to get the\nproject rolling.\nMr. Guerrero stated that another possible way to be in compliance would be to sell\npackaged peanuts.\nChair Ingram asked if the vendor could just put it on the EBRPD property with the EBRPD\nDistrict Board approval and not go to the Recreation Commission or City Council. AD\nLillard stated that it is their property and their Board could agree to go into a\nconcessionaire's agreement. But, Mr. Lillard believed that they would still have to go to the\nPlanning and Building Department for the proper/appropriate use permits.\nCommissioner Johnson asked what time Mr. Ensminger would go to the Dog Park to do\nbusiness. Mr. Ensminger stated that the ideal time for weekdays would be approximately\n4:00 p.m. to dusk. AD Lillard asked if there would be early morning hours. Mr. Ensminger\nstated not during the weekdays. No one is there at that time.\nChair Ingram stated that with the Long-Term Park Use Policy in the works, he felt that the\nUse Policy needed to be done first before approving any proposal.\nCommissioner Johnson asked if the Commission approves the proposal would the other\nvendors like Mr. Ensminger compete for the same thing. Commissioner Kahuanui stated\nthat by accepting this proposal the Commission would be setting precedence and would\nhave to have a procedure on how to choose a vendor, what kind of restrictions, etc. It\nthrows the Commission into a whole new set of policies and procedures to determine which\nvendors come in and which ones do not.\nSusan Krala stated that she has looked around the island and has counted at least 15\nvendors that do business on the side illegally as roach coaches. They are at Alameda\nPoint, business parks, container ship areas, parks, etc. They are not licensed and do not\npay taxes to this City and the powers that be of Alameda just decided that they would look\nthe other way.\n3\nRecreation & Park Commission Mtg.\nMinutes\nThursday, June 9, 2005\nDedicated to Excellence, Committed to Service", "path": "RecreationandParkCommission/2005-06-09.pdf"}
{"body": "RecreationandParkCommission", "date": "2005-06-09", "page": 4, "text": "Chair Ingram asked if there was a difference between industrial areas and neighborhood\nareas. AD Lillard stated that the Assistant City Manager is looking into the issue.\nCommissioner Kahuanui stated that being a life-long resident of Alameda as well, she feels\nthat it is irresponsible to think that we are all looking away when these so called illegal\ntrucks are coming around. Ms. Kahuanui asked if all the trucks were illegal. AD Lillard\nstated that the Assistant City Manager is looking into the situation.\nCommissioner Oliver stated that the concern of the Recreation and Park Commission is\nvendors in our parks. Other City staff will investigate the issue of other truck vendors\nhaving use permits, but for now the Commission is concerned about the parks.\nChair Ingram stated that he feels the Long-Term Park Use Policy should be worked on and\napproved and then work from there. Unfortunately this will delay a decision on Mr.\nEnsminger's request until at least the end of summer.\nCommissioner Johnson asked Mr. Ensminger if he owned the truck. Mr. Ensminger stated\nyes.\nCommissioner Johnson asked if Mr. Ensminger is currently allowed to go into other cities.\nMr. Ensminger stated yes, he goes into San Leandro, Oakland, San Luis Obispo County,\nSanta Barbara County (music festivals).\nCommissioner Johnson asked if Mr. Ensminger is not really counting on Alameda. Mr.\nEnsminger stated that his goal is to work in Alameda where he grew up. Branching out is\nmore of a necessity.\nChair Ingram stated that the Long-Term Park Use Policy will continue to be worked on and\nit may be several months before the policy is completed. AD Lillard stated that when it is\nappropriate the request will be revisited and those involved invited to another meeting.\nB.\nConsideration of Conceptual Drawing for Bay Port Park and Community\nBuilding - (Discussion/Action Item)\nAD Lillard presented the conceptual drawing for Bay Port Park which will be adjacent to the\nschool in the Catellus Development. Karen Folsom, LPA Architects representative, and\nJohn McDonald, Park Manager, were present to answer any questions.\nThe Park will be 4 acres and includes 2 small soccer fields. The community building is\nseparate and a separate plan will be presented later.\nChair Ingram asked if Little League had seen the plans. AD Lillard stated that after it is\nreviewed by the Commission the plans will be taken to the Sports Advisory Group for\nreview. The plans will be again reviewed by the Commission and then go to Council for\napproval.\n4\nRecreation & Park Commission Mtg.\nMinutes\nThursday, June 9, 2005\nDedicated to Excellence, Committed to Service", "path": "RecreationandParkCommission/2005-06-09.pdf"}
{"body": "RecreationandParkCommission", "date": "2005-06-09", "page": 5, "text": "Commissioner Oliver asked if the park entrance will be on Jack London Avenue. AD Lillard\nstated yes and that is where the parking lot is located. PM McDonald stated that we will be\nsharing the parking lot with the school.\nChair Ingram asked if the school has their own playground. Ms. Folsom stated the school\nhas their own play area.\nChair Ingram stated that a skinned infield would be great. AD Lillard stated that will be\ntaken to the Sports Advisory Group.\nAD Lillard stated that the community building will be 1,720 sq. ft. of program space. There\nis program space, storage, kitchen and one more restroom. This building was specifically\ndesigned to fit in with the school. The building will be the Alameda Recreation and Park\nDepartment's and according to the joint use agreement, as time and space is available, the\nSchool District may also use the building.\nThe Recreation and Park Department is currently looking at providing before and after\nschool care and a Tiny Tot program. During the summer the Department will also run\nsports camps out of the building.\nChair Ingram asked if it will be a prefab building. AD Lillard stated no.\nCommissioner Oliver asked if one restroom is enough for a building that will hold 85\npeople. AD Lillard stated that would be adequate. It is a unisex bathroom with two stalls.\nAD Lillard stated that it is anticipated the project will be completed by September 2006.\nC.\nConsideration of Proposed Additional Telecommunications Facility at Krusi\nPark - (Discussion/Action Item)\nAD Lillard stated that Cingular is proposing to replace the tennis lights on the other side of\nthe courts with the same type of lights and telecommunications antennaes that are\ncurrently there on the other side. The equipment building proposed is in the back toward\nthe fence near the maintenance shed and is larger than the one that is currently there.\nPM McDonald stated that the equipment building being proposed is close to 400 sq. ft., but\nare not supposed to go more than 200 sq. ft.\nChair Ingram stated that he felt it was time to start setting a policy with regard to installing\ncell towers in parks. Several other cities have policies in place and some have resolutions\nfor each telecommunications company. Something needs to be done or the Commission\nwill be discussing this issue a lot until Alameda has enough cell towers.\nChair Ingram stated that he is not prepared to make a decision tonight since the paper work\nwas just received tonight.\n5\nRecreation & Park Commission Mtg.\nMinutes\nThursday, June 9, 2005\nDedicated to Excellence, Committed to Service", "path": "RecreationandParkCommission/2005-06-09.pdf"}
{"body": "RecreationandParkCommission", "date": "2005-06-09", "page": 6, "text": "Commissioner Kahuanui stated that whether it is cell towers or equipment structures, the\nCommission needs to make sure that the policy covers everything.\nPM McDonald stated that the few towers that have gone in have been a good source of\nrevenue. We have not fully tapped into the resources, which is good because we have a\nlittle bit of reserve money. But, the Park Maintenance Division does not have any revenue\nsources other than these rental monies. ARPD was able to repave a bad area of\nWashington Park with these funds. Mr. McDonald stated that he would appreciate it if the\nCommission would look into the particulars and the rental agreements that are made. The\nbest deal possible is what will help the Park Maintenance Division. The Division was cut by\n$200,000 so any additional revenue will be of great help.\nChair Ingram stated that there is no doubt that this is a major source of revenue and that all\ncities are looking for revenue, but we need to set a policy with parameters.\nAD Lillard stated that the Commission can set a policy of building size that can be put in the\npark, etc., but the negotiation part is handled through Development Services. The\nCommission cannot put into the policy that they (Commission) will negotiate the terms of\nthe lease.\nCommissioner Johnson asked PM McDonald what he would like for the Commission to do.\nPM McDonald stated that he would like the Commission to get the best deal possible\nbecause it would really help the Park Maintenance Division.\nChair Ingram stated that from his prospective, we need to respect the Park Manager's\nopinion, but the Commission as park stewards needs to look at the policy and the bigger\npicture of the parks and how it will effect the park.\nThis item will be tabled until the next meeting for further discussion.\n6.\nUNFINISHED BUSINESS\nA.\nConsideration of Sports Advisory Committee's Recommendation regarding\nField use Fees - (Discussion/Action Item)\nAD Lillard stated that the Sports Advisory Committee has reviewed the Field Use Fee.\nBabe Ruth has provided the Commission with a letter of support.\nPolicy includes:\n1. Groups requesting City owned field space on an ongoing basis for either games or\npractices will be covered under the policy.\n2. Any applicable fees will be assessed per season according to the established field\nallocation process.\n6\nRecreation & Park Commission Mtg.\nMinutes\nThursday, June 9, 2005\nDedicated to Excellence, Committed to Service", "path": "RecreationandParkCommission/2005-06-09.pdf"}
{"body": "RecreationandParkCommission", "date": "2005-06-09", "page": 7, "text": "3. There will be a $3 per player fee assessed per organization. The minimum fee will\nbe $500 per group.\n4. For organizations with memberships larger than the $500 minimum, there will be an\nadditional $3 per player fee assessed.\n5. Groups will have the option to work off their assessment by completing field\nimprovements or providing goods or services equal to their assessment. The value\nof such improvements will be determined by the Park Manager.\n6. Groups failing to either submit payment or completing work projects will not be\nissued permits for future seasons until the assessment is cleared.\nAll groups (Alameda Soccer, High Schools, Little League, Babe Ruth, Football, newer\nleagues) agreed to support the proposed Field Use Fee.\nAD Lillard stated that he felt that the organizations who traditionally do a lot of work will\nwork off the debt and smaller organizations will pay.\nCommissioner Kahuanui asked if that included schools. AD Lillard stated yes that includes\nthe schools.\nChair Ingram stated that he received a call from Nino Borsoni, Alameda Soccer\nrepresentative. Mr. Borsoni had some questions with regard to the fee.\nQuestions were as follows:\n-\nWill this be a once per year fee, or once per season? AD Lillard stated it would\nbe per season.\nWill kids that participate in multiples sports (e.g., soccer, baseball, football, etc.)\nbe expected to pay the fee for each sport in which they are registered. AD Lillard\nstated yes, because they would be using the field for each sport they participate\nin.\nWill youth organizations that have already done projects be given credit for what\nhas already been done? If so, will there be a deferred start date given upon\ncredit already received? AD Lillard stated no, it would be starting from today. It\nwould not be feasible to try and credit items from prior years.\nHow will the collected fee be applied to field maintenance? Will certain fields be\ngiven priority? If so, on what basis and terms? AD Lillard stated that it would be\ndetermined based on need. We could generate a yearly list of fields and items\nthat need to be done for additional tracking if needed.\nIt has been determined that in lieu of fees the sports groups could do field\nmaintenance work themselves. If that is the case how will the work assignments\nbe made? Who will establish the value of each assignment? Is the Risk\n7\nRecreation & Park Commission Mtg.\nMinutes\nThursday, June 9, 2005\nDedicated to Excellence, Committed to Service", "path": "RecreationandParkCommission/2005-06-09.pdf"}
{"body": "RecreationandParkCommission", "date": "2005-06-09", "page": 8, "text": "Manager okay with non-City people providing materials, labor and possibly using\nheavy machinery to perform tasks? AD Lillard stated that the Park Manager\nwould determine the value. The group would determine that they want to do a\nproject. It could be to a specific park or it could be a monetary amount to be\ndetermined by ARPD staff. The people doing the work would be treated as a\nvolunteer for the City just as is currently being done. Most of the work will be\nmanual. Unless volunteers are heavy equipment operators by trade they would\nnot be allowed to move heavy machinery.\nWould the fee be applied to outside teams competing in Alameda? If so how\nwould that be returned? AD Lillard stated no, the fee would not apply to outside\nteams.\nWill the funds be put in the City's regular general accounting department? AD\nLillard stated that the fee will go into a regular Recreation and Park Department\nbudget and it will go into a dedicated account. There will be records of deposits\nand expenditures that anyone can ask to look at because it is public record.\nChair Ingram stated that Mr. Borsoni states that all of the above questions should be\naddressed and brought to the sports groups so they can have a final review and sign off for\napproval. AD Lillard stated that was already done at a prior meeting. Mr. Borsoni was not\nat the meeting and another representative was not present.\nChair Ingram stated that he would feel more comfortable if the groups would sign off on the\nfee.\nCommissioner Kahuanui stated that she understands that Chair Ingram wants to get the\ngroups to sign off on the policy; however the group works as an advisory to the\nCommission. The Commission gave them an opportunity to have an option. Originally the\nCommission and staff just wanted them to pay a fee. The Commission was nice and let\nthis item go to the Field Use Group because the groups wanted to try and barter out of the\nfee. We are trying to increase revenue, keep fields playable, etc., and before ARPD was\nnot receiving funds. If we send this back to the group and two people do not sign, it will not\nchange her mind. Ms Kahuanui thinks the policy proposed is a good idea and the\nCommission is being very generous in giving the groups the opportunity to barter work.\nMotion was made by Commissioner Oliver:\n\"That this policy be accepted as is and approved tonight.'\nFurther discussion was held.\nChair Ingram asked what the harm was in having the proposal go back to the group again\nand having them sign off. It will not hurt us.\nCommissioner Oliver stated what if it is taken back to them and they do not sign off on it?\nChair Ingram stated that it would then be like Commissioner Kahuanui mentioned. If two\npeople do not sign it, then the group has had an ample opportunity. Commissioner Oliver\n8\nRecreation & Park Commission Mtg.\nMinutes\nThursday, June 9, 2005\nDedicated to Excellence, Committed to Service", "path": "RecreationandParkCommission/2005-06-09.pdf"}
{"body": "RecreationandParkCommission", "date": "2005-06-09", "page": 9, "text": "stated that he felt the group has already had ample opportunity. Chair Ingram stated that in\nhis opinion he did not feel that was the case when Alameda Soccer has come back with a\nletter that has seven questions.\nPM McDonald stated that he did not want to give anyone the thought that this will take care\nof all the maintenance problems. The Maintenance Division was just given another field\nnear the Alameda Point Gym that is approximately five acres and there is no extra money\nto maintain it. Also, there is the Main Street Soccer Field and there were no extra funds\nappropriated to take care of that field.\nCommissioner Kahuanui asked if the group, by having this fee, that this does not mean that\nthe lawns are not going to be cut on their demand. AD Lillard stated that the group\nunderstands that this is an attempt to defray a part of the cost. At no time has this been\npresented to them as solving all of the field maintenance problems.\nPM McDonald stated that since he has been here (1995) there has not been a whole lot of\nsupport for maintenance costs. Granted there have been donations to repair damage or to\nbuild or rebuild something, but no monies were given to assist with field maintenance costs.\nCommissioner Johnson asked if the Acting Director recommended approving the policy.\nAD Lillard stated yes.\nChair Ingram stated that again he favors giving the groups ample opportunity to review and\nactually feels that having each group sign off would be the proper community process.\nM/S OLIVER/KAHUANUI\n(not approved)\n\"That the Field Use Fee Policy be accepted as is and approved tonight.\n\"\nIn Favor (2):\nKahuanui, Oliver\nOpposed (1):\nIngram\nAbstention (1):\nJohnson\n7.\nREPORTS FROM RECREATION COMMISSION AND RECREATION AND PARK\nDIRECTOR\nA.\nPark Division\nPM McDonald provided plans for the Dog Park drainage to the Commission.\nChair Ingram mentioned that he liked the newly installed gate at Franklin Park.\nFor additional information see attached Activity Report.\nB.\nRecreation Division\n9\nRecreation & Park Commission Mtg.\nMinutes\nThursday, June 9, 2005\nDedicated to Excellence, Committed to Service", "path": "RecreationandParkCommission/2005-06-09.pdf"}
{"body": "RecreationandParkCommission", "date": "2005-06-09", "page": 10, "text": "See attached Activity Report.\nC.\nMastick Senior Center\nSee attached Activity Report.\nD.\nOther Reports and Announcments\n1.\nStatus Report on Alameda Point Golf Course Design Committee (Vice Chair\nReeves)\nNo new information to report at this time.\n2.\nStatus Report on Alameda Point Advisory Committee (APAC) (Chair Ingram)\nThere was a public meeting held the week of May 30, 2005, at Mastick Senior Center.\n3.\nStatus Report on Transportation Master Plan Committee (Commissioner\nJohnson)\nThe Transportation Master Plan is Completed.\n8.\nSTATUS REPORT ON ONGOING PROJECTS\nChair Ingram asked about the status of Leydecker Park Playground Renovation. AD Lillard\nstated that equipment was to be shipped the week of May 30, 2005. As soon as the\nequipment is delivered the project will begin.\nPM McDonald stated that the biggest project was relocating the Administrative Office to\n2226 Santa Clara Ave. Everyone is happy with the new location.\n9.\nORAL COMMUNICATIONS, GENERAL\nNone.\n10.\nITEMS FOR NEXT AGENDA\n11.\nSET DAY FOR NEXT MEETING\nThursday, July 14, 2005\n12.\nADJOURNMENT\n10\nRecreation & Park Commission Mtg.\nMinutes\nThursday, June 9, 2005\nDedicated to Excellence, Committed to Service", "path": "RecreationandParkCommission/2005-06-09.pdf"}