{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-06-21", "page": 1, "text": "MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING\nTUESDAY- - -JUNE 21, 2005- -7:30 P.M.\nMayor Johnson convened the regular meeting at 8:05 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(\n05-298) - Proclamation recognizing Alameda Reads 20th Anniversary\nof formal literacy service to adults.\nMayor Johnson read the proclamation and presented it to Jordona\nElderts, Alameda Adult Literacy Program Director.\nMs. Elderts thanked the Council for the proclamation.\nCONSENT CALENDAR\nCouncilmember Matarrese moved approval of the Consent Calendar.\nCouncilmember Daysog seconded the motion, which carried by\nunanimous voice vote - 5.\n[Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk\npreceding the paragraph number. ]\n(*05-299) Minutes of the Special City Council Meeting held on\nJune 1, 2005; and Special and Regular City Council Meetings held\non June 7, 2005. Approved.\n(*05-300) Ratified bills in the amount of 2,944,635.27.\n(*05-301) Recommendation to award Contract for Legal Advertising\nfor Fiscal Year 2005-06. Accepted.\n(*05-302) - Recommendation to amend the Construction Contract with\nGolden Bay Construction Inc. for the Webster Renaissance\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n1\nJune 21, 2005", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-06-21.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-06-21", "page": 2, "text": "Project, No. P.W. 07-02-07 in the amount of $50,000 using\nCommunity Development Block Grant (CDBG) Funds for the purchase\nand installation of bus shelters. Accepted.\n(*05-303) Resolution No. 13854, \"Recommending the Inclusion of\nProjects in the Alameda Countywide Bicycle Plan. \"\nAdopted.\nREGULAR AGENDA ITEMS\n( (05-304) - Resolution No. 13855, \"Appointing Peter W. Holmes as a\nMember of the Public Utilities Board. \" Adopted.\n(05-304A) Resolution No. 13856, \"Appointing John R. McCahan as a\nMember of the Public Utilities Board. \" Adopted.\nCouncilmember Daysog moved adoption of the resolutions.\nCouncilmember Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by\nunanimous voice vote - 5.\nThe City Clerk administered the oath and presented certificates\nof appointment to the Public Utilities Board members.\n( (05-305) Introduction of Ordinance Amending the Alameda\nMunicipal Code to Change the Name of the Public Art Advisory\nCommittee to Public Art Commission, Transfer Reporting from\nRecreation and Park Commission to City Council, and Transfer\nStaffing from the Recreation and Park Department to the Planning\nand Building Department by Amending Subsections 30-65.3\n(Contribution Requirements), 30-65.4 (Public Art) 30-65.5\n(Alameda Public Art Fund) , 30-65.7 (Public Art Advisory\nCommittee), , 30-65.8 (Application and Approval Procedures for\nPlacing Public Art on Private Property) , 30-65.10 (Guidelines\nfor Approval) and 30-65.11 (Appeal to the City Council) of\nSection 30-65 (Public Art in New Commercial, Industrial,\nResidential and Municipal Construction) Introduced.\nRichard Neveln, Alameda, stated that changing the name of the\nPublic Art Advisory Committee to the Public Art Commission would\ninvolve increased responsibility. suggested that the duties be\nreviewed.\nVice Mayor Gilmore moved introduction of the ordinance.\nCouncilmember Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n2\nJune 21, 2005", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-06-21.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-06-21", "page": 3, "text": "unanimous voice vote - 5.\n(05-306) Public Hearing to consider an Appeal of the Historical\nAdvisory Board's approval of a Landscaping Plan for planting two\nCoast Live Oak trees on the vacant property at 301 Spruce\nStreet. The submittal of a Landscaping Plan, as part of new\ndevelopment proposals, was required by the Historical Advisory\nBoard as a condition for the removal of one Coast Live Oak tree\nin 2001. The site is located at 301 Spruce Street within the R-4\nNeighborhood Residential Zoning District. Applicant : Bill Wong\nfor Hai Ky Lam. Appellant: Patrick Lynch and Jeanne Nader; and\n(05-306A) Resolution No. 13857, \"Upholding the Historical\nAdvisory Board's Approval of a Landscaping Plan for Planting Two\nCoast Live Oak Trees on the Vacant Property at 301 Spruce\nStreet. Adopted.\nMayor Johnson opened the public portion of the Hearing.\nProponent (In Favor of Appeal) : Patrick Lynch, Appellant.\nOpponents (Opposed to Appeal) : Joanne Lam, Applicant; Ivan Chiu,\nBill Wong Engineering & Design Christopher Bowen, Project\nArborist.\nThere being no further speakers, Mayor Johnson closed the public\nportion of the Hearing.\nCouncilmember Matarrese inquired what percentage of the\ncomposite sample came from the piles of fill versus the areas\nunder the drip line of the tree, to which Mr. Bowen responded\nabout half of the soil was from the piles.\nCouncilmember Daysog noted that the Appellant stated that the\nlaboratory scientist was not accredited; inquired to what extent\nthe matter would be an issue.\nMr. Bowen stated that the laboratory would supply the Title 22\nlimits which include heavy metals; the laboratory is reputable\nand is recommended in the arborist field.\nCouncilmember Daysog inquired how to address the concern that\nthe laboratory is not accredited to perform Title 22 soil\ntesting.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n3\nJune 21, 2005", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-06-21.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-06-21", "page": 4, "text": "The Acting Planning Director stated that he had no knowledge of\nthe issue; the Planning and Building Department was asked to\ntest the soil to see if the soil was safe for the trees.\nMayor Johnson inquired whether Title 22 related to safety for\ntrees.\nMr. Bowen responded that he was advised that Title 22 addressed\ntoxicity of materials in the soil; he was asked to find out if\nthe trees would be harmed by anything in the soil; the soil from\nthe fill was tested as well as the soil around the trees.\nCouncilmember deHaan inquired whether soil would be removed from\nthe site during construction, to which the Acting Planning\nDirector responded in the affirmative.\nCouncilmember deHaan inquired whether the pile of dumped soil\nwould be removed, to which the Acting Planning Director\nresponded that most of the pile would be redistributed, if not\nremoved from the site.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated that the soil should be analyzed for\nthe health of the trees and to see if there was dumping of\nhazardous soil; there is a concern with mixing the soil.\nThe Planner III stated that Title 22 specifically addresses\nenvironmental hazards and hazardous waste materials for the\ngeneral environment.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated that a licensed arborist is\nlooking at the health and protection of the trees; the Historic\nAdvisory Board has a solution to mitigate the removal of trees;\na composite soil sample has been collected that is appropriate\nfor the future health of the trees; the laboratory' S\ncertification to determine whether the soil dumped was toxic is\nquestionable; the owner should be responsible for taking the\nsoil away if the levels exceed the same standards that are\napplied at Alameda Point for building residential units.\nVice Mayor Gilmore noted that the Planner III stated that Title\n22 covers hazardous waste in situations beyond agriculture; the\nreport states that the mineral content of the soil does not\nexceed Title 22 limits.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated there is a question about whether\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n4\nJune 21, 2005", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-06-21.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-06-21", "page": 5, "text": "the correct method was used.\nMayor Johnson stated the project could move forward with a\ncondition of staff confirmation.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated it is important to ensure that the\ndumped soil is analyzed and moved to the proper location and\nthat the project should continue.\nCouncilmember Daysog provided a brief background on the history\nof the trees at the site.\nCouncilmember Matarrese moved adoption of the resolution with\nconditions to require appropriate analysis of the soil deposited\nto ensure it meets residential safety, to require the owner to\nremove the soil if levels exceed levels necessary for\nresidential use, and that staff oversee the project.\nCouncilmember deHaan requested an Off Agenda report on the\nmatter.\nCouncilmember Daysog seconded the motion, which carried by\nunanimous voice vote - 5.\n(05-307) Public Hearing to consider adoption of Resolution No.\n13858, \"Approving Engineer's Report, Confirming Diagram and\nAssessment and Ordering Levy of Assessments, Island City\nLandscaping and Lighting District 84-2.\" Adopted.\nCouncilmember Daysog moved adoption of the resolution.\nCouncilmember Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by\nunanimous voice vote - 5.\n(05-308) Public Hearing to consider adoption of Resolution No.\n13859, \"Approving Engineer's Report, Confirming Diagram and\nAssessment and Ordering Levy of Assessments, Maintenance\nAssessment District 01-01 (Marina Cove) \" Adopted.\nCouncilmember Matarrese moved adoption of the resolution.\nCouncilmember deHaan seconded the motion, which carried by\nunanimous voice vote - 5.\n(05-309) - Public Hearing to consider adoption of Resolution No.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n5\nJune 21, 2005", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-06-21.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-06-21", "page": 6, "text": "13860, \"Authorizing Collection of Delinquent Integrated Waste\nManagement Accounts by Means of the Property Tax Bills.\nAdopted.\nMayor Johnson opened the public portion of the Hearing.\nOpponents : Nancy Schlegel, Alameda; Leo Beaulieu, Alameda;\nPamela Jones, Alameda.\nThere being no further speakers, Mayor Johnson closed the public\nportion of the Hearing.\nFollowing Nancy Schlegel's comments, Mayor Johnson suggested\nthat Ms. Schlegel discuss her garbage problem with the Acting\nCity Manager.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated that he was concerned that Ms.\nSchlegel's garbage problem had been on going for two years.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated that space allotted for recycling\nbins is the Home Owner Association's responsibility the City\ncan address the lack of response and communication between the\ncontractor and the City.\nCouncilmember deHaan inquired whether Ms. Schlegel received any\nnotification.\nMs. Schlegel responded that she has returned unopened statements\nand left messages but has not been called back.\nThe Public Works Director stated notification is via the bill; a\nlate notice is sent 45 days after a bill has not been paid;\nthere have been eight notifications over two years based upon\ninformation provided by Alameda County Industries (ACI)\nFollowing speaker Leo Beaulieu, the Public Works Director stated\nthe integrated waste management rate pays for all services\nresidents can use one or all of the services; there are no\nlonger exemptions for green waste; the contract with ACI allows\nfor vacation exemptions it is necessary to call ahead of time\nto stop and start service.\nMayor Johnson suggested that Mr. Beaulieu discuss the matter\nwith the Public Works Director.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n6\nJune 21, 2005", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-06-21.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-06-21", "page": 7, "text": "The Public Works Director stated that the Council could make a\nmotion to adopt the resolution and give staff two weeks to\nresolve the issues; if the issues are not resolved, a lien would\nbe placed on the properties.\nThe Acting City Manager requested that the two written\ncommunications presented to Council tonight be included with the\nspeakers' requests for staff review.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated better communication regarding the\nnew contract requirements is needed; inquired whether collection\nthrough property taxes has been done before.\nThe Public Works Director responded that collection of payment\nthrough property taxes has not been done in the seven years he\nhas been with the City.\nCouncilmember deHaan inquired whether it is the City's\nresponsibility to determine how outstanding bills are resolved.\nThe Public Works Director responded in the affirmative; stated\nthat delinquent accounts would be included in the next rate\nreview in a year and a half; any garbage fees that are not\ncollected is passed on to the rate payers; rates would be\nincreased because the City is required to compensate ACI for the\nservice.\nMayor Johnson stated that the problem is that everyone who pays\ntheir bill subsidizes those who do not.\nThe Public Works Director stated that 23 residents on the list\nincluded in the staff report have paid.\nThe Acting City Manager suggested that the Council adopt the\nResolution with direction for staff to resolve issues of concern\nraised by residents tonight and provide a status on said claims\nwithin two weeks.\nCouncilmember Matarrese moved adoption of the resolution,\nincluding the Acting City Manager's suggestion [to direct staff\nto resolve issues of concern and provide a status on said claims\nwithin two weeks].\nVice Mayor Gilmore seconded the motion.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n7\nJune 21, 2005", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-06-21.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-06-21", "page": 8, "text": "Under discussion, Councilmember deHaan stated that individuals\nappeared tonight or e-mailed the Council to contest their bill;\ninquired whether the Council would allow individuals who have\nnot responded to contest their bills.\nThe Acting City Manager responded that everyone had the right to\neither provide something in writing or come to the Hearing to\nrespond; stated that he does not see any way for other\nindividuals to be accommodated now.\nOn the call for the question, the motion carried by unanimous\nvoice vote - 5.\n(05-310) Recommendation to authorize the Acting City Manager to\nexecute extension of the Harbor Bay Maritime Ferry Operating\nAgreements for Alameda Harbor Bay Ferry Service (AHBFS) and\nadopt associated budget.\nThe Acting City Manager stated that the Agreement is an\nextension of an existing Agreement with Harbor Bay Maritime\n(HBM) to operate the AHBFS between Bay Farm Island and San\nFrancisco; the Agreement is complicated because a good deal of\nthe funding comes through Regional Measure 1 Funds, which are\nadministered by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission\n(MTC) ; HBM must achieve 40% revenue through fare box collections\nin order to receive the funding through the City; the fare box\ncollection has dropped in the past few years; collection was 23%\nlast year, 31% the year before, and 32% the preceding year MTC\nhas notified the City that funding will no longer continue if\nthe 40% revenue through fare box is not achieved; MTC has\nallowed the City an additional year; stated that the ferry was\ndown for four months last year and the cost of fuel has\npractically doubled during the last two years.\nCouncilmember deHaan inquired whether on board labor costs was a\nconcern.\nThe Acting City Manager stated that the City is not a party to\nnegotiations between the Operator and the Union; the Union\ncontacted the City regarding concern with a reduction in the\nwork shift from eight hours to seven hours. eight-hour - work\nshifts will be maintained per negotiations.\nThe Ferry Services Manager stated that HBM and the Union have\nreached a contract agreement for the next year beginning July 1.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n8\nJune 21, 2005", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-06-21.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-06-21", "page": 9, "text": "Mayor Johnson inquired where the fuel was bought, to which the\nFerry Services Manager responded that the fuel for the\nAlameda/Oakland Ferry is purchased through Blue and Gold Fleet,\nbought in bulk volume, and stored at Pier 39; AHBFS has a\ncontract with a fuel provider and is fueled at Pier 48.\nMayor Johnson inquired whether the fuel rates were comparable,\nto which the Ferry Services Manager responded there is\na\ndifference between 18 and 20 cents per gallon.\nMayor Johnson inquired whether HBM could fuel at Pier 39, to\nwhich the Ferry Services Manager responded that there have been\ndiscussions with Blue and Gold Fleet regarding fueling at Pier\n39; insurance requirements make the possibility difficult and\ncosts would offset any benefit; there have been discussions with\nthe WTA regarding bulk purchases.\nCouncilmember Daysog inquired whether gas could be purchased\nahead of time and locked in at lower prices, to which the Ferry\nServices Manager responded that HBM does not purchase ahead of\ntime but that Blue and Gold Fleet does.\nCouncilmember Daysog inquired whether purchasing gas ahead of\ntime would be a possibility for HBM, to which the Ferry Services\nManager responded there is a question of fuel storage\ncapability; relocating to Alameda Point is being reviewed.\nMichael Torrey, Alameda, encouraged the Council to accept the\nstaff recommendation.\nScott Hennigh, Alameda, urged acceptance of the staff\nrecommendation; stated eliminating the 7:30 p.m. run is short\nsighted and will decrease ridership; suggested capital reserve\nfunds be used to cover the cost of the 7:30 p.m. run and that\nthe Council consider a temporary reallocation of the Measure B\nFunds toward advertising costs.\nMayor Johnson inquired whether there was any way to avoid\neliminating the 7:30 p.m. run.\nThe Acting City Manager responded there would be approximately\n11 to 15 riders lost with the elimination of the 7:30 p.m. run;\nincreased ridership through marketing efforts should result in\nbreaking even; reducing what is set aside for capital reserves\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n9\nJune 21, 2005", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-06-21.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-06-21", "page": 10, "text": "ratio.\nCouncilmember Daysog stated that more information is needed on\nthe advertising strategy to properly evaluate the different\nscenarios.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated that he is concerned with cutting\nthe 7:30 p.m. run; riders are lost and not recovered when\nservices are down.\nMayor Johnson inquired when the advertising would start, to\nwhich the Acting City Manager responded that some direct mail\nadvertising has already started.\nThe Ferry Services Manager stated a survey was conducted in May\ninquiring whether commute patterns would remain the same if a 50\ncent each way fare increase was implemented and the 7:30 p.m.\nrun was eliminated; 22-23% riders indicated there would be a\nsignificant reduction in ferry usage; 50 to 60 riders per day\nwould be needed to make up the loss in a worst case scenario;\nthe survey indicates that the market potential exists in the\nprimary market, which is the Harbor Bay and the Fernside\nDistricts; tests on the secondary market, covering San Leandro\nand Oakland, are being conducted.\nThe Acting City Manager stated retaining the 7:30 p.m. run is\nimportant a three month trial would show whether increased\nridership would make up for the $2,500 loss per month.\nLorre Zuppan stated that she has not done an analysis of the\n7:30 p.m. run; tracking the success of prior campaigns is\ndifficult; if ridership is not increased, keeping the 7:30 p.m.\nrun presents a risk.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n10\nJune 21, 2005", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-06-21.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-06-21", "page": 11, "text": "Councilmember Matarrese inquired whether having the 7:30 p.m.\nrun would be better for marketing.\nMs. Zuppan responded that added features attract users.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated that time is needed to allow the\nmarketing to work and be assessed.\nVice Mayor Gilmore stated there would be more people on the 7:30\np.m. run now if the run was a desired feature; missing the\ntarget would require putting in a lot of money or not meeting\nthe 40% fare box requirement and losing the entire ferry\noperation.\nCouncilmember Daysog inquired what the break even number of\nriders would be for the 7:30 p.m. run, to which Ms. Zuppan\nresponded 22 riders.\nMayor Johnson inquired whether the Executive Director of the WTA\nhad any thoughts on the matter.\nSteve Castleburry, WTA Chief Executive Officer, stated there is\nuncertainty in marketing; information obtained in surveys is\nhighly unreliable.\nMayor Johnson inquired whether there is any information on the\nimpacts of cuts elsewhere.\nMr. Castleburry responded that the City of Larkspur did not lose\nas many riders as anticipated; stated ferry ridership is up\ncompared to other services.\nThe Acting City Manager stated that part of the increased ferry\nridership is because the economy is starting to get a little\nbetter having the trial period in the summer might not be good\nbecause people are on vacation.\nMayor Johnson inquired about lost ridership last summer.\nThe Acting City Manager stated that last summer would not be a\ngood comparison because the ferry was down for four months.\nThe Public Works Director corrected the break even number of\nriders for the 7:30 p.m. run to 36.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n11\nJune 21, 2005", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-06-21.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-06-21", "page": 12, "text": "Councilmember deHaan stated taking one trip out per day is a\nmajor change.\nSteve Brimhall, President HBM, stated the capital reserve funds\ndo not apply against the fare box; HBM is not in a funding\nposition.\nThe Ferry Services Manager stated that the City has an\nobligation to maintain ferryboats or pay back the grants used to\nacquire the boats.\nThe Public Works Director suggested the recommendation might be\nto accept the three-month trial subject to MTC's approval and\nreaching an agreement with HBM.\nMayor Johnson suggested conveying to MTC that the City does not\nwant to lose more riders by cutting service and wants to do\neverything possible to maintain the level of service and\nincrease the number of riders above the current level.\nCouncilmember Daysog inquired whether there is any indication\nthat the June fare box recovery is trending upwards, to which\nthe Public Works Direction responded that he did not know.\nCouncilmember Daysog inquired how eliminating the 7:30 p.m. run\nwould impact ratios, to which the Acting City Manager responded\nby 1%.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated that he is in favor of presenting\nthe proposal to MTC ; eliminated services are never recovered.\nCouncilmember Daysog concurred with Councilmember Matarrese.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated a month-and-a-half trial period\nwould be fine if a three-month trial period were too long.\nCouncilmember Matarrese moved approval of the staff\nrecommendation with the exception of eliminating the 7:30 p.m.\nrun contingent upon MTC allowing the City to preserve the 7:30\np.m. run for an approximate three-month trial period and\nagreement with HBM.\nCouncilmember Daysog seconded the motion, which carried by\nunanimous voice vote - 5.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n12\nJune 21, 2005", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-06-21.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-06-21", "page": 13, "text": "ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA\n(05-311) The following speakers spoke in favor of the\ntheatre/parking structure project : Pauline Kelley, Alameda,\nDebbie George, Alameda, Michael Britt, Alameda Eyes Optometry\nCatherine Brewer, Alameda; Melody Marr, executive Director,\nChamber of Commerce; Lorre Zuppan, Alameda; Kathy Leong,\nPresident, Chamber of Commerce; Mel Waldorf, Alameda; Robb\nRatto, Park Street Business Association (PSBA) (submitted\nhandout) ; Frank George, Alameda; Lars Hanson, PSBA; Kate Pryor,\nAlameda.\nThe following speakers expressed concern with the\ntheatre/parking structure project Bill Woodle, Alameda Jon\nSpangler, Alameda; Richland Tester, Alameda; Morgan, Alameda\n( submitted handout) ;\nKevin\nFrederick,\nAlameda;\nDeborah\nOverfield, Alameda; Valerie Ruma, Alameda; Ani Dimusheva,\nAlameda; Steph Wades, Alameda.\nFollowing Jon Spangler's comments, Councilmember Matarrese\ninquired whether the theatre would cost $25 million.\nThe Acting City Manager responded that the parking structure and\nthe theatre cost is $25 million.\nCouncilmember Matarrese inquired whether the theatre cost was $9\nmillion.\nThe Development Services Manager responded that the historic\ntheatre project cost is $9.6 million; $10.5 million is for the\n352 space parking structure; the multi screen cinema is a\ncombination of private and public dollars; $5.3 million has been\nraised privately by the developer; there is a contribution of\n$2.8 million in loans; the vertical features will be put into\nthe new theatre for an additional $760,000; the total project\ncost is about $28 million with the developer's contribution.\nCouncilmember Daysog requested an Off Agenda Report specifying\nproject costs.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated an economic feasibility study and\nmarket study was performed in 1997; inquired whether the\noperations of movie theatres have changed stated it would be\nprudent to review an updated market study.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n13\nJune 21, 2005", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-06-21.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-06-21", "page": 14, "text": "Mayor Johnson noted the matter was not on the agenda and Council\ncould not discuss the matter and could only ask questions.\nFollowing Kate Pryor's comments, Councilmember Matarrese\nrequested a catalog on the website indicating where reports can\nbe found regarding the theatre and parking structurel stated\nthat the Planning Board has deferred the design review for both\nthe parking structure and theatre.\n(05-312) Will Richards, Alameda, stated that Alameda growth is\ninevitable; redevelopment projects should be reviewed on own\nmerits.\n(05-313) ) Michael John Torrey, Alameda, stated that June 25\nthrough June 26 is the annual Amateur Radio Field Day.\n(05-314) Richard Neveln, Alameda, stated there has been no\nplanning for temporary bus stops during the Park Street and\nWebster Street construction.\nCOUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS\n(05-315) Discussion of the proposed baseball stadium along\nAlameda and Oakland's shared estuary.\nCouncilmember Daysog requested staff birddog the proposed\nbaseball stadium; stated the matter could be bad or good; noted\nthere is a shared interest in the estuary and the City of\nAlameda should be part of the planning.\n(05-316) Consideration of Mayor's nominations for appointment to\nthe Historical Advisory Board, Housing and Building Code Hearing\nand Appeals Board, Housing Commission, Library Board, Planning\nBoard, and Social Service Human Relations Board.\nMayor Johnson nominated Randal S. Miller for reappointment to\nthe Historical Advisory Board; Edward Dependbrock for\nreappointment to the Housing and Building Code Hearing and\nAppeals Board [remaining appointment continued] ; Nancy W.\nGormley and Garnetta S. King for reappointment to the Housing\nCommission; Ruth K. Belikove and Alan D. Mitchell for\nreappointment to the Library Board; Rebecca L. Kohlstrand\nParsons and Margaret McNamara for reappointment to the Planning\nBoard; Stewart Chen, Karen Hollinger Jackson, and Cynthia Wasko\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n14\nJune 21, 2005", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-06-21.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-06-21", "page": 15, "text": "for reappointment to the Social Service Human Relations Board.\nADJOURNMENT\nThere being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the\nregular meeting at 10:45 p.m.\nRespectfully Submitted,\nLara Weisiger\nCity Clerk\nThe Agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the\nBrown Act.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n15\nJune 21, 2005", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-06-21.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-06-21", "page": 16, "text": "MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING\nTUESDAY- - -JUNE 21, 2005- -6:00 P.M.\nMayor Johnson convened the special meeting at 6:05 p.m.\nRoll Call -\nPresent : Councilmembers\nDaysog,\ndeHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese and Mayor\nJohnson - 5.\nAbsent :\nNone.\nAgenda Items\n(05-293) Adjournment to closed session to consider : Public\nEmployment; Title City Manager\nFollowing the closed session, Mayor Johnson announced that the\nCity Council discussed selection of the City Manager.\n(05-294) Recommendation to approve Agreement Appointing Debra\nKurita as City Manager.\nCouncilmember Matarrese moved approval of the Agreement\nappointing Debra Kurita.\nVice Mayor Gilmore seconded the motion, which carried by\nunanimous voice vote - 5.\nAdjournment\nThere being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the\nspecial meeting at 6:29 p.m.\nRespectfully submitted,\nLara Weisiger\nCity Clerk\nThe agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the\nBrown Act.\nSpecial Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nJune 21, 2005", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-06-21.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-06-21", "page": 17, "text": "MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING\nTUESDAY- - -JUNE 21, 2005- -6:40 P.M.\nMayor Johnson convened the special meeting at 6:50 p.m.\nRoll Call -\nPresent : Councilmembers\nDaysog,\ndeHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese and Mayor\nJohnson - 5.\nAbsent :\nNone.\nThe special meeting was adjourned to closed session to consider :\n(05-295 ) Public Employee Performance Evaluation; Title: City\nAttorney.\nFollowing the closed session, the special meeting was reconvened\nand Mayor Johnson announced that the Council discussed the\nperformance of the City Attorney.\nAdjournment\nThere being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the\nspecial meeting at 7:40 p.m.\nRespectfully submitted,\nLara Weisiger\nCity Clerk\nThe agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the\nBrown Act.\nSpecial Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nJune 21, 2005", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-06-21.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-06-21", "page": 18, "text": "MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL JOINT CITY COUNCIL AND\nCOMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION MEETING\nTUESDAY - -JUNE 21, 2005- -7:25 P.M.\nMayor/Chair Johnson convened the special meeting at 8:00 p.m.\nROLL CALL - Present : louncilmembers/Commissioners\nDaysog,\ndeHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese and Mayor/\nChair Johnson - 5.\nAbsent :\nNone.\nMINUTES\n(05-296CC/05-032CIC) Minutes of the Special Community Improvement\nCommission Meeting held on April 5, 2005; and the Special Joint\nCity Council, Community Improvement Commission, and Alameda Reuse\nand Redevelopment Authority Meeting held on June 7, 2005.\nApproved.\nCouncilmember/Commissioner Gilmore moved approval of the minutes.\nCouncilmember/Commissione: deHaan seconded the motion, which\ncarried by unanimous voice vote - 5.\nAGENDA ITEM\n(05-297CC/05-033CIC) Joint Public Hearing to review and approve\nconcept of Affordable Rental Housing at Island High as an eligible\nuse of District Housing Fund.\nMayor/Chair Johnson opened the public portion of the Hearing.\nThere being no speakers, Mayor/Chair Johnson closed the public\nportion of the Hearing.\nThe Development Manager for Housing provided a briefing on the\nproposed concept.\nlouncilmember/Commissioner Daysog inquired whether there would be a\ntargeted beneficiary for rental housing, to which the Development\nManager for Housing responded that the agreement allows the School\nDistrict to target beneficiaries to the extent allowable by law;\nstated the School District would prefer to give priority to\nDistrict employees.\nCouncilmember/Commissioner Matarrese moved approval of the staff\nSpecial Joint Meeting\nAlameda City Council and\n1\nCommunity Improvement Commission\nJune 21, 2005", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-06-21.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2005-06-21", "page": 19, "text": "recommendation\nCouncilmember/Commissioner Matarrese stated there is an opportunity\nto provide meaningful, affordable housing.\nCouncilmember/Commissioner deHaan seconded the motion, which\ncarried by unanimous voice vote - 5.\nADJOURNMENT\nThere being no further business, Mayor/Chair Johnson adjourned the\nspecial meeting at 8:05 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\n2\nCommunity Improvement Commission\nJune 21, 2005", "path": "CityCouncil/2005-06-21.pdf"}