{"body": "LibraryBoard", "date": "2005-12-14", "page": 1, "text": "OF\nMinutes of the\nALAMEDA FREE LIBRARY BOARD\nDecember 14, 2005\nThe regular meeting of the Alameda Free Library Board was called to order at 7:05 p.m.\nROLL CALL\nPresent:\nLeslie Krongold, President\nRuth Belikove, Vice President\nKaren Butter, Board Member\nAlan Mitchell, Board Member\nAbsent:\nMark Schoenrock, Board Member\nStaff:\nActing Library Director Jane Chisaki, Secretary\nDavid Hall, Technical Services Supervisor\nJenna Gaber, Recording Secretary\nCONSENT CALENDAR\nAs asterisk indicates items so enacted and adopted on the Consent Calendar.\nA.\n*Report from Library Director highlighting Library Department activities for the\nmonth of December 2005. Accepted.\nB.\n*Draft Minutes of the Regular Library Board meeting of November 9, 2005.\nApproved.\nC.\n*Library Services Report for the month of October 2005. Accepted.\nD.\n*Report from Finance Department reflecting FY 2004-05 Library expenditures (by\nfund) through November 2005. Accepted.\nE.\n*Bills for ratification. Approved.\nActing Library Director Chisaki reported that the new main library is on time and on\nbudget and will be weather-tight in January. President Krongold asked how it could be\non time with the rain we have had. Ms. Chisaki stated that there are 30 \"rain days\" built\ninto the contract. Ms. Chisaki added that the City Council has asked to look at items that\nwere taken off during the value engineering process so that some items might be added\nback to help prolong the life of the building.\nBoard member Mitchell MOVED approval of the Consent Calendar. Board member\nButter SECONDED the motion which CARRIED by a unanimous voice vote.", "path": "LibraryBoard/2005-12-14.pdf"}
{"body": "LibraryBoard", "date": "2005-12-14", "page": 2, "text": "UNFINISHED BUSINESS\nA.\nMaterials Security and Inventory System. (J. Chisaki)\nResolution\nPassed by Alameda Free Library Board\nDecember 14, 2005\nWHEREAS, in order to improve library service to the residents of Alameda, by providing\nthem with modern materials security and inventory system; and\nWHEREAS, in order to provide accurate, reliable, and state of the art, library materials\nsecurity and inventory capability, it is necessary that the library replace its 3-M magnetic\nstrip security system; and\nWHEREAS, an extensive and impartial evaluation process has determined that\nLibramation Inc. has the best security and inventory system for our library and our\ncommunity;\nNOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of the Alameda Free Library that\nthe Board supports the acquisition of the Libramation Inc. Materials Security and\nInventory System and believes it will improve library services to the community with\ncutting-edge technology, and therefore respectfully urges the City Council to approve\nacquisition of this system.\nBoard member Butter stated that she would have liked to have seen a comparison chart\nand receive more information during the process. Ms. Chisaki stated that Technical\nServices Supervisor David Hall was here to answer questions from the Board.\nSupervising Librarian Hall discussed the process that was used to evaluate all of the\napplications. The evaluation was based on 5 points: completeness of the proposal,\nvendor support, is it what the library needs, standards/practices and vendor references &\ncredentials. The team used a total of 100 points to score each evaluation. The vendor\nwho had the highest score was chosen.\nBoard member Mitchell MOVED approval of the Resolution for Material Security and\nInventory System. Vice President Belikove SECONDED the motion which CARRIED\nby a unanimous voice vote.\nNEW BUSINESS\nA.\nAlameda Free Library Foundation (R. Belikove)\nVice President Belikove stated that the Foundation sent out 5,000 letters and are getting\nsome responses with small contributions. Acting Library Director asked if letters were\ngoing out to corporate offices. Vice President Belikove replied at the present time none\nhave gone out to any corporate offices.\nB.\nFriends of the Alameda Free Library (M. Skeen)", "path": "LibraryBoard/2005-12-14.pdf"}
{"body": "LibraryBoard", "date": "2005-12-14", "page": 3, "text": "President Krongold stated that the next book sale would be May 5th, 6th and 7th\nC.\nLibrary Building Watch (L. Krongold)\nPresident Krongold stated that she would be sending out a newsletter next week.\nD.\nPatron suggestions/comments (Speak-Outs) and Library Director's response.\nNone.\nORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (Public Comment)\nMarc Lambert advised the Board that Day in the District would be January 27th and\nFebruary 3rd.\nLIBRARY BOARD COMMUNICATIONS\nBoard member Mitchell noted that he went to the Humbolt Library.\nDIRECTOR'S COMMENTS\nLibrary Director Chisaki updated the Board members on the teenage gang problem the\nlibrary has been experiencing for the last few months. She congratulated Marc Lambert\non obtaining his MLS. Ms. Chisaki announced that 2 new part-time librarians have been\nhired. Peggie Dorrance will be the children's librarian and Anne Vannucchi will be the\nnew branch/reference librarian. Anne Vannucchi is currently a library technician who\nhas just completed her MLS. Ms. Chisaki also announced that Jenna Gaber, Executive\nAssistant at the Alameda Free Library, is retiring and moving out of the area.\nADJOURNMENT\nBoard member Mitchell MOVED to adjourn the meeting at 8:37 p.m. Vice President\nBelikove SECONDED the motion which CARRIED by a unanimous voice vote.\nRespectfully submitted,\nJane Chisaki\nInterim Library Director and\nSecretary to the Library Board", "path": "LibraryBoard/2005-12-14.pdf"}
{"body": "TransportationCommission", "date": "2005-12-14", "page": 1, "text": "TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MINUTES\nDECEMBER 14, 2005\nChair Knox White called the Transportation Commission to order at 7:30 p.m.\n1.\nROLL CALL - Roll was called and the following recorded:\nMembers Present:\nJohn KnoxWhite\nPattianne Parker\nMichael Krueger\nEric Schatmeier\nJeff Knoth\nAbsent:\nRobb Ratto\nRobert McFarland\nStaff Present:\nBarbara Hawkins, City Engineer\nBarry Bergman, Program Specialist II, Public Works\n2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES\nChair Knox White moved to approve the minutes of the November meeting. All were in favor\nexcept for Commissioner Parker who abstained.\n3. AGENDA CHANGES\nNone.\n4. COMMISSION COMMUNICATIONS\nRegarding the Pedestrian Transportation Master Plan update, there was a Task Force meeting on\nDecember 7th. Rebecca Kohlstrand from the Planning Board, Nancy Gormley from the Housing\nAuthority, and two members of the public attended the meeting. They reviewed the feedback\nfrom the first public workshop and provided input regarding key pedestrian issues and policies.\nChair Knox White suggested that staff call Task Force members prior to meetings to remind them\nof the meeting time.\nStaff Hawkins said that staff had called and that some members had either indicated they would\nbe attending but did not show up or that they left messages and could not connect directly.\n1", "path": "TransportationCommission/2005-12-14.pdf"}
{"body": "TransportationCommission", "date": "2005-12-14", "page": 2, "text": "Chair Knox White suggested that it might be helpful to follow up with the staff person from each\nboard and commission to make them aware that their representative did not make it to the\nmeeting, and also to let them know how many more meetings there would be.\nChair Knox White noted that no progress has been made on the Circulation Plan since the\nconsultant is not yet on board.\nCommissioner Krueger requested an off agenda report on the status of the Bus Stop Accessibility\nProgram at a future TC meeting.\nStaff Hawkins said that she would be working on that. She noted that Public Works is short\nstaffed so it will take some additional time. The main tasks are to check to see if the requests all\nwent through the TTT and to review the status of the work orders.\nCommissioner Krueger noted that he is interested in three issues: 1) Red curbing, 2) Paving for\naccessibility and 3) Parking restrictions.\n6A. CAPITAL IIMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (CIP) CALL FOR PROJECTS\nStaff Hawkins stated that the CIP would be presented first in house to the Commissions and\nBoards who can provide input. There will then be three public meetings held in\nJanuary/February or February/March Staff will prepare cost estimates for the top-ranked\nprojects. These will be presented to the public, and will then go back to the boards and\ncommissions prior to being sent to the Council.\nChair Knox White said that this item was put on the agenda so that the Commissioners can make\nrecommendations regarding projects that are either on the unfunded list or not on the list at all.\nThrough the project evaluation process, some of these projects could potentially be added to the\nlist of funded projects.\nChair Knox White asked for clarification about the carryover projects, such as the $30,000\nallocated for Bike and Pedestrian Operations.\nStaff Hawkins said that when staff deals with all bicycle and pedestrian requests, this pays for the\ntime to conduct analysis, collect data, and other related tasks.\nChair Knox White asked if all staff time is included in the CIP.\nStaff Hawkins said that previously all projects have generally been included in the CIP, but that\nbeginning this year the projects will be separated from annual costs. There will be two project\nlists, an annual projects list for these \"work program\" activities, and a capital projects list.\nChair Knox White asked if the \"General Plan Update\" project includes the Transportation Master\nPlan (TMP).\n2", "path": "TransportationCommission/2005-12-14.pdf"}
{"body": "TransportationCommission", "date": "2005-12-14", "page": 3, "text": "Staff Hawkins responded that the Planning Department generally has that money dedicated to\nconsultant activities, so it is not likely that this funding would be available for the TMP.\nChair Knox White asked about the I-880 High Street improvements.\nStaff Hawkins responded that the project includes reinforcing the bridge for seismic purposes and\npossibly adding an extra lane. She noted that the City would also like to continue to work with\nOakland to improve circulation on local streets in that area. This is a Caltrans project and\nAlameda's contribution is participating in meetings and providing our perspective.\nChair Knox White noted that the list includes $176,000 for in-pavement crosswalk lights. He\nasked if before and after studies could be conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of these\ndevices, as opposed to other treatments such as pedestrian paddles.\nStaff Hawkins said that this project is for crosswalks near Lum, Chipman and Haight schools,\nand was funded by a Safe Routes to School grant. Therefore the only discretionary spending in\nthe project is the $18,000 in Measure B funds.\nCommissioner Parker asked if the projects list is a wish list for grants.\nStaff Hawkins said that in the header the sheet it says \"carryover\" or \"funded\". The carryover\nprojects are supposed to be fully funded and grant submittals that were not funded should have\nbeen eliminated. She noted that the City had submitted a grant proposal for the\naudible/countdown signal heads. While the grant was awarded for the countdown devices, the\naudible signals were not funded. Therefore, while the entire budget amount is listed in the table,\nthe only the countdown portion of it has been funded. Staff Hawkins stated that the proposed\ngrant amounts are included, even if funding has not been secured, because the City needs to\nearmark then matching funds. If the City is not awarded the grants, the matching funds can be\nreleased for something else.\nCommissioner Parker asked if any of these grants going to sunset if we haven't started the\nproject.\nStaff Hawkins said that the pole-mounted radar speed displays was one that was just about to\nsunset but the City received an extension. It was supposed to have been finished by December\nbut instead it will be finished by March.\nCommissioner Parker asked who ranked the projects.\nStaff Hawkins said that the departments rank them. However, she noted that sometimes a project\nwith a lower ranking will proceed ahead of a higher priority one if grant funding becomes\navailable.\nCommissioner Parker requested that the list indicate what projects have been started, the\npercentage of completion, the estimated date of completion or estimated date of start if not\nstarted.\n3", "path": "TransportationCommission/2005-12-14.pdf"}
{"body": "TransportationCommission", "date": "2005-12-14", "page": 4, "text": "Staff Hawkins mentioned that there are sheets that include this information, it's just not printed in\nthe report that was distributed.\nChair Knox White suggested that it would be helpful to indicate the funding status in the table, so\nit would be understood if the funding status is uncertain.\nStaff Hawkins responded that this could be indicated in the Comments section.\nCommissioner Parker asked if the phase of the project, e.g. design, could be indicated.\nStaff Hawkins stated that the way the document is compiled is that the whole project is listed as a\nsingle record. This helps with the keeping track of overall project costs. She said that the phase\nof the project could also be indicated in the Comments section.\nCommissioner Parker asked if a project falls off the carryover list if it would then be put on the\nunfunded list? And would it continue to be a priority?\nStaff Hawkins said that the Council determines which projects are the priorities.\nCommissioner Krueger asked if there are any other means by which operations are handled and\ndo on going operations count under projects?\nStaff Hawkins replied that the purpose of some operations is to give Council the understanding of\nwhat people are working on. Work program is an annual project such as sidewalks, tree\ntrimming as to how much money has been put into it.\nCommissioner Krueger asked if there is any discretion for removal of projects from the\ncarryover/funded list or is everything on her subject to go forward no matter what.\nStaff Hawkins said that was her understanding.\nChair Knox White asked about the pedestrian heads project with various locations for $400,000\nand wanted to know what that was (page 4).\nStaff Hawkins stated that the Commission on Disability Issues had requested that all signals have\ncountdowns and audible signals. Public Works then applies for grants to bring the City's costs\ndown. The budget for this project indicates the cost for all signals in the City.\nCommissioner Krueger said that this sounds like another project, 1-04-96.\nStaff Hawkins acknowledged that it might have been put in twice. She's meeting with the\ndepartments to review the projects and determine where there is duplication.\nChair Knox White asked about the unfunded Tinker Extension project, and whether it is almost\ncomplete.\n4", "path": "TransportationCommission/2005-12-14.pdf"}
{"body": "TransportationCommission", "date": "2005-12-14", "page": 5, "text": "Staff Hawkins said the Tinker Extension is considered the portion from 5th to Webster Street, and\nshould be called Tinker Intersection. This will be funded by state funds and developer funds.\nChair Knox White asked about the traffic signal at Fernside Boulevard and San Jose Avenue for\n$400,000.\nStaff Hawkins said that this was supported by the school district. The projects had to be included\nin the budget because the City was seeking grant funding, but it hadn't yet been approved by the\nschool board at that time. The City did secure the funding but the school board voted against the\nproject, so it will be taken off the list.\nCommissioner Parker asked if we could apply the funds to another project.\nStaff Hawkins said that it was from local streets and roads funds, but will be applied towards the\nbicycle and pedestrian access along with bus access.\nChair Knox White suggested that a potential project might be construction of roundabouts on\nFernside Boulevard to help deal with the volume of traffic.\nStaff Hawkins said that the TC could recommend such a project. She noted that the City is trying\nto work down on already requested traffic calming projects, and a petition has been submitted by\nresidents of Fernside Boulevard, so this issue could be addressed. If it turns out that the capital\nportion is more than what we have budgeted, it can be brought before Council for more money.\nChair Knox White suggested adding several projects to the CIP list: purchasing and installing the\nremaining 18 bus shelters, the top ten priorities from the bike plan, safe routes to school and safe\nroutes to transit improvements, and the bike lanes on Central Avenue between Walnut and Oak\nStreets.\nStaff Hawkins said that some projects need some preliminary analysis so that that the general\nfeasibility could be determined and cost estimates can be developed. She said that the Cross\nAlameda Trail Feasibility Study is an example of this. Now that costs have been determined, it\ncan be included in the CIP. Staff Hawkins suggested that the Commission request funding for\nfeasibility studies so the projects would be moved forward.\nPublic Comment\nLucy Gigli said that she would like this budget cycle to include two projects from the bike plan's\npriority project list. Also, she wanted to ensure that funding is available for bike lanes on Central\nAvenue between Walnut Street and Oak Street, and if appropriate that should be included in this\nprocess.\nCommissioner Krueger suggested recommending the inclusion of the Cross Alameda Trail,\npurchase and installation of the remaining 18 bus shelters, and bike lanes on Central Avenue\nbetween Walnut and Oak Streets.\n5", "path": "TransportationCommission/2005-12-14.pdf"}
{"body": "TransportationCommission", "date": "2005-12-14", "page": 6, "text": "Staff Hawkins said that those projects have been sufficiently developed to be submitted. She\nnoted that the bike lanes are to be included as part of the library relocation, but it still needs to be\nin the budget. Staff Hawkins said a safe route to schools project is less defined, and that staff is\ncollecting data now to identify locations for improvements. Staff is also working with Jon\nSpangler to get more volunteers to get data, which we then can substantiate where and what we\nneed in improvements.\nCommissioner Parker moved that the following three projects be added to the capital\nimprovement budget for 2007-08: Cross Alameda Trail, purchase and installation of 18 Bus\nShelters to be bought and installed, and bike lanes on Central Avenue between Walnut Street\nand Oak Street. Commissioner Krueger seconded and was passed unanimously.\nCommissioner Parker moved that the operations and annual maintenance queue be formalized\nand part II added to that. Feasibility studies for bike plan priority projects, safe routes to transit\nand schools, bus shelter maintenance and transportation Master Plan. Commissioner Krueger\nseconded and passed unanimously.\nChair Knox White indicated that he wanted to make sure that the TMP funding matches up with\nwhat the Council has already approved.\nCommissioner Krueger asked if there are any rules about how gas tax funds are spent.\nStaff Hawkins said that it has to be spent on transportation related items and in the past gas tax\nwas always spent on the roads but in more recent years has been directed to transit purposes. For\ntransit purposes it's generally allocated to AC Transit and the only other given to the city is the\nroads money, which is generally used for resurfacing. When the City does resurfacing, it tries to\nupdate striping and bike lanes.\nCommissioner Krueger asked why $67,000 of gas tax money is being spend on the Underground\nDistrict Conversion project.\nStaff Hawkins said some money is made available from the utilities to underground the overhead\npoles. People from the community presented to Council areas where they are willing to pay half\nof the bill and the City would like to have its allocation from the utility company to be put\ntowards its share of the undergrounding.\nCommissioner Krueger asked what does undergrounding utilities doing with transportation?\nStaff Hawkins responded that she was not aware that the gas tax was to fund that.\nChair Knox White asked staff to check to see that this was correct.\nCommissioner Krueger stated that some of the existing bus shelters do not have all the amenities.\nThe shelter at Buena Vista Avenue and Paru Street does not have a bench, map and schedule.\nMost of the city shelters put in prior to the Park & Webster Renaissance Project and Bay Port do\n6", "path": "TransportationCommission/2005-12-14.pdf"}
{"body": "TransportationCommission", "date": "2005-12-14", "page": 7, "text": "not have map holders, although most have trash cans. He recommended bringing all bus shelters\nup to the new standards.\nStaff Hawkins mentioned that we have been using the bus shelter funds to handle the existing\nshelters, and that it would be appropriate to use the current maintenance fund money for this\npurpose.\n8.\nSTAFF COMMUNICATIONS\nStaff Bergman mentioned that the workshop at the College of Alameda collected input and got\nsome good information for the Trail Workshop and Paratransit. The Paratransit covers almost all\nof Alameda except for a few exceptions like Bay Farm Island. We have not been spending our\nannual Paratransit allocation. We have been looking for ways to expand the current program.\nOne way is to open up an existing Taxi program to the disabled and anyone 75 years and over.\nHave to figure and structure that. Short term during Christmas Season had it available to seniors\nfor shopping.\nChair Knox White asked when the consultant will be hired for the Circulation Plan.\nStaff Hawkins responded that this should happen in January. She noted that staff is currently\nworking on the request for qualifications (RFQ).\nChair Knox White requested the RFQ indicate that consultants need to have planning experience\nand that it would be two month process.\nStaff Hawkins would like to see the RFQ go out in January and then everything done by June.\nThe consultant would meet with the Task Force in February or March.\nStaff Hawkins noted that following projects are scheduled to be presented to the TC in the\ncoming months: Target EIR in January, Safeway gas station in February, and a request for a joint\nmeeting in April with the TC and the Economic Development Commission to look at the new\nProLogis environmental update.\nChair Knox White asked if there was any idea about a joint Council and TC meeting in January.\nStaff Bergman has not heard anything more on it.\nChair Knox White said that when the negative declaration comes to the TC it would be helpful to\nthe Commission and Planning Board to give a 15 minute discussion on the difference between an\nnegative declaration and an environmental impact report (EIR) and what is to be expected from\nboth.\nStaff Hawkins said that we would ask Doug Garrison of the Planning Board to present it.\nCommissioner Knoth asked if someone from the school district is involved in the safe routes to\nschool initiative.\n7", "path": "TransportationCommission/2005-12-14.pdf"}
{"body": "TransportationCommission", "date": "2005-12-14", "page": 8, "text": "schools along with a number of parents to get feedback.\nCommissioner Knoth suggested that facilities at each school need to be surveyed to determine\nwhere there are cross walks and other facilities.\nStaff Hawkins said that staff is using Otis and Franklin schools as a pilot program to determine\nwhat needs to be looked at for the other schools.\nCommissioner Knoth said that lighted crosswalks are something that would be important at all\nschools. Currently some schools have them and some not.\nStaff Hawkins said that in-pavement lights are also going to be installed at 8th Street and Taylor\nAvenue. Where in-pavement lights are installed depends on if they meet the warrants.\nChair Knox White mentioned that some schools have very vocal parents in getting thing done\nfaster, and recommended finding a way to level the playing field.\nCommissioner Knoth said that everyone should have at least a minimum level of facilities and\nthat there will be some cases where traffic deems other things. He asked if there was a timeline\nfor the study.\nStaff Bergman stated that as far as part of the Pedestrian Plan staff would be collecting a lot of\nschool data between now and the end of school year. Facilities have most of that already for\nlocations such as; cross walks and signals along with crossing guards, and in pavement lights\nlargely have not. Staff will also be looking at existing conditions and traffic patterns, such as\nconflicts between pedestrians and vehicles.\n9.\nADJOURNMENT\nMeeting was adjourned at 9:10 p.m.\nG:\\pubworks\\LT\\TRANSPORTATIONICOMMITTEES\\TC\\2006TC min 121405-final.doc\n8", "path": "TransportationCommission/2005-12-14.pdf"}