{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2006-05-02", "page": 1, "text": "MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING\nTUESDAY - -MAY 2, 2006- - -7:30 P. M.\nMayor Johnson convened the Regular Meeting at 7:45 p.m.\nCouncilmember Daysog led the Pledge of Allegiance.\nROLL CALL - Present : Councilmembers Daysog, deHaan, Gilmore,\nMatarrese, and Mayor Johnson - 5.\nAbsent :\nNone.\nAGENDA CHANGES\n(06-218 ) Mayor Johnson announced that the discussion of City\nAttorney/General Counsel Legal Services and staffing options\n[paragraph no. 06-244CC/06-016CIC] on the Special Joint City\nCouncil, Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority, and Community\nImprovement Commission Meeting agenda would be continued.\nPROCLAMATIONS, SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY AND ANNOUNCEMENTS\n(06 -129 - ) Proclamation declaring May as National Preservation\nmonth.\nMayor Johnson read the Proclamation and presented it to Nancy\nAnderson, Chair of the Historical Advisory Board.\n(06-220) - Proclamation declaring May 14 through May 19, 2006 as\nGirls Rights Week.\nMayor Johnson read the Proclamation and presented it to Gabriella\nLewis and Danessa La Cap, Girls Inc. Members and Melissa Marsh,\nGirls Inc. Board President.\n(06-221) Library project update.\nThe Project Manager provided a brief presentation.\nCouncilmember Matarrese inquired whether the County issue was with\nthe [Gim's] restaurant building and not the wood frame building.\nThe Project Manager responded in the affirmative; stated that he\nencouraged the property owner to de-couple the application and\ndelete the plans to have the kitchen equipment in the historic\nbuilding for the short term in order to move forward with the\napplication; the property owner would seek financing for the\nimprovements.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n1\nMay 2, 2006", "path": "CityCouncil/2006-05-02.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2006-05-02", "page": 2, "text": "Councilmember deHaan stated there are structural concerns with the\nhistoric building; inquired whether there are ways to ensure that\nthe asset stays in tact.\nThe Project Manager responded in the affirmative; stated plywood\nbracing could be applied to the interior and corners.\nMayor Johnson inquired whether spending money on cosmetic\nimprovement makes sense if structural work is not performed to make\nthe building sound; the community considers the building to be a\nhistoric asset; the building should be painted for the grand\nopening; grant money should not be spent on the fa\u00e7ade if the owner\nis not committed to perform structural work.\nThe Project Manager stated the fa\u00e7ade grant money could pay for a\ndecent paint job and window replacement.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated the question is whether the building is\nin jeopardy of being lost; inquired whether the owner's application\naddresses the shoring up of the building.\nThe Project Manager responded that the current application includes\na foundation replacement and structural stabilization; stated he\nhas not been in the building for over six years; the building\nappears to have a five-degree tilt towards the back; the permit\naddresses using the structure as a tearoom, which prompted the\ninvolvement of the Health Department.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated that he would like to see other City\ndepartments engaged in the process, particularly the Planning\nDepartment.\nVice Mayor Gilmore inquired whether the owner was hung up with the\nCounty Health Department and whether the City could concurrently\nprocess the rest of the application\nThe Project Manager responded Health Department requirements\ntrigger other requirements stated a straight rehabilitation\napplication could move forward fairly quickly.\nMayor Johnson inquired whether an application went to the Historic\nAdvisory Board (HAB) .\nThe Project Manager responded that the HAB issued a partial\ndemolition permit for up to 30% of the structure.\nMayor Johnson inquired whether the application was for the historic\nstructure alone, to which the Project Manager responded in the\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n2\nMay 2, 2006", "path": "CityCouncil/2006-05-02.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2006-05-02", "page": 3, "text": "affirmative.\nMayor Johnson inquired why the owner has not moved forward.\nThe Project Manager responded that the owner states that there are\ndelays with the Health Department.\nCouncilmember deHaan inquired whether other City departments could\nhelp with the process to save Gim's historic structure.\nThe Project Manager responded that he would work with the Planning\nand Building Departments to facilitate an evaluation of the\nstructure.\nRichard W. Rutter, Alameda Architectural Preservation Society\n(AAPS) , stated that AAPS voted to appropriate $500 toward painting\nGim's historic structure if the owners cannot get the money\nthemselves; stated he was the architect for the Independent Order\nof Odd Fellows fa\u00e7ade renovation; fa\u00e7ade grant money was not\nreceived until progress billings were provided.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated the library project and LEEDS\nrequired insulation is impressive; requested that a fireproof\nviewing port be considered; a building in Red Bluff had a glass cut\nout which provides a view of the fireproofing.\nThe Project Manager stated that he would work with the other\ndepartments to find a solution.\nVice Mayor Gilmore stated that a mock up could be placed in a\nshadow box and hung on the wall to look like a cross section of the\nwalls layers.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated that the community should see\nproposed alternatives.\n(06-222) Announcement regarding need for Poll Workers and general\nvoting information for June 6 election.\nMayor Johnson read a statement regarding the election and urged\nvoters to work at the polls; suggested that the information be\nposted on the City's website.\nThe City Clerk stated that May 22 is the last day to register;\nelection results will be available the morning after the election\ninstead of election night because paper ballots will be used; the\nRegistrar is working on solutions for the November election.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n3\nMay 2, 2006", "path": "CityCouncil/2006-05-02.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2006-05-02", "page": 4, "text": "Mayor Johnson inquired whether early voters would be voting by\nmachine.\nThe City Clerk responded in the affirmative; stated the equipment\nwill be borrowed from San Diego and meets the requirement for paper\naudit trail.\nCONSENT CALENDAR\nMayor Johnson announced that the recommendation to authorize the\npartial refund of Appeal Fees [paragraph no. 06-233] was removed\nfrom the Consent Calendar for discussion.\nVice Mayor Gilmore stated that she watched the meeting and read the\nminutes; inquired whether or not she could vote on the minutes, to\nwhich the City Attorney responded in the negative.\nCouncilmember Matarrese moved approval of the remainder of the\nConsent Calendar.\nVice Mayor Gilmore seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous\nvoice vote - 5. [Note: Vice Mayor Gilmore abstained from voting on\nthe Minutes [paragraph no. *06-223].\n[Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk preceding\nthe paragraph number ]\n(*06-223) Minutes of the Special City Council and Regular City\nCouncil Meetings held on April 18, 2006. Approved.\n[Note: Vice Mayor Gilmore abstained from voting on the Minutes. ]\n( *06-224) Ratified bills in the amount of $4,530,239.69.\n( *06-225) Recommendation to authorize Call for Bids for Legal\nAdvertising Accepted.\n(*06-226) Recommendation to accept the Quarterly Investment Report\nfor period ending March 31, 2006. Accepted.\n(*06-227) Recommendation to set Hearing to establish Proposition 4\nLimit for Fiscal Year 2006-07 for May 16, 2006. Accepted.\n(*06-228) Recommendation to Approve Contract Amendment for Library\nArtist Yuki Nagase. Accepted.\n(\n*06-229) Recommendation to authorize the execution of Landscape\nMaintenance Management Contract for the City of Alameda Island City\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n4\nMay 2, 2006", "path": "CityCouncil/2006-05-02.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2006-05-02", "page": 5, "text": "Landscaping and Lighting District 84-2, Zone 5 - Harbor Bay\nBusiness Park. Accepted.\n(*06-230) Resolution No. 13946, \"Preliminarily Approving Annual\nReport Declaring Intention to Order Levy and Collection of\nAssessments and Providing for Notice of Public Hearing on June 20,\n2006 - Island City Landscaping and Lighting District 84-2. \"\nAdopted.\n(*06-231) - Resolution No. 13947, \"Preliminarily Approving Annual\nReport Declaring Intention to Order Levy and Collection of\nAssessments and Providing for Notice of Public Hearing on June 20,\n2006 - Maintenance Assessment District 01-01 (Marina Cove) .\n\"\nAdopted.\n(*06-232) Resolution No. 13948, \"Authorizing the City Manager to\nApply to the California Integrated Waste Management Board for a\nTargeted Rubberized Asphalt Concrete Incentive Grant and to Enter\nInto All Associated Agreements. Adopted.\n(06-233) Recommendation to authorize the partial refund of Appeal\nFees to the Planning Board and to the City Council collected in\nFiscal Years 2004-05 and 2005-06.\nThe Planning and Building Director provided a brief presentation.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated that staff came up with an approach\nto resolve the issue in a fair and equitable manner.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated a proper decision has been made to\nprovide a refund.\nCouncilmember Daysog stated other people would be very happy in\naddition to the three appellants whose fees were reduced; the\nrefund is good news.\nCouncilmember Matarrese moved approval of the staff recommendation.\nCouncilmember Daysog seconded the motion, which carried by\nunanimous voice vote - 5.\nREGULAR AGENDA ITEMS\n(06-234) Resolution No. 13949, \"Approving the Endorsement and\nSupporting the 2006 California State Library Bond (Proposition\n81) \" Adopted.\nMarilyn Ezzy Ashcraft, Library Building Team, presented the Council\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n5\nMay 2, 2006", "path": "CityCouncil/2006-05-02.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2006-05-02", "page": 6, "text": "with buttons supporting Proposition 81; stated she attended the\nAnnual California Library Association and School Library\nAssociation Legislative Day in Sacramento; Proposition 81 is a $600\nmillion Library Construction and Renovation Bond Act Proposition\n81 is not polling well; the City could benefit from State bond\nfunds to renovate the two branch libraries or build another branch\nlibrary ; noted over 3 million native English speaking Californians\nare functionally illiterate; urged adoption of the Resolution.\nCouncilmember Daysog inquired what underlying revenue stream would\npay for the Bond.\nMs. Ezzy Ashcraft responded the indebtedness is taken on by the\nState; stated Proposition 81 has the same structure as Proposition\n14.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated the New Main Library would not be\npossible without Proposition 14; support is needed for Proposition\n81; the West End has an old branch library and Bay Farm Island has\nan undersized branch library.\nCouncilmember deHaan moved adoption of the Resolution.\nVice Mayor Gilmore seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous\nvoice vote - 5.\n(06-235) Resolution No. 13950, \"Supporting a \"Buy Alameda\"\nPhilosophy. \" Adopted.\nThe Acting Assistant to the City Manager provided a brief\npresentation.\nVice Mayor Gilmore inquired whether the centralization for\npurchasing goods and supplies is being handled by the Finance\nDepartment, to which the Acting Assistant to the City Manager\nresponded in the affirmative.\nCouncilmember Matarrese inquired whether hiring a buyer was\nanticipated.\nThe City Manager responded expanding the responsibilities of\nexisting staff is being considered.\nCouncilmember Daysog inquired how the 5% preference would work on a\n$10,000 purchase.\nThe Finance Director responded written proposals would be requested\non large purchases; a local vendor would have the advantage if they\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n6\nMay 2, 2006", "path": "CityCouncil/2006-05-02.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2006-05-02", "page": 7, "text": "missing piece; stated the City does not provide direction.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated the City should encourage teaming with\nother companies; a \"Hire Alameda\" philosophy is also important;\ntraffic would lessen with a \"Hire Alameda\" philosophy.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n7\nMay 2, 2006", "path": "CityCouncil/2006-05-02.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2006-05-02", "page": 8, "text": "Mayor Johnson suggested moving up the paragraph regarding the City\nof Alameda being a consumer of local businesses. stated the City is\nfalling short in buying in Alameda despite Municipal Code Section\n2-62; the opening paragraph should include a statement regarding\nthe City of Alameda buying locally and promoting Alameda businesses\nas shopping destinations language should be added to the last\nparagraph regarding the Finance Department's efforts to show that\nthe \"Buy Alameda\" philosophy is not just based on the Alameda\nMunicipal Code; the April check register shows that $20,340 out of\n$4.5 million was spent in Alameda.\nThe Finance Director stated that $91,151 was spent locally;\n$159,000 was purchased in Alameda County and approximately $2\nmillion was spent outside Alameda County.\nMayor Johnson stated many goods and services are not available in\nAlameda; there is a better chance of a business locating in Alameda\nif businesses know the City will do business locally; the City is\ntrying to provide an incentive for businesses to move to Alameda;\n$4.5 million is a lot of public money; she seldom sees outside\nbusinesses supporting the City's non-profits.\nCouncilmember deHaan inquired whether a trend has been seen\nThe Finance Director responded in the affirmative; stated the trend\ndoes not move positively in one direction; one month may have an\nincreasing proportion of payment to Alameda businesses and the next\nmonth may be different.\nCouncilmember deHaan moved adoption of the Resolution with Mayor\nJohnson's recommendations.\nThe Acting Assistant to the City Manager summarized the Mayor's\nrecommendations to move up the paragraph regarding the City of\nAlameda being a consumer of business, include the City of Alameda\nbuying locally and promoting Alameda businesses as shopping\ndestinations, and include the Finance Department's efforts.\nCouncilmember Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by\nunanimous voice vote - 5.\n(06-236) Resolution No. 13951, \"Establishing Guiding Principles\nfor the Management of the City Fleet Vehicles and Equipment. \"\nAdopted.\nThe Public Works Director provided a brief presentation.\nVice Mayor Gilmore inquired whether the Public Works' budget would\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n8\nMay 2, 2006", "path": "CityCouncil/2006-05-02.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2006-05-02", "page": 9, "text": "have a line item for equipment replacement.\nThe City Manager responded that a separate page would be provided\nwhich would summarize all the recommended equipment to be\nreplacement.\nCouncilmember Daysog stated the Police and Fire Departments have\nspecialized vehicles.\nThe Public Works Director responded that Public Works would work\ndirectly with the Police and Fire Departments to identify special\nvehicle needs.\nCouncilmember Daysog inquired whether bio-diesel fuel is possible\nwith the existing fleet.\nThe Public Works Director responded he has not looked into the\nmatter; electric and hybrid vehicles seem to be viable; hydrogen\nfuel is being investigated.\nCouncilmember Daysog requested that bio-diesel fuel alternatives be\nreviewed.\nThe Finance Director stated bio-diesel fuel was considered for the\nstandby generators at Alameda Point; the engine needs to be diesel\nall of the rubber has to be retrofitted to not ruin the engine.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated the funding stream becomes very\nimportant with expensive vehicles such as a fire truck; obtaining\nthe Navy vehicles helped in some areas; a purchasing procedure is\nneeded; replacement criteria has been established with the Police\nDepartment.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated that he appreciates the Resolution\nthe Resolution defines how to get a handle on fleet management ;\nsuggested that additional language be added to the Resolution;\nalternative fuel vehicles need to be identified; the first choice\nshould be electric; the next choice should be hybrid, if electric\nis not practical alternative fuel vehicles would be the next\nchoice; the last choice would be status quoi choices need to be\nspelled out so that there is a decision tree; boats are not on the\nlist; the City has two ferry boats and a fire and police boat.\nMayor Johnson stated the City also has a Trident ship.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated a watercraft inventory is needed.\nThe Public Works Director stated the Police and Fire Department\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n9\nMay 2, 2006", "path": "CityCouncil/2006-05-02.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2006-05-02", "page": 10, "text": "boats are included in the list, the ferry boats are not; he would\ninvestigate the Trident ships.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated Bay Crossings had an article on the\ndebate of the ability to construct a solar ferry; proposed\nadditional language to the Resolution and rewording of Point D to\naddress order of choices; stated he would rather pay Alameda Power\nand Telecom for clean fuel than pay the oil companies.\nMayor Johnson stated that she liked the terms of the Resolution\nelectric vehicles make sense for making trips back and forth from\nthe Base to City Hall; it is important to identify vehicle use to\nsee what type of vehicle is most efficient; other cities have a\ngreater variety of vehicles.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated that the University of California at\nRiverside has a fleet of Gem cars; Gem cars could be used by\nBuilding Inspectors, Interoffice Mail and the Library Department.\nCouncilmember Daysog stated there is general excitement regarding\nalternative fuels; guiding principles for managing the fleet are\nbefore the Council; alternative vehicle discussions would be\nhelpful but should be a separate item.\nThe Public Works Director stated alternative vehicle discussions\nhave started.\nCouncilmember Daysog stated that he wants to know why an\nalternative is practical or impractical at some point.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated the City declared itself as an electric\nCity in 1996; the City partnered with Calstart to move forward ;\nefforts evaporated in 1999; the commitment was not fulfilled;\nAlameda Power and Telecom can be the City's leader; electric cars\nare not being made in the United States the electric car\nphilosophy should be revisited.\nCouncilmember Matarrese moved adoption of the Resolution adding the\nfollowing language : WHEREAS there have been dramatic increases in\nthe cost of gasoline and diesel fuel, and there are anticipated\ncontinued long term escalation of these prices due to supply; and\nWHEREAS the current use of gasoline and diesel fuels have adverse\neffect on the environment while alternative cleaner fuels such as\nelectricity from Alameda Power & Telecom, bio-diesel, ethanol mix\ngasoline and compressed natural gas are available; Point 3-D:\nelectric vehicles are the first choice with hybrid vehicles and\nother alternative fuel vehicles as the second and third choices if\nthe first or second choice is not practical due to functional\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n10\nMay 2, 2006", "path": "CityCouncil/2006-05-02.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2006-05-02", "page": 11, "text": "requirements.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated that he was not sure about the proposed\npriorities i natural gas conversion is one of the methods discussed ;\napproximately one-third of the City's fleet is industrial type\nvehicles.\nCouncilmember Daysog seconded the motion, which carried by\nunanimous voice vote - 5.\nCouncilmember deHaan inquired whether establishing the overall\nfleet inventory issue would be included, to which the City Manager\nresponded in the affirmative.\nCouncilmember Matarrese inquired whether the electric vehicles\nwould be purchased with the Transportation for Clean Air money\nThe Public Works Director responded the Transportation for Clean\nAir money provides only 20% funding; the funding was changed to\nCongestion Management Air Quality money which covers 90% funding\nand has a lower threshold for air emissions.\nORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA\n(06-237) ) Duane Rutledge, Dublin, stated that he was selected in\nthe Bayport housing lottery; the process has been unclear ; the\nselection, points and evaluation have changed over time he has\nbeen involved in the process for two years; he was told his lottery\nnumber is being changed because now the selection committee does\nnot recognize volunteer work in the City as legitimate work; his\napplication was stalled due to staffing problems ; he is not\nreceiving clear answers or information on the appeal process.\nThe Assistant City Manager stated applications were processed by\nthe Alameda Development Corporation which had staff turnover ; the\nCity is aware of Mr. Rutledge's situation and will ensure the\nprocess is clearly explained and understood.\nCouncilmember Daysog requested the Council be kept informed.\nVice Mayor Gilmore requested Mr. Rutledge be provided contact\ninformation.\nThe Assistant City Manager stated the Development Services Housing\nDevelopment Manager is responsible.\nCouncilmember deHaan requested the City Manager's office be the\npoint of contact.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n11\nMay 2, 2006", "path": "CityCouncil/2006-05-02.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2006-05-02", "page": 12, "text": "Vice Mayor Gilmore requested Council be provided a detailed report\non the outcome, what happened, and why it happened.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated the report should include how other\napplicants could be affected.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated the report should address and\nprovide exhibits of what applicants are told when applying,\ndocumentatior of the point system, how points can change and what\ndocumentation goes with point changes.\nThe Assistant City Manager stated what applicants were told might\nbe difficult to reconstruct due to ADC staffing changes.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated anything in writing should be\nprovided.\nVice Mayor Gilmore stated there should be a system; applicants\nshould receive a handout clearly spelling out the requirements.\nThe Assistant City Manager stated the City used ADC as a\ncontractor.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated there should be contractor\nperformance requirement.\nMayor Johnson inquired whether ADC contracted with the City or the\ndeveloper, to which the Assistant City Manager responded the City.\nMayor Johnson stated the City should have specifications in place\nwhen entering into a contract.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated the evaluation process should not have\nchanged; consistency is all-important; further requested staff to\nreview the recourse and how applicants appeal the matter to a\ndifferent level.\n(06-238 - ) Mark Irons, Alameda, stated that he has concerns about\nthe use of alternative fuels; the process for reviewing use of\nalternative fuel vehicles should be thorough; questioned whether\nelectric vehicles should be selected over hybrids; hybrids are the\nfastest way to stop the greenhouse effect.\nMayor Johnson stated the City's electric power is over 80% green;\ninquired whether Mr. Iron's had concerns with using electric\nvehicles given Alameda's circumstance.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n12\nMay 2, 2006", "path": "CityCouncil/2006-05-02.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2006-05-02", "page": 13, "text": "Mr. Irons responded inspectors driving around the Island in\nelectric vehicles would not be a problem; electric vehicles have\nlimitations; if the country wanted to change fire engines to bio-\ndiesel, it could be done.\nCouncilmember deHaan requested that Adoption of Resolution\nEstablishing Guiding Principles [paragraph no. 06-236] be reopened;\nstated priorities should not be set completely; the City will use\nthe greenest technology.\nCOUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS\n(06-239) Consideration of Mayor's nominations for appointment to\nthe Film Commission.\nCouncilmember deHaan inquired whether the terms were staggered.\nThe City Clerk responded the staggering would be done by lottery\nafter nominations are made.\nMayor Johnson nominated: Jeanette L. Copperwaite (Historic\nExperience) i Kenneth I. Dorrance (Retail/Property Management) ;\nDavid J. Duffin (Film/Video Industry) ; Liam Gray Arts/Cultural) ;\nOrin D. Green (Film/Video Industry) ; Patricia A. Grey (Film/Video\nIndustry) ; Tamar Lowell (Water/Marina Based Experience) ; Theatte\n(Teddy) B. Tarbor (Community-art-large)\nMayor Johnson stated that committees would be established.\nCouncilmember deHaan inquired whether the nominated applicants were\nAlameda residents, to which Mayor Johnson responded in the\naffirmative.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated only two commissions allow non-\nresidents; the Charter requires applicants to be residents.\nMayor Johnson stated that all Film Commission categories require\nAlameda residency; a non-resident can fill the Business Association\nExecutive Director seat if the category cannot be filled by a\nresident.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated he leans toward applicants being\nresidents.\nMayor Johnson stated the issue could be considered; she prefers\nAlameda residents.\nCouncilmember Daysog stated that existing non-resident Board\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n13\nMay 2, 2006", "path": "CityCouncil/2006-05-02.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2006-05-02", "page": 14, "text": "Members and Commissioners should not be removed from their\npositions.\nCouncilmember deHaan requested the City Clerk to review the\nresident status of other Board Members and Commissioners.\nMayor Johnson stated that the Council could change the Municipal\nCode; the Code is intended to be flexible.\nCouncilmember deHaan requested an Off Agenda Report on the matter.\nMayor Johnson stated the matter could be brought back to the\nCouncil for discussion.\nCouncilmember deHaan requested the Council address commission\nresidency requirements.\n(06-240) Mayor Johnson reported that she attended the Northern\nCalifornia Power Agency/Northwest Public Power Association Western\nFederal Policy Conference in Washington D.C. ; the conference is an\nopportunity for small utilities to express their voice in\nWashington D. C. ; Alameda Power and Telecom has to keep up on State\nand federal policy and legislative issues.\n(06-241) Vice Mayor Gilmore stated pending federal legislation\nregulating cable companies included the Federal Communications\nCommission (FCC) overseeing trenching in City streets; the proposal\ntakes away local control; requested information; stated the City\nshould be actively lobbying against such regulations.\nThe City Manager stated lobbying against the regulations was\nconsistent with a resolution Council previously adopted; an update\nwould be provided.\nADJOURNMENT\nThere being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the\nregular meeting at 9:45 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\n14\nMay 2, 2006", "path": "CityCouncil/2006-05-02.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2006-05-02", "page": 15, "text": "MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING\nTUESDAY - -MAY 2, 2006- -5:30 P. M.\nMayor Johnson convened the Special Meeting at 5:45 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(06-216) Conference with Legal Counsel - Anticipated Litigation;\nSignificant exposure to litigation pursuant to Subdivision (b) of\nSection 54956.9. Number of cases : One.\n(06-217) Public Employment; Title: City Attorney.\nFollowing the Closed Session, the Special Meeting was reconvened\nand Mayor Johnson announced that regarding Conference with Legal\nCounsel, the Council received a briefing from Legal Counsel and\ngave directions to Legal Counsel; and regarding Public Employment,\nthe Council discussed hiring of a new City Attorney.\nadjournment\nThere being no further business, Mayor Johnson 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\nMay 2, 2006", "path": "CityCouncil/2006-05-02.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2006-05-02", "page": 16, "text": "MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL JOINT CITY COUNCIL,\nALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,\nAND COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION MEETING\nTUESDAY- - -MAY 2, 2006 - -7:31 P.M.\nMayor/Chair Johnson convened the Special Joint Meeting at 9:46 p.m.\nROLL CALL - Present : Councilmembers /\nBoard\nMembers\n/\nCommissioners Daysog, deHaan, Gilmore,\nMatarrese and Mayor/Chair Johnson - 5.\nAbsent :\nNone.\nMINUTES\n(06-242CC/06-014CIC) Minutes of the Special Community Improvement\nCommission (CIC) Meeting, and the Special Joint City Council,\nAlameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority, CIC and Housing\nAuthority Board of Commissioners Meeting held on April 18, 2006.\nApproved.\nCouncilmember/Board  ember/Commissioner Matarrese moved approval of\nthe minutes.\nCouncilmember/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan seconded the motion\nwhich\ncarried by the following voice vote : Ayes\nCouncilmembers/Board Member/Commissioners Daysog, deHaan, Matarrese\nand Mayor/Chair Johnson - 4. Abstentions: Vice Mayor/Board\nMember/Commissioner Gilmore - 1.\nAGENDA ITEM\n(06-243CC/06-015CIC) Recommendation to accept the Fiscal Year 2006\nthird-Quarter Financial Report and approve Budget Adjustments.\nThe Finance Director provided a brief presentation.\nVice Mayor/Board Member/Commissioner Gilmore inquired what was the\nbooking fee reimbursement which results in a $200,000 reduction.\nThe Finance Director responded that the State appropriates a\nreimbursement for fees that the City pays to the County for booking\nprisoners; the State took the reimbursement fee out of the General\nFund budget during Fiscal Year 2006; the reimbursement fee will be\nincluded in the Fiscal year 2007 budget.\nSpecial Joint Meeting\nAlameda City Council, Alameda\n1\nReuse and Redevelopment Authority, and\nCommunity Improvement Commission\nMay 2, 2006", "path": "CityCouncil/2006-05-02.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2006-05-02", "page": 17, "text": "Councilmember/Board  Member/Commissioner deHaan moved approval of\nthe staff recommendation.\nCouncilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Daysog seconded the motion,\nwhich carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.\n(06-244CC/06-016CIC) Discussion of City Attorney/General Counsel\nLegal Services and staffing options. Not heard.\nADJOURNMENT\n(06-245CC) There being no further business, Mayor/Chair Johnson\nadjourned the special joint meeting in sympathy and respect for the\nfamily of Fire Captain Rick Zombeck at 9:49 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, Alameda\n2\nReuse and Redevelopment Authority, and\nCommunity Improvement Commission\nMay 2, 2006", "path": "CityCouncil/2006-05-02.pdf"}