{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2006-05-16", "page": 1, "text": "MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING\nTUESDAY- -MAY 16, 2006- - -7:30 P. .M.\nMayor Johnson convened the Regular Meeting at 7:54 p.m.\nROLL CALL - Present : Councilmembers Daysog, deHaan, Gilmore,\nMatarrese, and Mayor Johnson - 5.\nAbsent :\nNone.\nAGENDA CHANGES\nNone.\nPROCLAMATIONS, SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY AND ANNOUNCEMENTS\n(06-253 ) Presentation by Alameda Architectural Preservation\nSociety of a Historic Preservation Award for the storefront\nrehabilitation of the Oddfellows Building at 1501 Park Street using\na City fa\u00e7ade grant.\nDenise Brady, President of the Alameda Architectural Preservation\nSociety, presented the award to the Mayor.\nMayor Johnson thanked Ms. Brady for the award; acknowledged the\nefforts of the Business Development Division Coordinator and\nDevelopment Services Director; stated the community realizes the\nimportance of preserving and restoring historic structures.\n(06-254) Proclamation declaring May 18, 2006 as Bike to Work Day.\nMayor Johnson read and presented the proclamation to Lucy Gigli and\nJohn McNulty with Bike Alameda.\nMs. Gigli thanked the Council for the proclamation; stated the\nAlameda Association of Realtors has done a great job to encourage\nbiking.\nCONSENT CALENDAR\nMayor Johnson announced that the recommendation to approve a\nContract with EIP Associates [paragraph no. 06-258], and Resolution\nof Intention to Levy an Annual Assessment [paragraph no. 06-262]\nwere removed from the Consent Calendar for discussion.\nCouncilmember Matarrese moved approval of the remainder of the\nConsent Calendar.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n1\nMay 16, 2006", "path": "CityCouncil/2006-05-16.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2006-05-16", "page": 2, "text": "Councilmember deHaan seconded the motion, which carried by\nunanimous voice vote - 5.\n[ Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk preceding\nthe paragraph number. . ]\n(*06-255) - Minutes of the Special and Regular City Council Meetings\nheld on May 2, 2006, and the Special City Council Meetings held on\nMay 3, 2006. Approved.\n( *06-256) Ratified bills in the amount of $8,292,392.81\n( *06-257) Recommendation to accept the Quarterly Sales Tax Report\nfor the Period Ending March 31, 2006. Accepted.\n(06-258) Recommendation to approve a Contract with EIP Associates,\nInc. in the amount of $173,075 for the preparation of an\nEnvironmental Impact Report for Harbor Bay Associates, Inc.\nThe Planning and Building Director provided a brief oral report.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated that the environmental review procedure\nis standard and is available to any individual.\nMayor Johnson stated the staff recommendation is to approve having\nthe Environmental Impact Report prepared and is not project\napproval.\nThe Planning and Building Director stated that the Contract ensures\nthat the applicant pays for the services.\nCouncilmember Matarrese inquired whether the City was the owner of\nthe Contract, to which the Planning and Building Director responded\nin the affirmative.\nDavid Kirwin, Alameda, stated past newspaper articles have\nindicated that the City could build several thousand homes on Bay\nFarm Island because of the reverse commute; the review is the fifth\none that has been performed; the demand to provide public services\nand community facilities would increase the tax burden on the City.\nMayor Johnson inquired whether the referenced article addressed a\nproposal to build several thousand homes at Harbor Bay.\nMr. Kirwin responded the article noted that building several\nthousand homes was possible; the proposed lot size is not the\nfamily neighborhood quality and style of Alameda.\nCouncilmember Matarrese noted the City does not plan to build\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n2\nMay 16, 2006", "path": "CityCouncil/2006-05-16.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2006-05-16", "page": 3, "text": "homes ; an application to build homes was submitted by the property\nowner.\nThe City Attorney stated the process is long; studies would be\nconducted to provide adequate information to the Planning Board to\nconsider the application.\nMayor Johnson stated the process is in the early stages the City\nis involved because the City wants to have the consultant perform\nthe work for the City.\nVice Mayor Gilmore stated an application for 104 homes does not\nmean that 104 homes would be built; 104 homes are the maximum but\nless could be built; the project may never be built because of\ncommunity and City concerns.\nCouncilmember Daysog stated that he would abstain on the matter he\nis concerned with on-going negotiations with the Port of Oakland.\nbuilding additional homes at Harbor Bay could injure the City's\nposition regarding airport expansion; information is needed to make\nan informed decision.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated he supports the recommendation in\norder to provide current information to the Planning Board.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated hopefully the report will provide\nneeded information; the recommendation does not commit the City to\nthe project; concerns will be aired.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated the staff recommendation commits the\nCity to engage the appropriate firm to conduct the study.\nCouncilmember Matarrese moved approval of the staff recommendation.\nVice Mayor Gilmore seconded the motion, which carried by the\nfollowing voice vote: Ayes: Councilmembers deHaan, Gilmore,\nMatarrese and Mayor Johnson - 4. Abstentions Councilmember Daysog\n- 1.\n(*06-259) Recommendation to appropriate $16,000 from the Curbside\nRecycling Fund and award a Contract in the amount of $72,582,\nincluding contingencies, to AJW Construction for installation of\nRubberized Sidewalks, No. P.W. 02-06-05. Accepted.\n(*06-260) Recommendation to award Contract in the amount of\n$436,000, including contingencies to SpenCon Construction, Inc.\nfor the Fiscal Year 2005-06 Repair of Portland Cement Concrete\nSidewalk, Curb, Gutter, Driveway and Minor Street Patching, No.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n3\nMay 16, 2006", "path": "CityCouncil/2006-05-16.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2006-05-16", "page": 4, "text": "Routes to School) No. P.W. 11-02-15. Adopted.\n(06-262) Resolution No. 13953, \"Intention to Levy an Annual\nAssessment on the Alameda Business Improvement Area of the City of\nAlameda for FY 2006-07 and to Set a Public Hearing for June 6,\n2006. \" Adopted.\nCouncilmember deHaan inquired whether the annual assessment is only\nfor Park Street.\nThe Development Services Director responded the assessment is for\nPark Street and Webster Street the levy rates are different; the\nfee is collected along with the business license fee.\nCouncilmember DeHaan inquired whether businesses have other\nassessment.\nThe Development Services Director responded a City Lighting and\nLandscape District is used for maintenance and trash collection\nsmaller areas also have individual Lighting and Landscape District\nareas.\nCouncilmember deHaan inquired whether there is a vote for the\nassessment.\nThe Development Services Director responded the assessment was\nvoted in a long time ago but is not renewed annually the self-\ntaxing improvement assessments have an annual review process.\nCouncilmember deHaan inquired whether Webster Street has a Lighting\nand Landscape District.\nThe Public Works Director responded the City has Landscaping and\nLighting Districts throughout the City, including Webster Street,\nPark Street and Bay Street the fees are set annually; the fees are\nused for maintenance, litter collection, and electricity.\nCouncilmember deHaan inquired whether the City provides the\nservice, to which the Public Works Director responded the service\nis provided by a contractor.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n4\nMay 16, 2006", "path": "CityCouncil/2006-05-16.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2006-05-16", "page": 5, "text": "Councilmember deHaan inquired whether the City manages the\nContract.\nThe Public Works Director responded in the affirmative; stated he\nwas unsure whether the City managed the Contract for trash pickup\non Webster Street.\nThe Development Services Director stated Webster Street has two\nzones for the Lighting and Landscaping District; the levy is\n$35,000 per year; Park Street has one zone for $61,000 per year ;\nthe Greater Alameda Business Area (GABA) has one zone for\napproximately $4,800 per year.\nCouncilmember deHaan inquired whether the City provides other\nfunding streams from improvement funds.\nThe Development Services Director responded in the negative; stated\nthe City provides support to Webster Street and Park Street through\nthe Community Improvement Commission.\nCouncilmember deHaan inquired whether the matter would be addressed\nin the budget process.\nThe Development Services Director responded in the affirmative;\nstated the current budget provides $74,000 for Webster Street and\n$94,000 for Park Street next year's budget would provide $94,000\nfor each.\nCouncilmember deHaan inquired whether any funding is given to GABA.\nThe Development Services Director responded that GABA has not\nrequested any funding since she has worked for the City; a nominal\namount was provided approximately four years ago.\nCouncilmember deHaan moved adoption of the resolution.\nCouncilmember Daysog seconded the motion, which carried by\nunanimous voice vote - 5.\n(\n*06-263) Resolution No. 13954, \"Ordering Vacation of an Abandoned\n15 Foot Storm Drain Easement within Assessor Parcel No. 074-1360- -\nPortion of 24, 25, 27, 29, 125 and 152 and Authorize Recordation of\nQuitclaim Deed [ID No. 16]. Adopted; and\n(*06-263A) Resolution No. 13955, \"Ordering Vacation of Abandoned 10\nFoot Sanitary Sewer Easement within Assessor Parcel No. 074-1356-\nPortion of 12 and 13, and Authorize Recordation of Quitclaim Deed\n[ID No. 17] (Catellus/Bayport Residential Project) \" Adopted.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n5\nMay 16, 2006", "path": "CityCouncil/2006-05-16.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2006-05-16", "page": 6, "text": "( *06-264) Resolution No. 13956, \"Amending the Management and\nConfidential Employees Association (MCEA) Salary Schedule by\nEstablishing the Salary Range for the Classification of Web\nTechnical Producer. \" Adopted.\nREGULAR AGENDA ITEMS\n( 06-265) Resolution No. 13957, \"Appointing Jeanette L. Copperwaite\nas a member of the Film Commission. (Historic Experience Seat)\nAdopted;\n(06-265A) Resolution No. 13958, \"Appointing Kenneth I. Dorrance as\na member of the Film Commission. Realty/Property Management\nProfessional Seat) Adopted;\n(06-265B) Resolution No. 13959, \"Appointing David J. Duffin as\na\nmember of the Film Commission. \" (Film/Video Industry Seat) Adopted\n(06-265C) Resolution No. 13960, \"Appointing Liam Gray as a member\nof the Film Commission. (Arts/Cultural Seat) Adopted;\n(06-265D) Resolution No. 13961, \"Appointing Orin D. Green as a\nmember of the Film Commission. \" (Film/Video Industry Seat) Adopted\n(06-265E) Resolution No. 13962, \"Appointing Patricia A. Grey and a\nmember of the Film Commission. (Film/Video Industry Seat) Adopted;\n(\n06-265F Resolution No. 13963, \"Appointing Tamar Lowell as a\nmember of the Film Commission. (Water/Marina Based Experience\nSeat) Adopted; and\n(06-265G) Resolution No. 13964, \"Appointing Theatte (Teddy) B.\nTabor as a member of the Film Commission. (Community-at-Large\nSeat) Adopted.\nCouncilmember Matarrese moved adoption of the resolutions.\nVice Mayor Gilmore seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous\nvoice vote - 5.\nThe City Clerk administered the Oath and presented certificates of\nappointment to Film Commission members.\nMayor Johnson announced that Allison Bliss is the Chamber of\nCommerce representative, Tricia Collins-Levi is the West Alameda\nBusiness Association representative, and Robb Ratto is the Park\nStreet Business Association representative.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n6\nMay 16, 2006", "path": "CityCouncil/2006-05-16.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2006-05-16", "page": 7, "text": "The Finance Director stated property owners are billed even though\nthe Municipal Code states that the property owner is responsible\nfor applying and paying for a business license; an annual renewal\nis sent out in April once a business license is on file. collection\nis attempted through July 31, at which time the business license\nbecomes delinquent delinquent notices are sent out again in March;\nparcels with unpaid business licenses as of June 30 are placed on\nthe tax roll; Public Hearing notices are also sent.\nMayor Johnson stated the total amount of uncollected license fees\nis $5,629.28, $9,536.77 with late charges; efforts are made to work\nwith the business community; the City appreciates what businesses\ndo for the community.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n7\nMay 16, 2006", "path": "CityCouncil/2006-05-16.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2006-05-16", "page": 8, "text": "Councilmember Daysog suggested researching adding \"Important\nNotice\" in the top five languages to the notification.\nCouncilmember deHaan inquired whether most of the people on the\nlist have paid business licenses in the past.\nThe Finance Director responded some are continuing business; the\nmajority took out a business license in 2004 but did not renew in\n2005.\nMayor Johnson inquired whether the notification indicates that the\nowner needs to advise the City when the business ceases, to which\nthe Finance Director responded in the affirmative.\nMayor Johnson opened the public portion of the Hearing.\nRupert Davis, Oregon, stated he disagrees with the March 15 letter\nhe received; his mother-in-law had a business license [for 720\nLincoln Avenue] until 1997; rent stopped for the upper unit in 1997\nbecause of renovation; his mother-in-lav was advised by the Finance\nDepartment that a business license is not required if only one unit\nis rented; his mother-in-law passed away in 2001, and he and his\nwife took ownership; the Finance Department personally informed him\nthat a business license is not required if only one unit is rented;\nan $84 late fee is ridiculous when he was told that he did not need\na business license; only one unit was rented in 1997, 1998, and\n1999, and he did not own the property at that time; no units were\nrented from 2000 to 2003; rent started in February 2004.\nThere being no further speakers, Mayor Johnson closed the public\nportion of the Hearing.\nMayor Johnson requested that Mr. Davis's case be referred to the\nFinance Department to determine whether the fee is valid.\nThe Finance Director stated she would work with Mr. Davis.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated conclusions would be made based upon\nthe supporting documentation.\nCouncilmember Daysog moved approval of staff recommendation with\ndirection to review and determine the validity of Mr. Davis's\ncomplaints and research adding \"Important Notice\" in the top five\nlanguages to the notification.\nCouncilmember Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by\nunanimous voice vote - 5.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n8\nMay 16, 2006", "path": "CityCouncil/2006-05-16.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2006-05-16", "page": 9, "text": "(06-268 ) Recommendation to award Contract in the amount of\n$1,050,505.00 to McGuire and Hester, and allocate a 10% contingency\nin the amount of $105,100.00 for the construction of the Bayport 4-\nacre park.\nThe Redevelopment Manager provided a brief presentation.\nCouncilmember deHaan inquired whether the original bidder or\nchallenger resubmitted a bid, to which the Redevelopment Manager\nresponded in the negative.\nMayor Johnson inquired whether the bids were lower.\nThe Redevelopment Manager responded the bids for the park were\nlower; stated the community building bids were higher than the\nengineer's estimate; staff will recommend rejecting the bids at the\nJune 20 City Council Meeting.\nThe Acting Recreation and Park Director stated he has contacted the\nSchool District to arrange for facilities to run the After School\nPlayground Program in the fall; field use will be rotated;\nrenovation of Godfrey Park will start after Bayport Park is opened.\nMayor Johnson inquired when the construction of the community\nbuilding would be completed.\nThe Acting Recreation and Park Director responded the community\nbuilding would be re-bid in the fall.\nMayor Johnson inquired whether construction could be done during\nthe school year, to which the Acting Recreation and Park Director\nresponded in the affirmative.\nThe Redevelopment Manager stated the community building is on\nschool property and is subject to the Department of State Architect\nstandards, which are higher the original lowest bid was $730,000\nthe re-bid was $850,000; the engineer's estimate was in the\n$600,000 range.\nVice Mayor Gilmore moved approval of the staff recommendation.\nCouncilmember Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by\nunanimous voice vote - 5.\nMayor Johnson inquired whether the renovations for Godfrey Park\nwould start in September, to which the Acting Recreation and Park\nDirector responded hopefully.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n9\nMay 16, 2006", "path": "CityCouncil/2006-05-16.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2006-05-16", "page": 10, "text": "Mayor Johnson inquired when renovations for Woodstock Park would\nstart.\nThe Acting Recreation and Park Director responded the City has\nuntil 2012 to spend the grant money; stated Ritler Park would be\nrenovated after Godfrey Park; Woodstock Park would be renovated\nnext; the Woodstock Park design is more involved because of\ndrainage problems in the neighborhood.\nlouncilmember Matarrese inquired why renovation for Ritler Park\nwould be before Woodstock Park.\nThe Acting Recreation and Park Director responded renovation for\nRitler Park would be quicker; stated renovation for Woodstock Park\nwould start next year in late summer or early fall.\nMayor Johnson stated starting renovation next year makes sense;\nWoodstock Park would not be open for the baseball season if work\nstarted next spring.\nCouncilmember deHaan inquired when the park and facility naming\npolicy would be brought to Council, to which the Acting Recreation\nand Park Director responded June 6.\nORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA\nNone.\nCOUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS\n(06-269) Vice Mayor Gilmore stated there have been various\nlobbying efforts to allow triple tractor trailers on California\nhighways ; California currently bans triple tractor trailers;\nshipping companies are attempting to get the legislation through\nthe State; the Governor has indicated some interest last time the\nissue was proposed; a subcommittee vote lost by a margin of eight\nto five; requested that the matter be placed on the agenda; stated\ncitizen safety is a concern; there is potential for jackknifing and\nmajor wear and tear on local roads.\nMayor Johnson concurred with Vice Mayor Gilmore; inquired whether\ntriple tractor-trailers could be restricted in Alameda.\nThe City Attorney responded probably not; stated there may be State\nand Federal preemptions; a number of Alameda streets are considered\nState highways.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated that the matter should be placed on\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n10\nMay 16, 2006", "path": "CityCouncil/2006-05-16.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2006-05-16", "page": 11, "text": "the agenda.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated eleven states allow triple tractor-\ntrailers, the Federal government does not.\nMayor Johnson inquired whether double tractor-trailers - are\npermitted in California and not Oregon, to which Councilmember\ndeHaan responded in the affirmative.\nVice Mayor Gilmore inquired whether the matter could be placed on\nthe agenda sooner rather than later, to which the City Manager\nresponded the matter would be placed on the June 6 City Council\nagenda.\n(06-270) Councilmember deHaan stated that the City has easement\nrights for streetscaping along Appezzato Way even though\nnegotiations are being conducted with the Alameda Beltline;\nrequested an Off Agenda Report on the matter; stated the City is\nmissing an opportunity to bring the community together; landscaping\nshould be done sooner rather than later; the Summer House,\npreviously Harbor Island Apartments and Buena Vista Apartments, is\none of the highest density areas in Alameda, with 41 homes per\nacre, and lends itself to a transportation node; the matter should\nbe brought to the Transportation Commission.\n(06-271) Mayor Johnson requested that the City Council or Planning\nBoard review office/business conversions in residential areas;\nstated the Council set a precedent on the issue several years ago\n[June 6, 2000] when a request was made to convert a residential\nstructure into a law office beyond a business area [2058 Central\nAvenue] ; she would like to formalize the precedent previously the\nCouncil stated that no residential conversions would be allowed in\nthe area.\nVice Mayor Gilmore stated that the Planning Board denied the\nrequest because parking requirements could not be met and a\nvariance was requested.\nMayor Johnson stated the City should be clear on the matter so that\npeople do not purchase residential property with the intent to\nconvert the property to commercial.\nThe City Manager stated that the matter would be brought back to\nCouncil, including past Council action.\n(06-272) Councilmember deHaan stated the Miracle League provides\nan opportunity to establish a baseball field for individuals with\nlimitations; the School Board reviewed possible fields; endorsement\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n11\nMay 16, 2006", "path": "CityCouncil/2006-05-16.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2006-05-16", "page": 12, "text": "has been received from the Recreation and Parks Commission; the\nCity provides full range sport opportunities; providing baseball\nfields for the Miracle League fills the one gap; encouraged the\nCity to lend a kind ear to the opportunity and move forward.\nADJOURNMENT\nThere being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the\nRegular Meeting at 9:01 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\n12\nMay 16, 2006", "path": "CityCouncil/2006-05-16.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2006-05-16", "page": 13, "text": "MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION MEETING\nTUESDAY- - -MAY 16, 2006- -5:30 P.M.\nChair Johnson convened the Special Meeting at 5:40 p.m.\nRoll Call - Present : Commissioners Daysog, deHaan, Gilmore,\nMatarrese, and Chair Johnson - 5.\nAbsent : None.\nThe Special Meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider:\n(06-018) Conference with Real Property Negotiators; Property: Fleet\nIndustrial Supply Center; Negotiating parties: Community\nImprovement Commission and ProLogis; Under negotiation: Price and\nterms.\nFollowing the Closed Session, the Special Meeting was reconvened\nand Chair Johnson announced that the Commission obtained a briefing\nfrom real property negotiators and provided direction on\nnegotiation parameters.\nAdjournment\nThere being no further business, Chair Johnson adjourned the\nSpecial Meeting at 7:45 p.m.\nRespectfully submitted,\nLara Weisiger\nSecretary\nThe agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown\nAct.\nSpecial Meeting\nCommunity Improvement Commission\nMay 16, 2006", "path": "CityCouncil/2006-05-16.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2006-05-16", "page": 14, "text": "MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING\nTUESDAY- - -MAY 16, 2006- - -5:31 P. M.\nMayor Johnson convened the Special Meeting at 6:50 p.m.\nRoll Call -\nPresent :\nCouncilmember deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese,\nand Mayor Johnson - 5.\nAbsent :\nNone.\nThe Special Meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider :\n(06-250) Conference with Legal Counsel - Existing Litigation; Name\nof case : Campos-Marquez V. City of Alameda.\n(06-251) Conference with Labor Negotiators; Agency negotiators:\nMarie Gilmore and Frank Matarrese; Employee City Attorney.\n(06-253) Public Employment. Title: City Attorney.\nFollowing the Closed Session, the Special Meeting was reconvened\nand Mayor Johnson announced that regarding Conference with Legal\nCounsel, Council received a briefing from Legal Counsel regarding\nConference with Labor Negotiators, Council discussed the City\nAttorney ; regarding Public Employment, Council discussed City\nAttorney employment.\nAdjournment\nThere being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the\nSpecial Meeting at 7:50 p.m.\nRespectfully submitted,\nLara Weisiger\nCity Clerk\nThe agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown\nAct.\nSpecial Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nMay 16, 2006", "path": "CityCouncil/2006-05-16.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2006-05-16", "page": 15, "text": "MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL JOINT CITY COUNCIL,\nALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,\nCOMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION, AND\nHOUSING AUTHORITY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS MEETING\nTUESDAY- -MAY 16, 2006 - -7:31 P.M.\nMayor/Chair Johnson convened the Special Joint Meeting at 9:01 p.m.\nROLL CALL -\nPresent : Councilmembers / Board Members\n/\nCommissioners Daysog, deHaan, Gilmore,\nMatarrese/Commissioner Torrey, and Mayor/\nChair Johnson - 6.\nAbsent :\nNone.\nCONSENT CALENDAR\nMayor/Chair Johnson announced that the recommendation to approve\nAmended Contract with Komorous-Towey [paragraph no. 06-020CIC] was\nremoved from the Consent Calendar for discussion.\nCouncilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Matarrese moved approval of\nthe remainder of the Consent Calendar.\nVice Mayor/Board Member/Commissioner Gilmore seconded the motion,\nwhich carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.\n[\nItems so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk preceding\nthe paragraph number. ]\n(*06-273CC/*06-019CIC) Minutes of the Special Joint City Council,\nAlameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority and Community Improvement\nCommission (CIC) Meeting held on May 2, 2006; and the Special CIC\nMeeting held on May 3, 2006. Approved.\n(06-020 CIC) Recommendation to approve Amended Contract with\nKomorous-Towey Architects, Inc. by increasing the Contract by\n$27,200 to provide additional Architectural and Construction\nAdministration Services for the Civic Center Parking Garage.\nDavid Kirwin, Alameda, stated the City already spent $1.8 million\non project planning lawsuit results are unknown; further\nexpenditures should be held off until issues are settled.\nChair Johnson inquired whether architectural changes are the result\nof community input.\nSpecial Joint Meeting\nAlameda City Council, Alameda\n1\nReuse and Redevelopment Authority,\nCommunity Improvement Commission, and\nHousing Authority Board of Commissioners\nMay 16, 2006", "path": "CityCouncil/2006-05-16.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2006-05-16", "page": 16, "text": "The Development Services Director stated the amendment would cover\nthe balance of the project the City was requested to retain the\narchitect through construction by the State Historic Preservation\nOfficer (SHPO) and Section 106 processi the architect would be on\nboard to verify construction administration; the money would not be\nspent until there is activity.\nCommissioner Matarrese stated he sees no problem with the staff\nrecommendation since the money would not be spent until services\nare needed.\nCommissioner deHaan inquired how the $27,200 was determined.\nThe Development Services Director responded the amount was already\nin the Contract; stated the money was used for the final response\nto the SHPO changes the Contract was exhausted; the amount would\ncarry through the range of services needed from the architect.\nCommissioner deHaan stated bids are back and are being evaluated\ninquired whether the extra service is needed for the review\nprocess.\nThe Development Services Director responded in the negative; stated\nthe service would be needed if the bid is awarded for the parking\nstructure; money is not spent on services until a project is\napproved by the Council.\nCommissioner deHaan inquired when the review process would be\ncompleted.\nThe Development Services Director responded options should be\npresented by June 6.\nCommissioner deHaan inquired when the physical massing model would\nbe available for the public, to which the Development Services\nDirector responded June 20.\nCommissioner deHaan stated he would prefer to hold off on the\nmatter until after the June 20 discussion.\nCommissioner Matarrese stated he does not see any reason to hold\noff on the matter; the money would not being spent; preparatory\naction can be taken now; the Council should move forward with the\nstaff recommendation.\nSpecial Joint Meeting\nAlameda City Council, Alameda\n2\nReuse and Redevelopment Authority,\nCommunity Improvement Commission, and\nHousing Authority Board of Commissioners\nMay 16, 2006", "path": "CityCouncil/2006-05-16.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2006-05-16", "page": 17, "text": "Chair Johnson stated the same action would be recommended at the\nnext meeting; the matter should be taken off the table so that\nfocus of [the next meeting] can be the bid issues.\nCommissioner Gilmore inquired whether voting on the matter tonight\nversus the next meeting would impact getting on the architect' S\nschedule.\nThe Development Services Director responded she would need to\ndiscuss the matter with the architect.\nCommissioner Gilmore stated that she would like to have the\narchitect on board if and when the project is ready to goi it is\nharder to get people on board to meet a schedule without notice.\nCommissioner Matarrese moved approval of the staff recommendation.\nCommissioner Gilmore seconded the motion.\nUnder discussion, Commissioner Daysog stated logistically the\nmatter should be dealt with together; he would abstain from voting\non the matter.\nOn the call for the question, the motion carried by the following\nvoice vote: Ayes : Commissioners Gilmore, Matarrese, and Chair\nJohnson - 3. Noes : Commissioner deHaan - 1. Abstentions :\nCommissioner Daysog - 1.\nAGENDA ITEMS\n(06-274 CC/06-021 CIC) Resolution No. 13966 and 06-142, \"Adopting\nPolicy of City Council, Community Improvement Commission, Housing\nAuthority Board of Commissioners, and Alameda Reuse and\nRedevelopment Authority for Expense Reimbursement, Compensation,\nand Ethics Training for Elected Officials and Legislative Body\nMembers. \" Adopted.\nMayor/Chair Johnson inquired whether the policy would apply to the\nIndustrial Development Authority (IDA)\nThe City Attorney responded IDA reimbursements or expenditures have\nnot occurred; stated the matter would be brought back if\nreimbursements and expenditures occur.\nCouncilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Matarrese moved adoption of\nthe resolutions.\nSpecial Joint Meeting\nAlameda City Council, Alameda\n3\nReuse and Redevelopment Authority,\nCommunity Improvement Commission, and\nHousing Authority Board of Commissioners\nMay 16, 2006", "path": "CityCouncil/2006-05-16.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2006-05-16", "page": 18, "text": "Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Daysog seconded the motion,\nwhich carried by unanimous voice vote - 6.\n(06-275 CC/06-022 CIC) Discussion of City Attorney/General\nCounsel Legal Services and staffing options.\nMayor/Chair Johnson stated the majority of the agenda item could be\ncontinued; direction can be given to hire one Deputy City Attorney. .\nThe City Attorney/Legal Counsel stated the hiring would be for one\nAssistant City Attorney.\nMayor/Chair Johnson inquired whether the motion would be to hire\none Assistant City Attorney. .\nCouncilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Matarrese responded in the\naffirmative; stated the background is that David Brandt [Assistant\nCity Attorney ] moved from the City Attorney's office to the City\nManager's office.\nMayor/Chair Johnson stated the hiring process has started; approval\ncould be given to hire one Assistant City Attorney.\nVice Mayor/Board Member/Commissioner Gilmore moved approval to hire\none Assistant City Attorney.\nCouncilmember/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan seconded the motion,\nwhich carried by unanimous voice vote - 6.\nMayor/Chair Johnson stated the remainder of the agenda item would\nbe continued.\nADJOURNMENT\nThere being no further business, Mayor/Chail Johnson adjourned the\nSpecial Joint Meeting at 9:15 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\n4\nReuse and Redevelopment Authority,\nCommunity Improvement Commission, and\nHousing Authority Board of Commissioners\nMay 16, 2006", "path": "CityCouncil/2006-05-16.pdf"}