{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2007-03-20", "page": 1, "text": "MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING\nTUESDAY- - -MARCH 20, 2007- - -7:30 P.M.\nMayor Johnson convened the Regular City Council Meeting at 8:31\np.m.\nROLL CALL -\nPresent : Councilmembers\ndeHaan,\nGilmore,\nMatarrese, Tam, and Mayor Johnson - 5.\nAbsent :\nNone.\nAGENDA CHANGES\nNone.\nPROCLAMATIONS, SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY AND ANNOUNCEMENTS\n(07-123) Proclamation declaring March 25 through March 31 as Boys\nand Girls Club Week.\nMayor Johnson read and presented the proclamation to Site Director\nMark Morales, Member Jamie Moreno, and Director George Phillips.\nMr. Phillips thanked Council for the help and assistance given to\nthe Boys and Girls Club.\nMichael John Torrey, Alameda, stated the Boys and Girls Club\nprovides a great service.\n(07-124) Commendation presented to the family of Ruth Blackwell\nHerch.\nMayor Johnson read and presented the commendation to Professor\nDavid Blackwell and family.\nProfessor Blackwell read a statement and thanked Council for the\ncommendation.\n***\nMayor Johnson called a recess at 7:40 p.m. to convene the Special\nCommunity Improvement Commission Meeting and reconvened the\nRegular Meeting at 8:31 p.m.\n***\nCONSENT CALENDAR\nMayor Johnson announced that the Recommendation to award Contract\nto Pacific States Environmental Contractors [paragraph no. 07-127]\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n1\nMarch 20, 2007", "path": "CityCouncil/2007-03-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2007-03-20", "page": 2, "text": "was removed from the Consent Calendar for discussion.\nCouncilmember Matarrese moved approval of the remainder of the\nConsent Calendar.\nVice Mayor Tam seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous\nvoice vote - 5. [Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an\nasterisk preceding the paragraph number. . ]\n(*07-125) Minutes of the Special Joint City Council, Alameda Reuse\nand Redevelopment Authority, and Community Improvement Commission\nMeeting held on February 20, 2007; and Special and Regular City\nCouncil Meetings held on March 6, 2007. Approved.\n(*07-126) Ratified bills in the amount of $2,486,622.05.\n(07-127) - Recommendation to award Contract in the amount of $198,360\nto Pacific States Environmental Contractors, Inc. for the\ndemolition of boarded and vacant structures at 110 and 112 Norfolk\nRoad located on Orion Street and 100 and 104 Miramar Road located\non Stardust Place.\nCouncilmember deHaan inquired whether deconstruction would not be\nallowed because the buildings have asbestos.\nThe Development Services Director responded in the affirmative;\nstated fixtures and other reusable items would be recycled.\nThe Development Manager stated the bid package included the City's\nconstruction and demolition debris procedures which require that\nconstruction and debris be recycled; approximately 70% would be\nrecycled after abatement.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated that there is an opportunity to go\nafter blighted areas, particularly Alameda Point; inquired whether\nadditional funding is available for other buildings.\nThe Development Manager responded the current Community Development\nBlock Grant funding would allow the project to be completed and the\nsite secured; stated there is not enough money in the budget to\ntake down additional buildings.\nCouncilmember deHaan inquired whether there would be some cost\nrecovery when the developer is chosen.\nThe Development Manager responded the Blight Buster Program is\nintended to be a revolving loan fund; stated costs are anticipated\nto be passed on to the Master developer.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n2\nMarch 20, 2007", "path": "CityCouncil/2007-03-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2007-03-20", "page": 3, "text": "Mayor Johnson inquired whether further demolition or deconstruction\nwould occur before the Master Developer was selected, to which the\nDevelopment Manager responded in the negative.\nCouncilmember deHaan moved approval of the staff recommendation.\nVice Mayor Tan seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous\nvoice vote - 5.\n( *07-128 - ) Introduction of Ordinance Amending the Lease Agreement\nDated January 31, 1991, Between the City of Alameda (Lessor) and\nthe Alameda Food Bank (Lessee) for Real Property Located at 1900\nThau Way. Introduced.\nREGULAR AGENDA ITEMS\n(07-129) Adoption of Resolution Adopting a Policy for Naming City\nProperty, Facilities, and Streets. Continued to April 3, 2007.\nMayor Johnson inquired whether Boards and Commissions review the\nlist annually and make recommendations for Council approval, to\nwhich the Recreation and Parks Director responded in the\naffirmative.\nMayor Johnson stated that Council should initiate the process and\nrequest the Board or Commission to review the matter.\nThe Recreation and Parks Director stated language could be added to\ndirect the individual Board or Commission to update the list and\nnot recommend a name until directed by Council.\nCouncilmember Gilmore inquired whether the Historical Advisory\nBoard is the repository for the names but does not take action, to\nwhich the recreation and Parks Director responded in the\naffirmative.\nCouncilmember Gilmore stated that Criteria #6 notes that only one\nname would be used for each property or facility; inquired whether\none park name would be used for all park components, to which the\nRecreation and Parks Director responded in the affirmative.\nCouncilmember Gilmore stated many streets cross a broad street and\nthe name becomes another name on the other side; inquired whether\nthe procedure would be discontinued, to which the Recreation and\nParks Director responded in the affirmative.\nMayor Johnson stated that she wants additions and deletions to come\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n3\nMarch 20, 2007", "path": "CityCouncil/2007-03-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2007-03-20", "page": 4, "text": "to Council annually; Council should initiate the process for naming\nor renaming streets or facilities; she does not want Council review\nto be in the last step of the process.\nCouncilmember deHaan inquired whether the policy states that an\nindividual needs to be deceased for a minimum of three years, to\nwhich the Recreation and Parks Director responded in the\naffirmative.\nMayor Johnson stated the Boards and Commissions have violated the\npolicy for the past two names.\nThe City Manager requested clarification on whether the Boards and\nCommissions would perform an annual review and that recommendations\nwould come to Council first.\nMayor Johnson stated that the Boards and Commissions would review\nthe list annually and make recommended changes to Council for\napproval requested that the resolution be revised to reflect\nrecommended changes and brought back to Council.\n(07-130) - Resolution No. 14077, \"Directing Staff to Monitor the\nChuck Corica Golf Complex Budget, Consider Results of Operational\nReview, and Implement Operational Changes to Ensure a Balanced\nBudget. Adopted.\nThe Finance Director gave a brief presentation.\nThe City Manager clarified that the anticipated revenue would be\n$60,000, which would leave a $20,000 deficit.\nMayor Johnson requested that the Golf Commission be added to the\nlast Whereas statement and the first NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT\nRESOLVED; more detailed budget reporting is needed.\nCouncilmember deHaan inquired whether the unreserved balance would\nbe $2.2 million at the end of the year.\nThe Finance Director responded the unrestricted fund balance was\n$2,358,000 at the end of February.\nCouncilmember deHaan inquired what was the unrestricted fund\nbalance at the beginning of the year, to which the Finance Director\nresponded $2,611,000.\nCouncilmember deHaan inquired what was the unrestricted fund\nbalance five years ago, to which the Finance Director responded\napproximately $6 million.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n4\nMarch 20, 2007", "path": "CityCouncil/2007-03-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2007-03-20", "page": 5, "text": "Mayor Johnson stated that some money went to capital improvement\nfunding.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated capital improvements should be\nfulfilled.\nMayor Johnson stated that the Golf Commission would be reviewing\nthe funding for Capital Improvement Projects noted that the\nRecreation and Park Director will be the Interim Golf Manager.\nCouncilmember Gilmore inquired what accounts for the $200,000\nmonth-to-month swing in expenditures.\nThe Finance Director responded September's expenditures include a\n$100,000 increase because there was a third pay period in the\nmonth; stated $13,000 was spent for painting the driving range\nstructure; July expenditures are low because less maintenance work\nis done; utility costs fluctuate from the first three months to the\nsecond three months.\nMayor Johnson stated that the Golf Commission should recommend and\nset a reserve. the Golf Commission would need to give special\napproval to draw from the reserve balance.\nThe Finance Director stated that money is made in July and August ;\nmoney is drawn in September and October.\nVice Mayor Tam inquired whether there is a high variability in\nutility use.\nThe Interim Golf Manager responded swings occur; stated water is\nsaved on rain days.\nVice Mayor Tam stated higher golf participation occurs in July and\nAugust; irrigating in the winter months seems odd.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated Capital Improvement Projects take place\nin the winter.\nMayor Johnson requested a list of Capital Improvement Projects\nstated maintenance is critical and cannot be deferred.\nThe Finance Director stated some maintenance costs are routine and\nare included in the operating costs.\nMayor Johnson stated that project schedules and goals need to be\ndeveloped.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n5\nMarch 20, 2007", "path": "CityCouncil/2007-03-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2007-03-20", "page": 6, "text": "The Finance Director stated $56,600 has been expended for Capital\nImprovement Projects through February.\nMayor Johnson inquired what was done with the $56,600.\nThe Finance Director responded some money was spent for golf\namenity projects; stated $54,600 was expended for the Clubhouse\nproject.\nMayor Johnson stated a capital improvement schedule needs to be\nestablished.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated the resolution is a good start; he\nlikes the idea of recognizing the Golf Commission's role and\nresponsibility and adding language to recognize keys points, such\nas directing staff and the Golf Commission to monitor the Golf\nComplex; recognizing the need to operate under a balanced budget is\nessential: a trigger point should occur when operating under a\nbalanced budget is not possible; the Golf Commission should\nevaluate the matter and make a recommendation to allocate the money\nneeded to close the gap; action is not driven by monitoring the\nbudget and providing a monthly report; the Golf Complex is a City\nasset that generates revenue.\nMayor Johnson stated that Council needs to establish an annual\nreserve for bad months; the reserve should be replenished in good\nmonths.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated rainy days are the difficult portion of\nthe equation; a monthly budget is needed with all elements taken\ninto consideration.\nMayor Johnson stated the Interim Golf Manager needs time to balance\nthe budget and get things under control. the Clubhouse funding\nshould be restricted; separate accounts should be established for\noperating reserves.\nThe Finance Director stated Council could designate unrestricted\nreserve funds for a specific purpose; staff cannot set up a\ndesignated reserve without Council direction.\nMayor Johnson requested that the matter come back to Council to\naddress how much unrestricted funds would be needed.\nThe City Manager suggested the recommended changes be made and the\nmatter be brought back [of restricting funds for the Clubhouse]\nwith the budget update in May.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n6\nMarch 20, 2007", "path": "CityCouncil/2007-03-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2007-03-20", "page": 7, "text": "Fiscal Year; inquired whether Council could propose that the\nrestricted operation fund is whatever the amount is between now and\nthe end of the Fiscal Year; Council could have further discussions\nbefore any more money is spent.\nThe Finance Director stated the net loss is $112,000 through\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n7\nMarch 20, 2007", "path": "CityCouncil/2007-03-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2007-03-20", "page": 8, "text": "February; three-month projections add to the amount i reserves need\nto be in the neighborhood $250,000 to $300,000.\nThe City Manager clarified that Councilmember Gilmore was referring\nto the amount that would be needed for the end of the year.\nThe Finance Director stated $79,000 would be needed at the end of\nthe year.\nMayor Johnson stated the goal for a balance budget needs to be\nimplemented as soon as possible.\nCouncilmember Gilmore inquired whether a motion needs to be made to\nset the operating reserve fund.\nThe Finance Director responded that an additional clause could be\nadded to the existing resolution stating that an $80,000 operating\nreserve be expended from the unrestricted fund balance.\nMayor Johnson inquired whether language could be added stating that\nthe unrestricted fund balance is now restricted.\nThe Finance Director responded said matter could be addressed as\npart of the budget.\nCouncilmember deHaan inquired whether depreciation is part of the\n$79,000.\nThe Finance Director responded depreciation is added into the\nexpenditure and then taken out in order to get the net gain or loss\nwithout depreciation.\nVice Mayor Tam inquired whether $80,000 is a conservative amount if\nfee increases are approved, to which the Finance Director responded\nin the affirmative.\nCouncilmember Gilmore moved adoption of resolution with direction\nto add language: 1) referencing the Golf Commission and 2) setting\na $79, operating reserve fund; and approval of direction to have\ndirected restricted funds addressed when the budget is presented.\nVice Mayor Tam seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous\nvoice vote - 5.\n(07-131) Resolution No. 14078, \"Amending Master Fee Resolution No.\n12191 by Changing Various Chuck Corica Golf Complex Rates. \"\nAdopted.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n8\nMarch 20, 2007", "path": "CityCouncil/2007-03-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2007-03-20", "page": 9, "text": "The Interim Golf Manager gave a brief presentation.\nBob Wood, Golf Commission Chair, gave a brief report.\nCouncilmember Gilmore stated that the new fee schedule is in the\nmiddle of the pack; inquired how the golf course compares in terms\nof condition and age.\nMr. Wood responded the golf course is an older course stated the\nEarl Fry Course will celebrate its 80th anniversary in May i course\nconditions vary with seasons; drainage is a problem; recycled water\nis used, which results in salt buildup; traditionally fees have\nbeen low.\nVice Mayor Tam stated the proposed weekend rates are $40/$36;\ninquired whether other golf courses have made significant\nimprovements and how the higher fees are warranted.\nMr. Wood responded Metropolitan Golf Course is completely rebuilt;\nstated Monarch Bay had a complete upgrade five or six years agoi\nHarding Park has been completely rebuilt; expensive improvements\nneed to be recouped through fees.\nVice Mayor Tam inquired whether the golf courses are City run.\nMr. Wood responded Metropolitan Golf Course is owned by the City of\nOakland; stated Monarch Bay is owned by the City of San Leandro;\nHarding Park is owned by the City of San Francisco.\nVice Mayor Tam inquired whether the golf courses are operated by\noutside professionals, to which Mr. Wood responded in the\naffirmative.\nMayor Johnson inquired whether Metropolitan and Monarch Bay are\nprivately operated, but Harding Park is operated by the City of San\nFrancisco.\nMr. Wood responded he would be surprised if Harding Park was\noperated by the City of San Francisco.\nMayor Johnson called the speakers.\nJon Hasegawa, Alameda, stated he opposes any fee increase.\nRobb Ratto, Alameda, stated Friday rates should be weekday rates ;\nencouraged marketing and maintenance.\nGeorge Humphreys, Chuck Corica Senior Golf Club, stated setting a\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n9\nMarch 20, 2007", "path": "CityCouncil/2007-03-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2007-03-20", "page": 10, "text": "fee prior to the operational audit is premature.\nNeil Coe, Chuck Corica Senior Golf Club, stated there are not many\nplayers on Fridays.\nMayor Johnson stated the Monday through Friday rate was changed to\nMonday through Thursday because the golf course was so crowded on\nFridays; the situation does not exist now; inquired whether the\nMonday through Friday weekday rate should return.\nJane Sullwold, Golf Commissioner, responded Friday play was busy\nwhen monthly passes were good on Fridays; stated additional revenue\nwas not being generated.\nMayor Johnson suggested having Monday through Friday rates with no\npasses allowed.\nMs. Sullwold stated the proposal allows passes on the Jack Clark\ncourse on Fridays.\nCouncilmember Gilmore stated that the fee schedule is confusing;\nthe fee schedule could be changed twice in four to six months if\nfee changes are approved and the Consultant's Operational\nEfficiency Report suggests a rate change; suggests postponing the\nmatter until the Consultant's report is reviewed and the Golf\nCommission can meld the recommendations and come up with a fee\nschedule.\nMayor Johnson inquired whether a consultant reviewed the fee\nschedule recently.\nMr. Wood responded a consultant reviewed the fee schedule last\nyear.\nMayor Johnson stated the current consultant would not be looking at\nan in-depth fee analysis but would review operation.\nMr. Wood encouraged Council to review the previous [Consultant's]\nreport stated the public should not be confused. prime golfing\nmonths are coming up soon.\nMayor Johnson stated a lot of changes are not being made; the\nbiggest change is the non-resident monthly pass fee; she opposes a\nnon-resident monthly pass; no other golf course gives a non-\nresident monthly pass; monthly pass abuse needs to stop; penalties\nshould be imposed.\nCouncilmember deHaan inquired whether tournament play would be\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n10\nMarch 20, 2007", "path": "CityCouncil/2007-03-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2007-03-20", "page": 11, "text": "discouraged with increased fees; stated the non-resident monthly\npass fee is a big jump; he agrees with the Monday through Friday\nfee; marketing is key; golfing is a good experience at a fair price\nin Alameda.\nBill Schmitz, Golf Commissioner, stated the tournament fee includes\na cart.\nMayor Johnson stated a non-resident senior monthly pass could be\nconsidered.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated he likes the idea of making Friday a\nweekday again; fee increases can be disassociated from the\noperational audit; inquired whether fees were part of the RFP .\nThe Assistant City Manager responded the RFP was general and\nincludes a review of all operational revenues.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated he is inclined to make some fee\nadjustments now with the understanding that fee adjustments are\nprecluded in the future.\nThe City Manager stated that she would recommend that any future\nincreases would not be taken lightly rather than precluded.\nMr. Wood inquired whether the Monday through Friday weekday rate\nwould be for everyone except monthly pass holders, to which Mayor\nJohnson responded in the affirmative.\nMr. Wood stated the Golf Commission has scheduled a meeting\ntomorrow night at 6:30 p.m. in Room 361 to discuss policy changes;\nencouraged attendance.\nMayor Johnson inquired whether fee policy changes would come back\nto Council.\nThe City Manager responded some policies would come back to\nCouncil; stated the Golf Commission may have the authority to move\nforward with other policies.\nMayor Johnson requested clarification on whether juniors would be\nallowed to play on the Earl Fry Course on Monday through Friday\nafter 12:00 p.m. and on the Jack Clark Course at any time, to which\nMr. Wood responded in the affirmative.\nMayor Johnson inquired when juniors would be able to play on\nweekends.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n11\nMarch 20, 2007", "path": "CityCouncil/2007-03-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2007-03-20", "page": 12, "text": "Mr. Wood responded after twilight on the Earl Fry Course and at all\ntimes on the Jack Clark Course.\nMayor Johnson inquired whether the $1 fee would be maintained for\njuniors.\nMr. Wood responded the $1 fee would be maintained for resident\njuniors.\nCouncilmember Gilmore inquired whether Golf Commission policy\ndiscussions would include monthly pass abuse.\nThe Interim Golf Manager responded monthly pass abuse would not be\ndiscussed tomorrow night because the matter was not included on the\nagenda; stated he would be reviewing the matter.\nMayor Johnson stated identification should be required for monthly\npasses.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated that everyone agrees that Friday rates\nshould be the same as weekday rates; recommended that Friday\ntournament rates be dropped to the Monday through Thursday rate; he\nwould like to have the non-resident monthly pass stay at $130 with\na $3 surcharge.\nMs. Sullwold stated non-residents would not be bearing any of the\nadditional expense that residents would bear if the rate stays the\nsame.\nMayor Johnson stated a senior non-resident monthly pass should be\nconsidered; the senior resident monthly pass is reasonable.\nMs. Sullwold stated most non-resident pass holders play ten rounds\na month, which amounts to $19.50 per round.\nMayor Johnson stated monthly passes provide a huge discount.\nCouncilmember Matarrese suggested that the senior non-resident\nmonthly pass fee be $130.\nMayor Johnson suggested that the senior non-resident monthly pass\nfee be $160 with no surcharge.\nMayor Johnson inquired whether the Golf Commission was comfortable\nwith making policy changes, to which Ms. Sullwold responded in the\naffirmative.\nCouncilmember Matarrese moved adoption of the resolution with\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n12\nMarch 20, 2007", "path": "CityCouncil/2007-03-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2007-03-20", "page": 13, "text": "direction to: 1) make the Friday fee schedule the same as Monday\nthrough Thursday instead of the weekend rate, with the exception of\nmonthly pass holders 2) add a $160 non-resident senior monthly\npass fee with no surcharge; 3) make the tournament schedule Monday\nthrough Friday with clarification that carts are required and\nincluded in the fee.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated that he appreciates all the hard\nwork done by staff and the Golf Commission.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated some rates have been reduced; golfers\nwill be coming back to play golf on Fridays.\nCouncilmember Gilmore seconded the motion, which carried by\nunanimous voice vote - 5.\nORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA\n(07-132) Bill Smith, Alameda, discussed electric vehicles.\nCOUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS\n(07-133) Councilmember deHaan stated tires are embedded along the\nshoreline of Mount Trashmore; requested that staff look into\nremoving the tires.\n( (07-134) Councilmember deHaan suggested implementing a summer work\nprogram to remove graffiti at bus shelters and utility boxes\nthroughout the City.\nMayor Johnson inquired whether the graffiti abatement program was\nstill in place.\nThe City Manager responded that the matter would be reviewed.\n(07-135) Councilmember deHaan requested a moment of silence in\nrecognition of entering the fourth year of the Iraq War and in\nremembrance of service members who have lost their lives.\n(07-136) Councilmember Matarrese stated a Green Building Code\npresentation was made to the Planning Board; requested that staff\naccelerate implementing said code.\n(07-137) Councilmember Matarrese requested an update on the next\nphase of bus shelter installation.\n(07-138) Councilmember Matarrese stated an order was issued to\ncall up eight hundred California National Guard members based in\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n13\nMarch 20, 2007", "path": "CityCouncil/2007-03-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2007-03-20", "page": 14, "text": "Walnut Creek; he has the same concerns that he had a year ago\nregarding bringing the National Guard home; revisiting the issue is\nappropriate.\nADJOURNMENT\n(07 -139) - There being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned\nthe Regular Meeting at 10:48 p.m. in a moment of silence with\nthoughts and prayers for those who have lost their lives or have\nbeen wounded in Iraq and Afghanistan.\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\nMarch 20, 2007", "path": "CityCouncil/2007-03-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2007-03-20", "page": 15, "text": "MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING\nTUESDAY- - -MARCH 20, 2007- - -6:00 p.m.\nMayor Johnson convened the Special Meeting at 6:40 p.m.\nROLL CALL - Present : Councilmembers\ndeHaan,\nGilmore,\nMatarrese, Tam, and Mayor Johnson - 5.\nAbsent :\nNone.\nThe Special Meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider :\n(07-121) Conference with Legal Counsel - Anticipated Litigation:\nSignificant exposure to litigation pursuant to Subdivision (b) of\nSection 54956.9 Number of cases One.\n(07-122) - Conference with Labor Negotiators; Agency Negotiators:\nCraig Jory and Human Resources Director Employee Organizations\n:\nAll City Bargaining Units.\nFollowing the Closed Session, the Special Meeting was reconvened\nand Mayor Johnson announced that regarding Anticipated Litigation,\nCouncil authorized settlement of an employment dispute; regarding\nLabor, Council received a briefing from its Labor Negotiators on\nthe status of negotiations with the Police Association Non-Sworn\nbargaining unit; no action was taken.\nAdjournment\nThere being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the\nSpecial Meeting at 7:30 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\nMarch 20, 2007", "path": "CityCouncil/2007-03-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2007-03-20", "page": 16, "text": "MINUTES OF THE COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION MEETING\nTUESDAY- - -MARCH 20, 2007- - 7:27 P.M.\nChair Johnson convened the Special Meeting at 7:49 p.m.\nROLL CALL -\nPresent : Commissioners deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese,\nTam, and Chair Johnson - 5.\nAbsent :\nNone.\nMINUTES\n(07-006)\nMinutes of the Community Improvement Commission (CIC) and\nSpecial Joint City Council, Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment\nAuthority (ARRA) and CIC Meetings held on February 20, 2007.\nApproved.\nCommissioner deHaan moved approval of the minutes.\nCommissioner Tam seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous\nvoice vote - 5.\nSPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY\n(07-007) Report on Alameda Theater, Cineplex, and Parking\nStructure Project Construction update.\nThe Redevelopment Manager gave a brief presentation.\nChair Johnson inquired whether there would be an opportunity to add\nitems back, to which the Redevelopment Manager responded in the\naffirmative.\nCommissioner Matarrese inquired whether pictures [of the north side\ngarage design] would be provided in April, to which the\nRedevelopment Manager responded in the affirmative.\nThe Redevelopment Manager continued the presentation.\nChair Johnson inquired whether the Cineplex construction schedule\nwould be provided in the next couple of months.\nThe Redevelopment Manager responded in the affirmative; stated\ntwelve months is a realistic schedule; Council would be informed of\nany changes.\nCommissioner deHaan inquired whether options and timelines have\nbeen researched for the northern side of the parking garage.\nSpecial Meeting\nCommunity Improvement Commission\n1\nMarch 20, 2007", "path": "CityCouncil/2007-03-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2007-03-20", "page": 17, "text": "The Redevelopment Manager responded options are being explored;\nstated hard costs would be provided to Council at the second\nmeeting in April.\nCommissioner deHaan inquired whether the parking garage is 25%\ncomplete because the vast majority of the work went into the\nfoundation to which the Redevelopment Manager responded in the\naffirmative; stated the foundation was a very expensive part of the\nproject.\nCommissioner deHaan stated a twelve-month build out is scheduled\nfor the Cineplex.\nThe Redevelopment Manager stated the developer believes a twelve-\nmonth build out is reasonable.\nCommissioner deHaan stated the cineplex would coincide with other\nconstruction if the schedule were compressed by a couple of months.\nThe Redevelopment Manager stated the desire is to make the schedule\nshorter; twelve months is a realistic schedule.\nChair Johnson stated the Historic Theater could not open without\ntenant improvements.\nThe Redevelopment Manager stated tenant improvements could happen\nearlier; the garage could open by itself in December.\nRobb Ratto, Park Street Business Association, thanked the\nCommission for project support over the years.\nChair Johnson stated the Alameda Theater has been closed for\ntwenty-six years; a month or two is not going to make a difference.\nAGENDA ITEM\n(07-008 - ) Public Hearing for the periodic review of the Five-year\nImplementation Plan, Fiscal Years 2004-2005 through 2008-2009, for\nthe Business and Waterfront Improvement Project and the West End\nCommunity Improvement Project.\nThe Housing Development Manager gave a brief Power Point\npresentation.\nCommissioner Tam stated the staff report references required\nexpenditures under existing pass-through agreements and capital\nimprovements for the Alameda Unified School District. requested an\nSpecial Meeting\nCommunity Improvement Commission\n2\nMarch 20, 2007", "path": "CityCouncil/2007-03-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2007-03-20", "page": 18, "text": "explanation on how annual payments are made through the Education\nRevenue Augmentation Fund (ERAF) and how the funding relates to\nSchool District housing, i.e., the conversion of Island High\nSchool.\nThe Housing Development Manager responded ERAF is State funding;\nstated a portion of tax increment goes to the State to be\ndistributed to school districts; the capital improvement and\nhousing funds are a negotiated pass-through agreement the housing\nfunds are being accessed for the development of Island High School ;\nshe would need to verify whether capital improvement funds have\nbeen accessed.\nThe Development Services Director stated two payments were required\nby the State over the last few years; one large bulk payment was\nmade a few years ago; a decision was made to finance the second\npayment of $770,000 and pay it over ten years; capital improvement\nfunding went to the School District for projects constructed over\nthe past year such as Ruby Bridges Elementary School and the park\nand community building; the pass-through agreements reflect that\nthe School District negotiated for 20% of the money instead of 80%;\n20% of all redevelopment money collected must be spent on low and\nmoderate income housing the School District's goal is to develop\naffordable housing for teachers and employees; the City is banking\nthe funds for the School District; redevelopment housing money must\nbe used for affordable housing purposes.\nCommissioner Tam inquired whether three separate pots of money are\nset up for education from redevelopment districts, to which the\nDevelopment Services Director responded in the affirmative.\nCommissioner deHaan inquired what was the payment two years ago.\nThe Development Services Director responded the last payment was\n$470,000. stated the payment was over $1 million the year before.\nCommissioner deHaan inquired whether the support was for Ruby\nBridges Elementary School infrastructure.\nThe Development Services Director responded the support was for\ninfrastructure, land, and predevelopment activity.\nCommissioner deHaan stated the School District provided some\nfunding for the building through a Bond Measure.\nThe Development Services Director stated that she was not\nsuggesting that the City paid for everything; significant money was\ncontributed for infrastructure, site preparation, demolition, etc.\nSpecial Meeting\nCommunity Improvement Commission\n3\nMarch 20, 2007", "path": "CityCouncil/2007-03-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2007-03-20", "page": 19, "text": "Commission deHaan requested information on the amount of money the\nCity contributed to the Ruby Bridges Elementary School\nconstruction.\nMayor Johnson opened the public portion of the hearing.\nBill Smith, Alameda, stated the City should provide affordable\nhousing.\nThere being no further speakers, Mayor Johnson closed the public\nportion of the hearing.\nCommissioner Matarrese stated that the Business and Waterfront\nImprovement Project and West End Community Improvement Project\nunencumbered fund balances reflect 20% set-aside funds for housing ;\nrequested information on the 80% unencumbered funds; discussions\nare needed for funding other projects such as the Carnegie\nbuilding, new Fire House, and Webster Street Streetscape Phase II\nproject.\nThe Housing Development Manager stated the numbers in the report\nreflect housing funds; State law is very prescriptive regarding the\ntype of information in the Implementation Plan.\nCommissioner Matarrese stated that 80% of the picture is missing\nhe would like to plan some other activities such as the Carnegie\ninterior renovation or Webster Street Streetscape completion;\ninquired whether the matter should be placed on an agenda.\nThe Development Services Director responded the matter could be\naddressed as part of the budget report, which is scheduled for May.\nCommissioner deHaan requested that historical funding information\nbe provided.\nCommissioner Matarrese stated that some generated funds would pay\nthe debt for completed projects; choices should be provided for the\n80% unencumbered portion.\nCommissioner deHaan inquired whether the lifespan for redevelopment\nprojects was 30 or 35 years.\nThe Development Services Director responded each project is\ndifferent; stated a 25 to 30 year lifespan is typical when a\nredevelopment project area is originally adopted.\nSpecial Meeting\nCommunity Improvement Commission\n4\nMarch 20, 2007", "path": "CityCouncil/2007-03-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2007-03-20", "page": 20, "text": "ADJOURNMENT\nThere being no further business, Chair Johnson adjourned the\nSpecial Meeting at 8:31 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\n5\nMarch 20, 2007", "path": "CityCouncil/2007-03-20.pdf"}