{"body": "AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority", "date": "2007-09-04", "page": 1, "text": "UNAPPROVED\nMINUTES OF THE SPECIAL MEETING OF THE\nALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY\nTuesday, September 4, 2007\nThe meeting convened at 9:34 p.m. with Chair Johnson presiding.\n2-A\n1.\nROLL CALL\nPresent: Chair Beverly Johnson\nBoardmember Doug deHaan\nBoardmember Frank Matarrese\nBoardmember Marie Gilmore\nVice Chair Lena Tam\n2.\nCONSENT CALENDAR\n2-A. Approve the minutes of the Special Meeting of August 7, 2007.\n2-B. Approve Two-Year Sublease for Architectural Glass & Aluminum at Alameda Point.\n2-C. Approve the Proposed Sale and Disposition of Surplus Property at Alameda Point, Itemized\nas Five Rapid Electric Rectifiers, One Industrial Oven, Two Abrasive Blasters, and One\nAbar Ipson IVD Machine, for a Total Amount of $84,000 in Revenue to the ARRA.\n2-D. Approval to Provide Building 24 for No Cost for Alameda Boys & Girls Club Fundraiser.\nMember deHaan pulled Item 2-D. Approval of the balance of the Consent Calendar was\nmotioned by Member deHaan, seconded by Member Matarrese and passed by the\nfollowing voice votes: 5 ayes, 0 noes, 0 abstentions. Member Gilmore abstained from Item\n2-A (Aug. 7 Minutes), as she was absent from that meeting.\nMember deHaan asked why Item 2-D was brought before the ARRA on short notice. Debbie\nPotter, Base Reuse & Community Development Manager, explained that the ARRA Board meets\nonce a month, and often times requests come through, particularly from non-profits or small\nbusinesses that might not be familiar with the steps and processes necessary to approve their\nrequests. Their lack of familiarity that any requests would have to come to the board is the\nreason for the short notice, and as soon as the request was received, it was placed on the agenda.\nMs. Potter further explained that it is not unusual to take and approve requests for fee-waivers\nfrom non-profits; but in the past, this was done administratively, and just more recently, the\npolicy was to bring these requests to the ARRA.\nMember deHaan motioned to approve Item 2-D, seconded by Member Tam, and passed by\nthe following voice votes: 5 ayes, 0 noes, 0 abstentions.\n3.\nREGULAR AGENDA ITEMS\n3-A. Alameda Point Update -- Presentation of Master Project Schedule Prepared by SCC\nAlameda Point LLC", "path": "AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2007-09-04.pdf"}
{"body": "AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority", "date": "2007-09-04", "page": 2, "text": "Debbie Potter summarized the Alameda Point project to date and introduced Pat Keliher,\nSunCal's Project Manager, to present the Master Project Schedule. The ENA calls for the master\nplan to be prepared initially, and updated on a quarterly basis and presented to the ARRA. The\nfirst update of the Master Schedule will be presented in the Dec. - Jan. timeframe.\nPat Keliher walked through highlights of the Project Master Schedule and explained that the\nschedule was put together in a logical manner, first with the public planning process, which\nclearly is important to set the stage for a final development plan. The first community meeting\nwill be scheduled very soon, and consist of land, site, design constraints and charettes. The\nsecond stage of public process includes returning back to the public to present a development\nconcept. Mr. Keliher emphasized how critical it is to remain consistent and continue the public\nprocess throughout the project timeline. Next critical item on the schedule is the traffic, location,\nand infrastructure impacts of the VA issue and scope of their project. Mr. Keliher stated that\nSunCal began early on working together with the VA.\nThe next key phase is the Planning and Entitlement phase where the development concept,\npublic amenities, adaptive reuse, and historic district issues are refined. Mr. Keliher explained\nthat SunCal has met with members of the Alameda Architectural Preservation Society (AAPS),\nand with Chris Buckley and Richard Rutter, to evaluate buildings and uses in the historic district.\nSunCal's next key item on the schedule is the submittal of the Entitlement Application in March\n2008. Mr. Keliher did not go into detail with the balance of schedule which includes the DA,\nDDA, CAA, Business Plan, MOA, Tidelands Trust Agreement, etc. He further explained that the\nNEPA & CEQA processes can't start until project description is in place. He expressed how\ncritical the next three to six months are and that SunCal is committed to meeting the milestones.\nMember Matarrese focused on the zoning issue and asked when Zoning will be adopted. He\nrequested that the Zoning is put under the control of the City and is locked so that the City\nprotects itself. Debbie Potter explained that the city anticipates the entitlement package\n(Development Agreement, Disposition and Development Agreement, General Plan Amendment,\nZoning amendment, and Master Plan) will all come together as one package, and, pursuant to the\nENA allows this in July 2009. One of the mandatory milestones is the submittal of an initial\nentitlement package by May 2008, which will trigger the CEQA process. David Brandt, Deputy\nExecutive Director, explained that the milestone is not an actual exchange, just a framework\nagreement of how we'll proceed. Chair Johnson requested it is made clear that the milestone is a\nframework. Mr. Brandt further explained that once the CEQA process is complete, the City\nCouncil can then adopt Zoning, but legally it cannot be done without an environmental review\nprocess. Member Matarrese expressed concern about zoning changes and that any changes have\nto go thru the City so that it is not left open if the Navy decides to change the rules. Debbie\nPotter explained that the intent is to execute all required documents simultaneously such that we\nprotect our existing position as our role as the trustee. Ms. Potter assured that she will discuss\nwith the Planning dept. about whether or not the existing EIR done for the General Plan\nAmendment is sufficient, or whether we will have to undertake additional environmental review.\nAn update on this issue will be reported at the Oct. ARRA meeting.\nMember deHaan asked if the Navy will be able to meet the timeline, and if not, what the\nconsequences are. David Brandt stated that we cannot guarantee that the Navy will perform and\nwe cannot control third party delay. Debbie Potter stated that we should be hearing from the\nNavy about the schedule in the next day or so.\nMember Gilmore commented that our sense of urgency does not match the Navy's and that they\nneed to come to the realization that time is money for everyone involved. The costs of", "path": "AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2007-09-04.pdf"}
{"body": "AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority", "date": "2007-09-04", "page": 3, "text": "construction, infrastructure, etc. makes the project difficult, and the factors that affect our\ndeveloper, and would affect any developer, affects the Navy as well.\nPat Keliher stated that SunCal has a tactical strategy to deal with the Navy - that they have a\nstreamlined process of sharing technical studies and other documents that underpin the CEQA &\nNEPA processes; but that there are still a lot of unknowns, including whether there will be\nfunding for clean-up. Chair Johnson compared the Oaknoll site to Alameda, that Oaknoll was a\nclean site without Tidelands Trust issues. Mr. Keliher reiterated SunCal's commitment to the\nchallenging, but necessary task, stating that SunCal would work with the City of Alameda, their\nconsultants and lobbyists, to deal with the changing climate ahead that may affect things moving\nforward.\nThe Board thanked Mr. Keliher and SunCal for presenting the Master Project Schedule and\nexpressed it was a job well done.\n4.\nORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (PUBLIC COMMENT)\nThere were no speakers.\n5.\nCOMMUNICATIONS FROM THE GOVERNING BODY\nNone.\n6. ADJOURNMENT\nMeeting was adjourned at 10:07 p.m. by Chair Johnson.\nRespectfully submitted,\nIrma Glidden\nARRA Secretary", "path": "AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2007-09-04.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2007-09-04", "page": 1, "text": "MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING\nTUESDAY - -SEPTEMBER 4, 2007- 7:30 P.M.\nMayor Johnson convened the Regular City Council Meeting at 7:46\np.m.\nROLL CALL -\nPresent : Councilmembers\ndeHaan,\nGilmore,\nMatarrese, Tam and Mayor Johnson - 5.\nAbsent :\nNone.\nAGENDA CHANGES\n(07-417) Mayor Johnson announced that the Proclamation would be\naddressed later in the meeting.\nCONSENT CALENDAR\nMayor Johnson announced that the recommendation to accept the\nQuarterly Sales Tax Report [paragraph no. 07-420] and Resolution\n[paragraph no. 07-420] were removed from the Consent Calendar for\ndiscussion.\nCouncilmember Gilmore moved approval of the remainder of the\nConsent Calendar.\nCouncilmember Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by\nunanimous voice vote - 5. [ Items so enacted or adopted are\nindicated by an asterisk preceding the paragraph number. ]\n( 07-418 - ) Minutes of the Special and Regular City Council Meetings\nheld on August 21, 2007 and the Special City Council Meeting held\non August 27, 2007. Approved.\n(*07-419) - Ratified bills in the amount of $7,824,299.10.\n(07-420) Recommendation to accept the Quarterly Sales Tax Report\nfor period ending March 31, 2007.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated the report shows an increase in auto\nsales tax revenue inquired when the increase would disappear.\nThe Finance Director responded somewhere between eighteen and\ntwenty-four - months stated the revenue was large because of a catch\nup from December and the first quarter.\nCouncilmember deHaan inquired whether said increase was an anomaly,\nto which the Finance Director responded in the affirmative.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n1\nSeptember 4, 2007", "path": "CityCouncil/2007-09-04.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2007-09-04", "page": 2, "text": "Councilmember deHaan inquired whether all sales tax revenue goes to\nthe General Fund, to which the Finance Director responded in the\naffirmative.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated that sales tax revenue totaled\napproximately $6.3 million annually since 1997; today $5.4 million\nis generated; other things will erode sales tax revenue.\nThe Finance Director stated the State engaged in the triple flip in\n2004 and took a quarter percent of the sales tax; the City only\nreceives seventy five percent of one cent in exchange for the\nproperty tax.\nCouncilmember deHaan inquired how much the City receives.\nThe Finance Director responded in the neighborhood of $300,000 to\n$400,000; stated she would need to verify said amount.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated sales tax revenue will never be a\nstrong element in Alameda.\nThe Finance Director stated historically sales tax revenue has not\nbeen a strong element of the entire General Fund budget the cure\nis more retail, business-to-business, and everyone buying locally;\nthe City is not dependent on one source of revenue; property taxes\nare approximately twenty-five percent of General Fund revenues.\nCouncilmember deHaan inquired whether the property tax revenue\nwould become a flat line operation in out years.\nThe Finance Director responded the City will not see more than a\ntwo percent growth within the next fifteen years; stated every\nnewly built house and remodel adds to the assessed valuation.\nCouncilmember Matarrese inquired whether tax is collected on the\nformer Naval Air Station property; further inquired whether the\nCity would see a run up when the former Naval Air Station becomes\npart of Alameda.\nThe Finance Director responded property taxes are very small.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated that he is concerned with the flatness\nof a couple of key indicators within the General Fund.\nMayor Johnson stated that sales tax generated north and south of\nLincoln Avenue is almost forty percent of the total sales tax and\nis higher than Alameda Towne Centre ; auto sales is a key factor;\nsales tax has increased slightly from the first quarter of 2006 to\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n2\nSeptember 4, 2007", "path": "CityCouncil/2007-09-04.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2007-09-04", "page": 3, "text": "the first quarter of 2007.\nThe Finance Director stated the increase is an excellent trend if\nthe trend continues; she does not anticipate that the increase will\ncontinue some of the larger more substantial sales will be\ndecreasing; yacht sales have been an increasing trend but may\ndecrease in the second quarter of 2007.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated some yacht sales have been closed down\nfor the Grand Street development.\nThe Finance Director stated yacht sales would not disappear\ncompletely and would occur in another location.\nMayor Johnson stated that Alameda's sales tax percentage is\nsignificantly lower compared to surrounding communities; people\nneed to be provided with more opportunities to buy in Alameda.\nCouncilmember deHaan moved approval of the staff recommendation.\nCouncilmember Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by\nunanimous voice vote -5.\nCouncilmember Matarrese requested that the next Quarterly Report be\nplaced on the Regular Agenda for discussioni stated the public\nneeds to see the trends and understand how much money is needed to\nfund the Police and Fire Departments, Library and parks.\nCouncilmember deHaan requested that the staff report provide\nbackground on sales tax proportions in the General Fund along with\na forecast stated the City will be impacted with situations\noccurring on auto row and with property taxes.\nMayor Johnson requested that the report include information on how\nmuch sales tax revenue supports surrounding communities; people\nneed to know the impact that sales leakage has on the community.\n(*07-421) Recommendation to approve amendment to Consultant\nAgreement with Sally Swanson Architects, Inc. to increase the\nContract amount by $5,000 for the update of the City's Americans\nwith Disabilities Act Transition Plan and Self Evaluation.\nAccepted.\n(07-422) Resolution No. 14143, \"Approving the Appeal of Nissan\nSaidian and Leon Zektser and Overturning the Planning Board's\nDenial of Use Permit UP06-0010 for 1310 Central Avenue. \" Adopted.\nCouncilmember deHaan commended staff for including all elements in\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n3\nSeptember 4, 2007", "path": "CityCouncil/2007-09-04.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2007-09-04", "page": 4, "text": "the resolution; stated that he hopes that the owners do not\ncontinually request additional hours.\nCouncilmember Gilmore inquired whether Condition of Approval 16\nrequires the owners to redo the process in September 2008.\nThe Planner III responded in the negative; stated the owners will\nbe able to operate under the conditions of the Use Permit if they\nare in compliance with the Conditions of Approval Condition of\nApproval 16 states that the owners have until September 4, 2008 if\nthey choose not to vest the Use Permit.\nCouncilmember Matarrese moved adoption of the resolution.\nCouncilmember deHaan seconded the motion, which carried by\nunanimous voice vote - 5.\n(*07-423) Ordinance No. 2971, \"Amending the Alameda Municipal Code\nby Adding Section 2-19 (Youth Advisory Commission) to Article II\n(Boards and Commissions) of Chapter II (Administration) ,\nEstablishing a Youth Advisory Commission and Prescribing Membership\nand Duties of Said Commission. Finally passed.\nPROCLAMATIONS, SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY AND ANNOUNCEMENTS\n(07-424) Proclamation declaring September 15, 2007 as Coastal\nCleanup Day and September 16 through 22, 2007 as Pollution\nPrevention Week.\nMayor Johnson read the proclamation; requested that the City Clerk\nforward the proclamation to Doug Siden, Board of Directors, East\nBay Regional Park District; stated the City has battery drop off\nlocations; the Public Works Department has scheduled an electronic\ndrop off event for October 20.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated that the beach is a beautiful City\nasset; the shoreline is beginning to gain some character and is\nsuperb; the sand is course and beautiful: he encourages everyone to\nhelp clean up the beach; sand had to be brought in to keep erosion\nfrom occurring in the past; mother nature has done a great job.\nMayor Johnson stated the back page of the Park Street Business\nAssociation newsletter indicates that the electronic drop off\nlocation is at the Towne Centre on the north side of Safeway.\nThe Environmental Services Manager stated that there would be two\nelectronic events this year; the Chamber of Commerce and Greater\nAlameda Business Association (GABA) event is first; the City event\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n4\nSeptember 4, 2007", "path": "CityCouncil/2007-09-04.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2007-09-04", "page": 5, "text": "is October 20 at Alameda Point.\nREGULAR AGENDA ITEMS\n(07-425) Report on the process for Council-Initiated City Charter\nAmendments ; and consideration of creating a City Council Sub-\ncommittee or Ad-Hoc Committee to Review the Charter for Suggested\nAmendment of City Charter Provisions.\nThe City Attorney provided a brief presentation.\nMayor Johnson stated Charter amendments need to be placed on the\nballot in a certain amount of time before the election; inquired\nhow much time is needed.\nThe City Attorney responded legislation would need to be adopted if\nCharter amendments are Council initiated; stated the legislation\nwould need to be adopted 88 days before the intended election.\nThe City Clerk stated next year's elections are February 5, June 3,\nand November 4; the deadlines for adopting a resolution to place\nthe matter on the ballot are November 9 for the February 5\nelection, March 7 for the June 3 election, and August 8 for the\nNovember 4 election.\nMayor Johnson stated that Council-initiated Charter amendments have\nnot been done while she has served.\nCouncilmember Gilmore stated that the thrust of the Charter review\nis to deal with portions of the Charter that are no longer\napplicable and to clean up some gender specific language; a list of\nmore substantive issues would be brought back to the entire Council\nfor discussion.\nMayor Johnson stated Measure A would not be addressed.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated that the scope of review should not\nbe limited; the process would be to review the entire Charter with\nregard to language clean up, State laws and other governing\nprocesses that have changed a list would be developed and brought\nback to Council; Council would pick and choose what to put on the\nballot; the process would take care of what is placed on the\nballot.\nMayor Johnson stated that she does not want to turn the Charter\nreview clean up into a Measure A debate.\nCouncilmember deHaan concurred with Mayor Johnson; stated the\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n5\nSeptember 4, 2007", "path": "CityCouncil/2007-09-04.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2007-09-04", "page": 6, "text": "Charter review would be a housekeeping effort to clean up language\nand clich\u00e9s the City has been living with continually.\nMayor Johnson stated Alameda Power and Telecom issues need to be\nreviewed; the Charter review should be an ongoing process.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated that the City Attorney should be\ninvolved in the process because she understands the Charter very\nwell; the City Manager needs to be involved also.\nMayor Johnson stated that Council meeting dates and times should\nnot be in the Charter.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated presupposing what Council will say\nwhen information comes back does a disservice; the list should\nstart with non-substantive issues and lead up to more substantive\nissues; the entire list would not be placed on a ballot; Article 25\naddresses Urban Renewal; Urban Renewal is an antiquated phrase;\nthere would not be an objective review if some sections of the\nCharter were overlooked.\nCouncilmember Gilmore stated that the first step is to form a\nCouncil sub-committee to review the Charter with assistance from\nthe City Attorney and City Clerk; the sub-committee would list\nissues that may need further discussion by Council; the list and\nother housecleaning items would come back; Council can decide when,\nif, and how to deal with the issues; issues need to be identified\nfirst.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated that the Charter is awkward at best;\nthe City Attorney helps Council with interpreting the Charter.\nDavid Howard, Alameda, stated people are concerned that the Charter\nreview will turn into a Measure A discussion; the process should be\nan open process.\nVice Mayor Tam stated that she raised the Charter review issue\nafter attending a League of California Cities conference; numerous\ncities are going through a similar processi issues should be\nidentified first; she would like to get broad community input on\nareas that should or should not be reviewed; other cities have\nappointed a committee through an application process or have had\neach Councilmember appoint two members from the community; the\ncommittee would work with the City Attorney, City Clerk, and\noutside resources to craft specific language that would help with\nCharter revisions to provide flexibility and be reflective of broad\ncommunity support that will not tie the hands of future Councils;\nsuggested starting out with a committee that is a little more\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n6\nSeptember 4, 2007", "path": "CityCouncil/2007-09-04.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2007-09-04", "page": 7, "text": "advisory in nature.\nMayor Johnson stated that the process should be open; a Council\nsub-committee should deal with cleaning up the Charter first and\nworking with the City Attorney and City Clerk; public meetings\nwould occur when items are brought back to Council.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated hopefully the public will provide\ncontinual feedback.\nMayor Johnson stated that it would be very helpful to have the\npublic well informed regarding Charter provisions people do not\nunderstand limitations.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated the Charter drives many Council\ndecisions.\nCouncilmember Gilmore moved approval of Council appointing two\nCouncilmembers to a sub-committee to review the Charter with input\nand advice from the City Attorney, City Clerk, necessary Department\nHeads, City Manager and public; the structure would be to clean up\noutdated language and issue spot items that the sub-committee feels\nwould benefit from a floor discussion by the Council and the\npublic.\nCouncilmember deHaan seconded the motion, which carried by\nunanimous voice vote - 5.\nVice Mayor Tam and Councilmember Gilmore were selected to serve on\nthe sub-committee.\nORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA\n(07-426) Dorothy Freeman, Estuary Park Action Committee, submitted\nletter; stated the City Council decided to create a Task Force for\nthe Beltline park development in November 2006; Council decided to\ncombine the Beltline and Oak Street Estuary Park projects in the\nsame Task Force; there will be an unnecessary delay in looking for\nfunds to purchase the Oak Street Estuary Park property if a Task\nForce is not formed for two years; a Task Force needs to be created\nin order to initiate the work.\nMayor Johnson stated that she does not recall Council deciding to\ndelay creation of a Task Force for two years.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated that Council decided to defer the\nmatter [ on August 21, 2007].\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n7\nSeptember 4, 2007", "path": "CityCouncil/2007-09-04.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2007-09-04", "page": 8, "text": "Mayor Johnson stated that a Task Force could make recommendations\non ways to raise money to buy the land.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated he would like Council to review the\nminutes addressing establishment of a Task Force.\nMayor Johnson stated that the City has to buy the land first.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated that he would like an Off Agenda report\non the goals of the Task Force.\nMayor Johnson stated that Council would discuss priority settings;\nEstuary Park should be included as a priority.\nThe City Manager stated that staff would provide Council\ninformation regarding the work plan and direction for Estuary Park.\n(07-427) Marie Kaylar, Alameda, stated the audio signals at\nCentral Avenue and Broadway have an unbearable sound; the\nneighborhood was not informed of the installation of the signals.\nMayor Johnson stated the Public Works Department is reviewing the\nvolume of the audio signals; inquired whether the audio signals can\nbe set at an acceptable volume.\nMs. Kaylar responded she spoke with the company that makes the\naudio signals; stated information has been provided to the City\nEngineer a neighbor conducted a survey that will be provided to\nCouncil; a button would be a more acceptable option.\n(07-428) James Wullschleger, Alameda, stated twenty-five audio\nsignals were purchased using Measure B funds; the neighborhood\ntried to work with the City on the issue; the audio signals were\nturned off and then turned back on a few weeks later; the neighbors\nare excited that the audio signals have a manual activation button\noption; the neighborhood requested to be included in the process;\nbuttons could be installed for $1,600 per intersection; the audio\nsignals get louder when trucks pass; a blind resident wants buttons\ninstalled; requested that the audio signals be turned off for a\nperiod of time in order to review the matter.\nCouncilmember deHaan inquired whether the rest of the audio signals\nhave been installed.\nThe City Manager responded that she would provide a list of\nsignals; stated other audio signals will not be installed until the\nmatter is resolved.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n8\nSeptember 4, 2007", "path": "CityCouncil/2007-09-04.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2007-09-04", "page": 9, "text": "from the Coral Reef Hotel on Park Street for a long period of time\npolice officers patrolled the area and trucks no longer park at the\nsite.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated an immediate public health issue\nexists; there are indications that people are staying over night\nwithout facilities; requested that exact locations be provided and\nthat the Police Department investigate the matter.\nThe City Manager requested that Mr. Neal provide the Deputy City\nManager with the exact location.\nMayor Johnson stated that trucks idle for hours in West Oakland.\nMr. Neal stated traffic should be controlled at certain times when\nthere are other demands on the roads.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated Encinal Terminals is in the process of\nchanging entitlements.\n(07\n7-430\n-\n)\nDavid Howard, Alameda, stated California cities are\nsetting up reciprocal sales tax agreements with neighboring cities;\nsuggested reviewing the matter; stated retail will not solve all\nsales tax problems encouraged the Council to look at business to\nbusiness opportunities.\n(07-431) Bill Smith, Alameda, discussed housing.\nCOUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS\n(07-432) Report on City Priority-Setting Project.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n9\nSeptember 4, 2007", "path": "CityCouncil/2007-09-04.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2007-09-04", "page": 10, "text": "Counci lmember Matarrese stated that he requested that the matter be\nplaced on the agenda in order for everyone to understand the scope\nof work and intent before the first workshop; requested staff to\nprovide a background on the project.\nThe City Manager stated a priority setting workshop would be held\nbetween Council and the Executive Management team on September 11;\nstaff developed work plans based on Council direction; Council will\nhave an opportunity to review the plans and discuss priorities ;\nManagement Partners has been hired to structure and facilitate the\nprocess i Council interviews were conducted; environmental\ndemographics and department interconnectivity will be discussed:\nCouncil will review Citywide priority objectives.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated that he is concerned that the staff\nreport and consultant's report do not mention public participation;\npriority setting is a policy decision; policy decisions need to be\nmade in public; there is no mention of how the public will be\nengaged or whether the workshop would be broadcasted; a daytime\nmeeting limits the public's ability to participate; his biggest\nconcern is to focus on a public processi he does not want to end up\nwith another strategic plan.\nMayor Johnson stated that the workshop would be a public meeting;\nanother public meeting would be held in November a report should\nbe provided on the outcome of the first meeting; said report should\nbe placed on the internet to allow feedback.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated details should include whether\nminutes and broadcasting would be provided and how the loop would\nbe closed to ensure decisions are memorialized.\nThe City Manager stated a report would be provided; the workshop\nwould be recorded and the priority setting would feed into the\nbudget process, which provides an opportunity for public input.\nVice Mayor Tam stated that she is supportive of the process;\nthirty-two different priorities were identified when Council had a\njoint meeting with the Planning Board; the workshop will help to\nbring all departments together in a more cohesive way to directly\nhear about priorities.\nMayor Johnson stated that an annual workshop would be a good idea.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated that he appreciates tonight's\ndiscussion; he is glad that the workshop will be recorded; he has\nreservations regarding a day workshop; there are many challenges\nthat are not going to go away.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n10\nSeptember 4, 2007", "path": "CityCouncil/2007-09-04.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2007-09-04", "page": 11, "text": "(07-433) Consideration of Mayor's nomination for appointment to the\nSocial Service Human Relations Board.\nMayor Johnson nominated Regional James for appointment to the\nSocial Service Human Relations Board.\n(07-434) Mayor Johnson inquired whether four-way stops signs have\nbeen installed near St. Philip Neri School.\nCouncilmember Matarrese responded the signs were installed\nrecently.\n(07-435) Councilmember deHaan questioned when Big Box ordinance\ndiscussions would come to Council; stated that he anticipates that\nthe matter could come to Council within the next month; further\nstated the priority planning process should not preclude Big Box\nordinance discussions; Council was to review other cities'\nordinances and discuss adopting a similar ordinance.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated the Big Box Ordinance was to address\nsuper stores that have more than a specific percentage of non-\ntaxable items.\nMayor Johnson stated Livermore and Dublin have adopted Big Box\nOrdinances.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated Council also had discussions on a\nstyrofoam ordinance.\nMayor Johnson stated Council would have an opportunity to discuss a\nGreen Building ordinance on Tuesday.\n(07-436) Councilmember deHaan stated that he is hearing\nrepercussions from neighbors regarding parking concerns related to\nclosing off the street at St. Joseph Notre Dame High School;\nrequested the City Attorney to provide information about whether\nthere is a review process; stated another wing has been\nestablished.\nMayor Johnson stated the area used to have all single-family homes;\nmany of the homes are now subdivided; residents do not have\nadequate off-street parking.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated dialog needs to take place between\nneighbors and the school.\n(07-437) Vice Mayor Tam requested an update on the progress that\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n11\nSeptember 4, 2007", "path": "CityCouncil/2007-09-04.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2007-09-04", "page": 12, "text": "CalTrans has made on lighting replacement in the Webster Street and\nPosey Tubes.\nThe Assistant City Manager stated lights have been replaced on one\nside.\nCouncilmember Gilmore stated lights were replaced on one side of\nthe inbound tube; the other side has not been completed CalTrans\nis now taking down the lights in the outbound tube.\nThe Assistant City Manager stated both tubes will have one set of\nlights.\nMayor Johnson requested that CalTrans be invited to the next\nCouncil meeting to explain the situation.\nThe City Manager noted Supervisor Lai-Bitker is conducting a\nmeeting with CalTrans on September 10; stated CalTrans would be\ninvited to the next Council meeting.\n(07-438) Mayor Johnson stated that the City needs to insist that\nthe County maintain Alameda's bridges Measure B funds should be\nused for streets and roads in Alameda and should not be used to pay\nthe County's obligation of maintaining the bridges.\nCouncilmember deHaan inquired whether any City funds were used in\nthe past.\nMayor Johnson requested that Council be provided a report on the\nrecent funding history stated a resolution might be needed\nregarding the use of City funding for streets, roads, and County\nbridges.\nVice Mayor Tam requested that background information be provided on\nwhether there have been joint agreements in the past.\nMayor Johnson stated that the bridges should be maintained by the\nCounty the County contracted with the Army Corps of Engineers to\noperate and maintain the railroad bridge.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated discussions took place ten or fifteen\nyears ago regarding the County requesting money from the City due\nto of lack of funds.\n(07-439) Councilmember Matarrese stated that there are a lot of\non-going issues with AC Transit; a formula has been established for\nan Eco Pass system for City employees; sworn police officers and\nfirefighters can ride buses free and need to be encouraged to do\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n12\nSeptember 4, 2007", "path": "CityCouncil/2007-09-04.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2007-09-04", "page": 13, "text": "so; the Public Works Director will be providing a report on the\nmatter.\nADJOURNMENT\nThere being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the\nRegular Meeting at 9:34 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\n13\nSeptember 4, 2007", "path": "CityCouncil/2007-09-04.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2007-09-04", "page": 14, "text": "MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING\nTUESDAY - -SEPTEMBER 4, 2007-6:00 p.m.\nMayor Johnson convened the Special Meeting at 6:10 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(07-416) Conference with Real Property Negotiators: Properties :\n1041 W. Midway and Various Easements in Alameda; Negotiating\nparties : City of Alameda and Alameda Power and Telecom; Under\nnegotiation: Price and terms.\nFollowing the Closed Session, the Special Meeting was reconvened\nand Mayor Johnson announced that the Council received a briefing\nfrom its Real Property Negotiator; no action was taken.\nAdjournment\nThere being no further business Mayor Johnson adjourned the Special\nMeeting 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\nSeptember 4, 2007", "path": "CityCouncil/2007-09-04.pdf"}