{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2007-11-20", "page": 1, "text": "MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING\nTUESDAY - -NOVEMBER 20, 2007- 7:30 P.M.\nMayor Johnson convened the Regular City Council Meeting at 7:52\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(07-542) Presentation by the Alameda Museum regarding the Museum\nBusiness Plan.\nDiane Coler-Dark, Museum President, stated earnings will not have\nthe same growth as in the past; income has been converted into\ncertificates to offset the rent increase thanked Counci lmember\nMatarrese for fundraising and corporate sponsor suggestions stated\nfundraising ideas have been implemented; a progress report will be\npresented in March.\nRobbie Dileo, Museum Board Member/Secretary, outlined the Business\nPlan.\nMayor Johnson inquired whether gross revenue includes the City's\nsubsidy, to which Ms. Dileo responded in the affirmative.\nMayor Johnson inquired what percentage is the City's subsidy, to\nwhich Mr. Dileo responded 50%.\nMayor Johnson inquired whether the fundraising drive was\nsuccessful.\nMr. Dileo responded very little; stated some corporate sponsors\nwere acquired.\nMayor Johnson stated the Board works very hard to earn money for\nthe Museum taxpayers make a significant contribution; she is very\ndisappointed that people do not understand the need to financially\nsupport the Museum.\nMs. Dileo stated that the Museum will have new Board Members soon;\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n1\nNovember 20, 2007", "path": "CityCouncil/2007-11-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2007-11-20", "page": 2, "text": "the Business Plan is a two-year, forward looking document i the\nMuseum has a lot of money in the bank; hopefully, dipping into\nreserves will not be necessary; funds were down to approximately\n$2,000 in 1991 and 1992.\nMayor Johnson stated people need to understand that money is needed\nto run a Museum; inquired whether the Museum has any plans to\nbecome accredited, to which Ms. Dileo responded in the negative.\nVice Mayor Tam stated that she appreciates receiving the Business\nPlan; Page 20 outlines a series of activities to help generate\nadditional funds; inquired which area would have the largest\ngrowth.\nMs. Dileo responded estate sales; stated estate sales are being\npromoted; a big money maker is the Legacy Home Tour, which also\nshowcases Alameda.\nVice Mayor Tam stated Page 22 notes that funds have been set aside\nto obtain a permanent home; she has trouble understanding the line\nitem referring to funds reserved for finding a permanent home.\nMs. Dileo stated the $194,480 Edward Jones Endowment account cannot\nbe touched and is strictly set aside for building.\nVice Mayor Tam inquired whether said Endowment is stipulated for a\nspecific use.\nMs. Dileo responded the Endowment was stipulated for a specific\nuse; stated most of the money was from the Regina Stafford Estate.\nVice Mayor Tam stated the Meyers House is open for three hours one\nSaturday per month; inquired whether the Meyers House is reflected\nin the expense report.\nMs. Dileo responded the Meyers House is reflected in the net\nfigures on Page 41; stated the Meyers House has a separate income\nstatement and balance sheet; income and expenses are equal to date;\nthe Meyers House had significant damage due to a leaky roof; the\ninterior ceiling was damaged window sills needed to be repaired\nshe does not have repair costs yet.\nVice Mayor Tam inquired whether statements reflect the City's\noperation and maintenance costs.\nMs. Dileo responded in the negative; stated there was supposed to\nbe a five percent tithing to the City every year, which was\nexpected to be approximately $60,000 to $70,000; the assets were\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n2\nNovember 20, 2007", "path": "CityCouncil/2007-11-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2007-11-20", "page": 3, "text": "devalued based on property in the Union City area.\nMayor Johnson inquired whether there is a copy of the Trust, to\nwhich the Recreation and Parks Director responded in the\naffirmative.\nMayor Johnson stated that the Meyers House was not intended to cost\nthe City money i the City maintains the House; the Trust has the\nability to take the House back; she is concerned that the Meyers\nHouse could be taken back and the City would not be reimbursed for\nmaintenance costs; the matter needs to be addressed immediately;\nthe City needs to be assured that taxpayers will be reimbursed if\nthe Meyers House is taken back.\nThe Recreation and Park Director stated the Trust stipulates that a\ncertain percentage goes to the Meyers House; the Trust has a\nvariety of benefactors.\nMayor Johnson stated the Meyers House is maintained with taxpayers'\nmoney, but is owned by a private trust.\nThe Recreation and Park Director stated the Meyers House is owned\nby the City; the Meyers House would revert back to the Trust only\nif the House is not operated as a museum or for public benefit.\nMayor Johnson stated that a report is needed on how the Trust works\nand how much money is spent; then Council can give direction.\nThe City Manager stated said information will be provided.\nMayor Johnson stated the Meyers House should be a separate budget\nline item.\nCouncilmember Matarrese inquired whether there was consensus for\ngiving direction; stated that he does not just want a report he\nwants to take action on the matter a report should be brought back\nto Council for discussion and disposition.\nThe City Manager inquired whether requested information would be\noutside of the budget process, to which Council responded in the\naffirmative.\nThe City Manager stated that the Meyers House history, status, and\nTrust structure would be provided.\nMayor Johnson stated the matter should be brought back for Council\ndiscussion, direction, and action.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n3\nNovember 20, 2007", "path": "CityCouncil/2007-11-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2007-11-20", "page": 4, "text": "Councilmember deHaan inquired whether the $164,000 [in cash and\nbank accounts] is for working capital.\nMs. Dileo responded said money is for the benefit of the museum to\ngo forward; stated the revenue stream is starting to stabilize.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated that the report shows a two-year future\nplan.\nMs. Dileo stated that writing a more forward thinking plan is\ndifficult because three new Board Members will be appointed in\nJanuary; she would like to complete projects that help the public\naccess records better Woody Minor kept notes dating back to the\n1880's the photographic collection consists of approximately 6,000\nprints; she does not see making $100,000 per year and not needing\nthe City's support.\nCouncilmember deHaan requested an explanation of the Museum's role\nin taking on historic information.\nMs. Dileo stated that the Museum and Library both have historical\ninformation; the Library has collection on Microfiche; the Museum\nhas the actual books.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated that the Museum took over some of the\nLibrary's assets.\nMs. Dileo stated the Museum took over a lot of things from the\nCity; there are two newspaper collections, one from the Library and\na whole set from the Oakland Tribune.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated that he would like to see the\n[Museum's] vision expanded further.\nMayor Johnson inquired when the City's subsidy started.\nMs. Dileo responded the early 1990's stated the Museum relocated\nin 1990-1991; $110,000 was paid by the Alameda Unified School\nDistrict to the City to buy out the 99-year lease that was ten\nyears old.\nMayor Johnson inquired when the Museum moved into the existing\nbuilding.\nMs. Dileo responded 1991; stated City grants were used to make the\nbuilding suitable for the Museum.\nMayor Johnson inquired whether more effort is being made to protect\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n4\nNovember 20, 2007", "path": "CityCouncil/2007-11-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2007-11-20", "page": 5, "text": "collections.\nMs. Dileo responded items were placed on casters long ago; stated\ncollections are on racks. plenty of effort has been put into\nmaintenance.\nMayor Johnson inquired whether the Museum industry has standards\nfor preserving collections.\nMs. Dileo responded she that is not an expert; stated efforts are\nbeing made with available resources.\nMayor Johnson stated on-going efforts need to be made to expand\ndisplays.\nMs. Dileo stated there would be two new displays after the first of\nthe year.\nCouncilmember Gilmore thanked Ms. Dileo for presenting the Business\nPlan; stated a lot of work went into the Plan; she understands that\nthe forward looking aspect is limited because there will be three\nnew Board Members; she would like future reports to address\nexpanding fundraising, the marketing plan, and membership plan; she\nwould like to see more detailed steps on how expansion will be\naccomplished and how success will be measured; concrete steps need\nto be established for implementing ideas Council was clear in\nstating that greater fundraising efforts and results are expected;\neducational services may be beneficial to the public but do not\nbring in money; there needs to be a balance between educational\ngoals and fund raising goals; rent will increase; she would like to\nsee the Museum make an effort to contribute to the delta.\nCouncilmember Matarrese thanked Ms. Dileo for the information;\nstated it is important for people to know the cost of running a\nMuseum; the City has a role by allocating $50,000 to support the\nMuseum; a budgetary fundraising goal needs to be assigned Council\ncan measure the progress against the goal; the Board should\nconsider assigning a target for a 2008 membership drive; future\nupdates should provide said information; tonight's discussion helps\nput public spotlight on the Museum so that people are aware that\nthe Museum is here, what the costs are, and that volunteers work\nvery hard to keep the Museum going; he would like to see the City\nand Museum move together as partners.\nMs. Coler-Dark stated that membership has increased from 350 to\nover 450 over the last year.\nMayor Johnson stated that it is important to establish 2008\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n5\nNovember 20, 2007", "path": "CityCouncil/2007-11-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2007-11-20", "page": 6, "text": "membership and fundraising goals.\nMs. Dileo stated that volunteers spend approximately 150 hours per\nweek at the Museum costs would escalate by approximately $150,000\nif the Museum had an Executive Director and Curator.\nMayor Johnson stated that other non-profits hire full-time or part-\ntime Executive Directors to make money ; sometimes it is necessary\nto spend money to make money.\nMs. Dileo stated the Museum spent $50,000 to $60,000 on a large\nMuseum study with no results.\nMayor Johnson stated volunteers are needed, but money needs to be\nraised also.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated that interfacing with the schools,\nLibrary, and City is valuable; Council is eager to see the Museum\nsucceed; he would not like to see the City lose its history; China\nhas 2000 years of history; the Meyers House is an important\nsegment it is important to make the Museum sustainable for the\nlong run; the Museum will always have a role; Council can discuss\nthe budget and funding allocation.\nCONSENT CALENDAR\nMayor Johnson announced that the Minutes [paragraph no. 07-543 and\nResolution Authorizing Open Market Purchase [paragraph no.\n07-549 ] were removed from the Consent Calendar for discussion.\nVice Mayor Tam moved approval of the remainder of the Consent\nCalendar.\nCouncilmember Gilmore 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(07-543) Minutes of the Special City Council Meeting, the Special\nJoint City Council and Housing Authority Board of Commissioners\nMeeting, the Special Joint City Council and Community Improvement\nCommission Meeting and the Regular City Council Meeting held on\nNovember 6, 2007; and Special City Council Meeting held on November\n7, 2007. Approved.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated that Council received an Off Agenda\nReport noting that $1.3 million was put into the parking structure;\nhe would like to have said information added to the November 6,\n2007 Regular City Council Meeting minutes.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n6\nNovember 20, 2007", "path": "CityCouncil/2007-11-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2007-11-20", "page": 7, "text": "Mayor Johnson stated minutes need to reflect what was said at the\nmeeting.\nCouncilmember Gilmore stated that Page 17 of the November 6, 2007\nRegular City Council Meeting minutes states \"the matter is not an\ninappropriate item to discuss during Council Communications\" the\ndouble negative is confusing.\nCouncilmember deHaan moved approval of the minutes with the\nfollowing corrections: Page 17 \"the matter is an appropriate\nitem\"; and Page 9... \"the vote would not have been 7 to 2\".\nCouncilmember Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by\nunanimous voice vote - 5.\n( *07-544) Ratified bills in the amount of $2,857,184.79.\n( *07-545) Recommendation to accept the Quarterly Investment Report\nfor period ending September 30, 2007. Accepted.\n(*07-546) Recommendation to accept the work of William P. Young\nConstruction for the Ballena Bay Bridge Seismic Retrofit Project,\nNo. P.W. 05-00-09. Accepted.\n( *07-547) Recommendation to award a Contract in the amount of\n$102,177, including contingencies, to Robert C. Terry, dba Comfort\nAir Mechanical Systems, for the annual heating, ventilating, and\nair conditioning systems maintenance in various City facilities,\nNo. P.W. 09-07-30. Accepted.\n(*07-548) Resolution No. 14159, \"Authorizing Applications to the\nCaltrans Safe Routes to School Program for Fiscal Years 2006/2007\nand 2007/2008 and the Use of City Matching Funds for Construction\nof Pedestrian Access and Street Crossing Improvements near Franklin\nElementary School and Wood Middle School and for Purchase and\nInstallation of Radar Speed Signs. Adopted.\n(07-549) Resolution No. 14160, \"Authorizing Open Market Purchase\nfrom Berendo Solutions, Inc. of Los Angeles, California, Pursuant\nto Section 3-15 of the Alameda City Charter for Electronic Citation\nSoftware. Adopted.\nVice Mayor Tam congratulated the Police Chief on the grant; stated\nthe staff report notes that the software would enhance the ability\nto capture data related to the Police Department's efforts\nto\npromote cooperative strategies to prevent racial profiling; she\nwould like to have a better understanding of what is involved in\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n7\nNovember 20, 2007", "path": "CityCouncil/2007-11-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2007-11-20", "page": 8, "text": "the data collection.\nThe Police Chief stated the existing software is fifteen years old\nand does not interface with the Records Management System; the\nproposed system would interface with the Records Management System\nand the court system throughout the State; driver's license status,\nwarrants, etc. can be checked by swiping the license; the\nelectronic interface would help make court processing quicker; the\nPolice Department has collected data on traffic stops for years;\nthe proposed software would link said information.\nVice Mayor Tam inquired whether said data exists or is something\nthat the Police Officer enters upon a traffic citation stop.\nThe Police Chief responded Police Officers enter data for every\nstop; stated information would be tracked through the electronic\ncitation software system.\nCouncilmember Gilmore stated the existing software is fifteen years\nold; she is troubled by the fact that there is only one vendor who\nmakes the software that interfaces with the current system in a way\nthat is acceptable to the Police Department; inquired whether there\nwould be trouble with interfacing in the future if the existing\nsoftware is replaced.\nThe Police Chief responded the proposed software would do things\nthat the old software does not; stated the existing Records\nManagement System and computerized dispatch system are state-of\nthe-art and provide interfacing; court system interfacing is new;\nother vendors have not been able to interface with the court\nsystem; the citation component would interface where previous\nsystems did not; the system is cutting edge and is beyond what\nother vendors are providing; the system meets all criteria and has\nbeen tried by Alameda County and City of Oakland.\nCouncilmember Gilmore inquired whether the new system would be an\nadd-on or replacement, to which the Police Chief responded a\nreplacement.\nVice Mayor Tam moved adoption of the resolution.\nMayor Johnson inquired whether there would be annual costs.\nThe Police Chief responded upgraded maintenance costs would be\nincluded in the grant.\nMayor Johnson inquired what is the length of coverage under the\ncurrent fee.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n8\nNovember 20, 2007", "path": "CityCouncil/2007-11-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2007-11-20", "page": 9, "text": "The Police Chief responded three years; maintenance costs could be\noffset by other grants in three years.\nCouncilmember deHaan inquired whether other departments have\nevaluated and bought into the system.\nThe Police Chief responded Alameda County and the City of Oakland\nhave bought the system; the court system has signed off that the\nsystem meets their specifications and requirements.\nCouncilmember deHaan seconded the motion, which carried by\nunanimous voice vote - 5.\n( (*07-550) Ordinance No. 2975, \"Amending the Alameda Municipal Code\nby Amending Chapter XIII (Building and Housing) by Repealing\nArticle I (Uniform Codes Relating to Building, Housing and\nTechnical Codes) in Its Entirety and Adding a New Article I\n(Uniform Codes Relating to Building, Housing and Technical Codes)\nto Adopt the 2007 California Building Code, the 2007 California\nHistorical Building Code, the 2007 California Electrical Code, the\n2007 California Plumbing Code, the 2007 California Mechanical Code,\nthe 2007 California Energy Code, the 1997 Uniform Housing Code, and\nthe 1997 Edition of the Uniform Code for the Abatement of Dangerous\nBuildings, and by Amending Chapter XV (Fire Prevention) by\nRepealing Section 15-1 in Its Entirety and by Adding a New Section\n15-1 to Adopt the 2007 California Fire Code. Finally passed.\nREGULAR AGENDA ITEMS\n(07-551) Recommendation to accept the improvements and release the\nSubdivision Bond for Tract 7170 (Marina Cove) subject to receiving\na Maintenance Bond for improvements and landscaping and authorize\nthe City Manager to execute an Amendment to the Annual Landscape\nMaintenance Contract in the amount of $24,000 to maintain the\nparking strip within the Marina Cove development.\nThe Public Works Director gave a brief presentation.\nMayor Johnson inquired whether the Maintenance Assessment District\namount can be adjusted to cover the actual maintenance costs.\nThe Public Works Director responded Council adopts a budget each\nyear; stated the amount is adjusted by the Consumer Price Index\n(CPI) increase.\nCouncilmember Matarrese inquired whether the Clement Avenue strip\nincludes up to the water and the backside of the shelter near the\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n9\nNovember 20, 2007", "path": "CityCouncil/2007-11-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2007-11-20", "page": 10, "text": "park, to which the Public Works Director responded in the\naffirmative.\nCouncilmember Matarrese inquired whether the area includes up to\nwhere the park that terminates at the Fortman Marina.\nThe Public Works Director responded the area is included if the\narea was constructed as part of the subdivision.\nCouncilmember Gilmore inquired whether the budget covers staff or\ncontractors.\nThe Public Works Director responded the budget includes\nadministration cost as well as cost for any work done by staff or\ncontractors; stated landscape maintenance has been done by\ncontractors for years.\nMayor Johnson inquired whether future infrastructure maintenance is\ncovered.\nThe Public Works Director responded sewers are not covered because\nmoney is collected from property taxes; the Maintenance Assessment\nDistrict pays for street and sidewalk maintenance.\nCouncilmember Gilmore moved approval of the staff recommendation.\nCouncilmember Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by\nunanimous voice vote - 5.\n(07 -552 - ) Recommendation to approve re-use of the Carnegie Building\nas the Community Arts/Planning and Building Center, amend the\nContract with Muller & Caulfield Architects to provide\narchitectural and engineering services for design development\nthrough the construction phase of the Carnegie Restoration and\nPreservation Project, appropriate funds in the amount of $481,816\nto execute the Contract, and authorize the City Manager to seek\ndebt financing.\nThe Building Official made a brief presentation and introduced\nRosemary Muller of Muller & Caulfield Architects and Alan Dreyfus\nof Wiss, Janney, Elstner Associates, Inc.\nMs. Muller gave a Power Point presentation.\nCouncilmember Matarrese inquired whether the balcony proposed for\nthe Museum use could be constructed on the outside of the building.\nMr. Dreyfus responded the idea was reviewed; stated it would be\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n10\nNovember 20, 2007", "path": "CityCouncil/2007-11-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2007-11-20", "page": 11, "text": "very difficult; due to the location of sheer walls, the only\nalternative would be an exit out of the east side, which would go\ndown to the ground.\nCouncilmember Matarrese inquired whether the exit would be similar\nto the Council Chambers exit.\nMs. Muller responded in the affirmative; stated the exit would not\nlook too great from the street.\nMr. Dreyfus stated exterior and interior building impacts were\nreviewed; the interior is important, but the exterior is as well;\nthe [balcony ] proposal appeared to have the least impact on the\nhistoric fabric.\nMayor Johnson stated that she appreciates the lighting issue\ninformation. the building has a lot of windows, which she had\nconsidered when reviewing different uses.\nMs. Muller stated museums tend to find preserving artifacts more\nimportant than seeing buildings.\nMayor Johnson inquired whether the building is not the ideal type\nof building for a museum.\nMs. Muller responded that she is reluctantly coming to said\nconclusion; stated thirty years ago museums were okay with\ndaylight research has led to curators being more careful with\nartifacts; visiting exhibits will not allow paintings to be\ndisplayed if there is too much light.\nCouncilmember Matarrese inquired how the art exhibit area [in the\nproposed Community Arts/Planning and Building Center] could be\njustified if people are concerned about paintings.\nMs. Muller responded that she discussed the matter with artists and\nthey were not concerned about art for sale being displayed for two\nto three months as long as the windows have film to keep out most\nof the ultraviolet light.\nMayor Johnson inquired whether oil paintings have different\nlighting tolerance than wood or leather.\nMs. Muller responded in the affirmative; stated the most light\nsensitive items are drawings on paper, watercolors and fabric, such\nas old costumes.\nMayor Johnson inquired whether special art exhibits require\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n11\nNovember 20, 2007", "path": "CityCouncil/2007-11-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2007-11-20", "page": 12, "text": "Ms. Muller stated 25% is typically added to construction cost\nestimates to get the complete project cost.\nThe City Manager stated $2.4 million was included in the CIP budget\nprior to the completion of the work by the architect, which\nprovides a better estimate; the new estimate would be used to\nupdate the $2.4 million listed in the budget document.\nMayor Johnson stated that the number is more refined.\nMs. Muller stated there are still a lot of holes to be filled since\nthe building has not been designed; the number is high enough that\nit should be okay.\nThe Planning and Building Director summarized the staff\nrecommendation; noted Council could direct staff to provide a\nfinancing plan prior to authorizing the contract.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated the project itself is a restoration\nproject trying to retain some of the City's history in a building,\nwhich is worthwhile; inquired whether Planning currently occupies\n6,000 square feet and would move into an 18,000 square foot\nbuilding.\nMs. Muller responded the Carnegie building is 10,800 square feet.\nCouncilmember deHaan inquired whether the effort to save the\nbuilding would be subsidized by Planning Department funds, to which\nthe Planning and Building Director responded in the affirmative.\nCouncilmember deHaan inquired whether taking a step to save\nsomething historic would cost more than renting or building office\nspace somewhere else.\nThe Planning and Building Director responded the attempt is to\nserve the public in a certain area; stated the larger space would\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n12\nNovember 20, 2007", "path": "CityCouncil/2007-11-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2007-11-20", "page": 13, "text": "allow information from other City departments to be displayed.\nCouncilmember deHaan inquired whether finding other functional\nquarters would be cheaper to maintain and renovate, to which the\nPlanning and Building Director responded that might not be the case\nand would require analysis.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated the real goal is to save the historical\nbuilding and make it functional; there have been discussions about\nthe City's commitment to restoration. the project could be done\ncheaper quartered somewhere else.\nMayor Johnson stated Planning and Building would subsidize the\nhistoric restoration and renovation since the Department would use\nthe building.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated the cause is more than worthy people\njust need to understand that it would be a commitment over and\nabove in cost.\nMayor Johnson stated two birds are being killed with one stone.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated the former Children's library is\nanother opportunity to centralize the City's office space; he\nrequested that centralizing the City's operations be reviewed; he\nwas hoping to see more of said vision and plan; inquired whether a\ndifferent department could go in the [Carnegie] building, but the\nPlanning Department was selected due to greater access to funding\ninquired where money would come from to relocate a different\ndepartment.\nThe City Manager responded funding set aside from building permits\nhas to be used for Planning and Building services; that she could\nnot identify other potential funding sources at the moment.\nCouncilmember Gilmore stated other departments have been moved into\nbuildings owned by the City the last times there were moves; the\nRecreation and Parks Department was moved into a City owned\nbuilding; the City is only paying maintenance and tenant\nimprovements, which is an entirely different story than finding\n8,000 to 10,000 square feet of space in the open market.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated Councilmember Gilmore has a valid\npoint currently, the City occupies Building 1 at Alameda Point\nrent free; the City might not have said luxury at a later point in\ntime; he would like for the City to lessen the future burden and\nbetter utilize facilities over which the City has control, such as\nthe former Children's library.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n13\nNovember 20, 2007", "path": "CityCouncil/2007-11-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2007-11-20", "page": 14, "text": "Alana Dill, Alameda, suggested the Carnegie space be used not just\nfor art display, but also include classroom space.\nMarilyn Schumacher, Alameda, stated Mr. Carnegie intended his\nbuildings be used for public uses, not just libraries; urged\napproval of the Community Arts/Planning and Building Center.\nChristopher Buckley, Alameda Architectural Preservation Society\n(AAPS) stated AAPS concluded that both uses would meet AAPS's\nsuggested selection criteria of public access and historic\nrenovation.\nMike Shepard, Frank Bette Center, thanked the Council for\nconsidering restoration of the Carnegie building thanked staff for\nthe community involvement process; stated that he supports the\nCommunity Arts/Planning and Building Center.\nDebra Owen, Alameda, stated the two-story area should be used for\nsculpture; there are not many places to display sculpture.\nMayor Johnson inquired whether there could be sculpture display at\nthe Community Arts/Planning and Building Center, to which Ms.\nMuller responded in the affirmative.\nMayor Johnson stated Muller & Caulfield's retrofit work on the\nbuilding is beautiful and cannot be seen.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated the retrofit is well hidden; inquired\nwhether the former Children's library is 4,400 square feet.\nMs. Muller responded that her firm was responsible for the\nconnection building; she reviewed the drawing and the former\nChildren's library is about 3,800 including the garages and lower\nlevel, which has a ceiling height of seven and a half feet.\nCouncilmember deHaan inquired whether the [ former Children's\nlibrary] building is on brick foundation, to which Ms. Muller\nresponded in the affirmative.\nCouncilmember deHaan inquired how many people could fit in the\nspace if it were used as an office, to which Ms. Muller responded\naround thirty.\nCouncilmember deHaan inquired how many people are in the Planning\nand Building department, to which Ms. Muller responded forty.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated the building would be twice the size,\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n14\nNovember 20, 2007", "path": "CityCouncil/2007-11-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2007-11-20", "page": 15, "text": "but would be used for more than just office space.\nMs. Muller noted office space includes conference rooms, storage\nand other items that take up additional space.\nCouncilmember Gilmore stated Planning currently occupies about\n6,000 square feet; 6,000 square feet of office space in City Hall\nwould be available if Planning moved into the Carnegie building\ninquired which department could move into the space, perhaps Public\nWorks or Development Services; stated the goal is to try to\ncentralize services.\nThe City Manager stated bringing Public Works back into City Hall\nwas reviewed during the processi Information Technology could be\nmoved back as well if there is enough space; Development Services\nis a little larger.\nCouncilmember deHaan questioned whether Development Services could\nfit in the former Children's library.\nThe City Manager stated having staff together increases efficiency\nhaving Public Works move back was reviewed because the department\nis involved with the Permit Center.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated all of the possibilities should be\nreviewed; the City might have to be out of Building 1 at some\npoint.\nThe City Manager stated a Facilities Mater Plan is on the work\nplan; since funding is available and the Carnegie building is not\noccupied, there is an opportunity to move Planning and Building\ninto the space, restore the building, provide better customer\nservice in the Planning and Building Department and return another\ndepartment or two back to City Hall; staff does not anticipate\nthere is enough room for Public Works, Information Technology and\nDevelopment Services staff would look for other opportunities in\nthe future.\nMayor Johnson stated the former Children's library should be\nreviewed; inquired whether there is extra space in the building\noccupied by the Recreation and Parks Department; stated that she\nunderstands the department does not utilize the whole building.\nThe City Manager responded said issues would all be included in the\nanalysis.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated that he is concerned about the annual\nmaintenance of the Carnegie; said costs would be over and above\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n15\nNovember 20, 2007", "path": "CityCouncil/2007-11-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2007-11-20", "page": 16, "text": "what is being incurred currently; maintaining the building will be\na budget line item of a couple hundred thousand dollars per year;\nthe question is how to relieve other burdens at Alameda Point and\nmove forward.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated that he has a couple of concerns;\nphilosophically. he does not believe Andrew Carnegie envisioned\ngiving the City an office building; the Carnegie should not be used\nas an office building; form a practical point, there are too many\nunanswered questions regarding the building use and consolidating\nCity services from City Hall West without reviewing all options; he\ninquired about an Oak Street property at one point ; there were\nrumors about the property being for sale; he never received an\nanswer; looking at said property should be reviewed; the Recreation\nbuilding is not fully utilized; said issues should be reviewed\nfirst; his other questions are regarding financing; the project\ncosts are almost double what was initially anticipated; questioned\nwhether the building would always have to be used for Planning and\nBuilding if permit revenues are used to finance the debt;\nquestioned whether tax increment can be used to pay debt service;\nfurther stated the funding source, as well as the Master Plan,\nshould be determined first; there is an option to complete the work\nregardless of use, particularly if tax increment can be used; the\nelevator has to be completed regardless of use; phasing would allow\nexpensive items to be completed; the lighting information is\ninteresting; there should be further study; the building is to\nimportant to rush to a decision at this point.\nVice Mayor Tam stated that she appreciates the presentation\naddressing public access and the use types that have been\nconsidered; staff and the architects exercised a fair and balanced\ndue diligence process working with the museum; deterioration will\ncontinue the longer the building remains unoccupied and not\nrenovated the building is a vital historical asset that needs to\nbe preserved; the timing and available funding is a coincidence\nthe project cost will not decrease; the Community Arts/Planning and\nBuilding use recommended does not preclude converting to other uses\nif there is funding in the future; the $4.7 million estimate brings\nthe building up to code and allows for other issues; the daylight\nissue is in concert with the City's green building efforts that\nshe supports the staff recommendation.\nVice Mayor Tam moved approval of the staff recommendation.\nCouncilmember Gilmore seconded the motion.\nUnder discussion, Councilmember Gilmore stated projections were\nmade regarding public access to the building; the museum's\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n16\nNovember 20, 2007", "path": "CityCouncil/2007-11-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2007-11-20", "page": 17, "text": "might not fully develop; that he would like to see more foresight ;\nhe does not feel comfortable approving spending $1/2 million\ntonight the action is premature; he needs more information\nalthough he supports the idea; maintenance would be a budget issue;\neverything must be put in proper context.\nVice Mayor Tam stated the $481,000 would firm up the total project\ncost and availability of funding would be evaluated.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated the Planning and Building Director\nindicated that Council could direct staff to come back with the\nproject financing possibilities, which is an important thing; the\nCity is in a tight budget situation; the funding should be reviewed\nprior to spending $1/2 million on a project that the City might not\nbe able to finance at this point in time; the building was\nseismically retrofitted; the Council only has partial bits of\ninformation to make a decision to spend $1/2 million and start\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n17\nNovember 20, 2007", "path": "CityCouncil/2007-11-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2007-11-20", "page": 18, "text": "going down a road that might not be able to be finished; what the\nbuilding could be, other than a Community Arts/Planning and\nBuilding Center, has not been fully explored; people visiting the\nPlanning and Building Department is not the same as people visiting\na museum or art center; Planning and Building Department customers\nare there to do business; he wants to know whether the project can\nbe financed and what it will take to finance the project before\nvoting on anything.\nlouncilmember Gilmore stated that the money for the architectural\ncontract is for changes that have to made to the building\nregardless of who occupies the building; construction costs are not\ngetting any cheaper; once the drawings are underway and there is a\nbetter idea of the number [project cost], the City is going to\ndetermine how to finance the project.\nCouncilmember Matarrese inquired whether spending the $481,000 is\nuse neutral and whether it does not matter whether or not the\nbuilding would be a Cultural Arts Center/Museum or a Community\nArts/Planning and Building Center.\nThe Planning and Building Director responded the same work goes\ninto the construction plans stated furnishing would be the only\ndifference; the funding from permit center revenues would have to\nbe repaid if a different use was selected.\nCouncilmember Matarrese inquired whether using said funding would\nrequire that the building be used as the Community Arts/Planning\nand Building Center.\nThe City Manager responded the assumption is that the permit center\nfunds would be used for the Community Arts/Planning and Building\nCenter to go forward because the funds have been collected related\nto Planning and Building services; the proposal was to use the\nfunds to get more detailed cost estimates and come back with a\nfinancing plan based on the cost estimates.\nCouncilmember deHaan inquired how much money is in the permit\ncenter fund, to which Vice Mayor Tam responded $1.089 million.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated almost half of the funding would be\nused for design; the building would have to be used for Planning\nand Building services or the funds would have to be paid back; that\nhe wants firm financial information before moving forward.\nThe Planning and Building Director stated if the Planning and\nBuilding Permit Center does not move forward, the funds could be\nreimbursed when an alternate use comes forward with funding.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n18\nNovember 20, 2007", "path": "CityCouncil/2007-11-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2007-11-20", "page": 19, "text": "On the call for the question, the motion carried by the following\nvoice vote: Ayes: louncilmembers Gilmore, Tam and Mayor Johnson -\n3. Noes : Councilmembers deHaan and Matarrese - 2.\nORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA\n(Public Comment)\n(07-553) Musiy Rishin, Alameda, submitted handout ; requested a\nwaiver on a parking ticket delinquent fee.\nMayor Johnson requested staff to work with Mr. Rishin on the\nmatter stated courts allow individuals to perform community\nservice in order to reduce fines.\n(07-554) Jason Ross, submitted handout discussed foreclosures.\n(07-555) Diana Wong urged Council to petition Congress to freeze\nforeclosures.\n(07-556) Joelle Wright, Larouche Political Action Commission,\ndiscussed foreclosures and the banking crises; urged Council to\nreflect on families who could be losing their homes this holiday\nseason.\nCOUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS\n(07-557) Vice Mayor Tam stated that she attended the League of\nCalifornia East Bay Division Meeting on November 15; stated that\nAlameda is one of the two cities where home appreciation values\nwent up; the median price for a home in Alameda is approximately\n$725,000; 80% to 85% of loans in Alameda are conventional loans;\nthe foreclosures within the City have been steady; the volume of\ntransactions has declined.\nCouncilmember Matarrese inquired whether the League presentation\ncould be provided in writing.\nMayor Johnson suggested a written report be requested.\n(07-558) Councilmember deHaan stated there were concerns on the\nfuture direction on the Carnegie Library with regard to\ncentralizing the City's operation; he would like to place the\nmatter on an agenda\nMayor Johnson stated that an analysis of other facilities is a good\nidea.\nCouncilmember Gilmore stated that she thought she heard that the\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n19\nNovember 20, 2007", "path": "CityCouncil/2007-11-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2007-11-20", "page": 20, "text": "information would be provided as part of a facilities master plan.\nThe Assistant City Manager stated said plan is extensive and would\nnot be ready for nine months or so; staff could work on a smaller\nversion of the plan.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated the primary focus is to centralize\noperations and downsize the footprint at Alameda Point.\nThe Assistant City Manager stated staff could review the matter to\nsee what it would take to relocate the uses in Building One at\nAlameda Point.\nCouncilmember Gilmore suggested that the matter be placed on an\nagenda for further discussion.\n(07-559) Councilmember deHaan stated he would like to have the\nissue of placing liquor and smoking ads within certain distance of\nschools brought to Council for discussion.\nThe City Attorney stated that the legal opinion states that Council\nhas no control over the matter.\nADJOURNMENT - City Council\nThere being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the\nRegular Meeting at 11:10 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\n20\nNovember 20, 2007", "path": "CityCouncil/2007-11-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2007-11-20", "page": 21, "text": "MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING\nTUESDAY - -NOVEMBER 20, 2007 -7:00 P.M.\nMayor Johnson convened the Special Meeting at 7:15 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(07-541) Conference with Legal Counsel - Existing Litigation; Name\nof case : Chow V. City of Alameda, et al.\nFollowing the Closed Session, the Special Meeting was reconvened\nand Mayor Johnson announced that Council received a briefing on the\nstatus of the litigation and gave direction to Legal Counsel to\ndefend the City.\nAdjournment\nThere being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the\nSpecial Meeting at 7:20 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\nNovember 20, 2007", "path": "CityCouncil/2007-11-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2007-11-20", "page": 22, "text": "MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION MEETING\nTUESDAY - -NOVEMBER 20, 2007- - - -7:25 P.M.\nChair Johnson convened the Special Meeting at 7:37 p.m.\nCommissioner Gilmore led the Pledge of Allegiance.\nROLL CALL - Present : Commissioners deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese,\nTam, and Chair Johnson - 5.\nAbsent :\nNone\nSPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY\n(07-048) Update on the Alameda Theater, Cineplex, and Parking\nStructure Project.\nThe Redevelopment Manager gave a brief presentation.\nCommissioner Tam stated that BikeLink elockers are a wonderful\nasset BikeLink cards are $20; rates are three to five cents per\nhour; inquired how long it would take to use up the $20 card.\nThe Redevelopment Manager responded usage would determine how long\nthe card would last. stated BikeLink is a non-profit organization;\nthe $20 card helps cover administrative costs and provides upfront\nmoney for services.\nTrish Spencer, Alameda Parent Teacher Association Council\nPresident, stated that she was did not know about the winebar at\nthe Theater; the winebar changes the type of theater being offered;\nBurgermister will have a full liquor license; the high school has\nan open campusi Alcohol Beverage Control (ABC) has regulations\nregarding establishments that have liquor licenses within 600 feet\nof a high school; the issue should have been shared with the\ncommunity; there should be disclosure if the mezzanine provides\nalcohol.\nLeo Baldaramos, Alameda, read an email that he sent to the School\nBoard President regarding the winebar at the Theater; stated he is\nconcerned about the distance [of the winebar ] from the school.\nMINUTES\n(07-049) Minutes of the Special Joint City Council and Community\nImprovement Commission Meeting held on November 6, 2007. Approved.\nCommissioner deHaan moved approval of the minutes.\nSpecial Meeting\nCommunity Improvement Commission\n1\nNovember 20, 2007", "path": "CityCouncil/2007-11-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2007-11-20", "page": 23, "text": "Commissioner Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by\nunanimous voice vote - 5. .\nAGENDA ITEMS\nNone.\nADJOURNMENT\nThere being no further business, Chair Johnson adjourned the\nSpecial Meeting at 7:52 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\n2\nNovember 20, 2007", "path": "CityCouncil/2007-11-20.pdf"}