{"body": "AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority", "date": "2008-01-02", "page": 1, "text": "UNAPPROVED\nMINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE\nALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY\nWednesday, January 2, 2008\nThe meeting convened at 7:33 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 Regular Meeting of December 5, 2007.\n2-B. Authorize the Executive Director to Execute an Agreement with Russell Resources for\nEnvironmental Consulting Services for Alameda Point for 12 Months in an Amount not to\nexceed $117,500.\n2-C. Approve Sublease for American Bus Repair, LLC at Alameda Point.\nApproval of the Consent Calendar was motioned by Member Matarrese, seconded by\nMember Tam and passed by the following voice votes: Ayes: 5, Noes: 0, Abstentions: 0\n3.\nREGULAR AGENDA ITEMS\n3-A. Alameda Point Update -- Presentation of Quarterly Update of Project Master\nSchedule Prepared by SCC Alameda Point LLC.\nDebbie Potter, Base Reuse and Community Development Manager, gave a quick update of\nAlameda Point activities. On 12/12, SunCal met with the Navy to discuss their due diligence and\nprogress on the project. On 12/13, SunCal conducted their second community meeting with over\n200 community residents and business people in attendance. The community members\nparticipated in small workgroups and identified pros and cons of two broadly defined concepts\nfor Alameda Point. SunCal will take the information and feedback from this meeting to put to\nuse for the next community meeting. Ms. Potter introduced Pat Keliher, SunCal's Project\nManager for the Alameda Point Project, to give the first quarterly update of the Project Master\nSchedule.\nMr. Keliher summarized past public meetings, explaining that the public would like more\nspecific feedback on multiple planning concepts. SunCal has aggregated most of the information\nand feedback and will present this to staff. To update the master schedule -- originally, SunCal's\npretense was that they would move forward with the Preliminary Development Concept (PDC),\nbut over the course of the last few months, due to constraints, the PDC is not feasible. SunCal\nhas communicated this to the Navy, to the public, and to staff, and the Project Master Schedule\nhas been updated. Most of schedule triggers project description, which is still in process and will\ntake several more months, but does not affect the two-year ENA period. Mr. Keliher discussed\nthat the City hired an independent peer review team to evaluate SunCal's results and this peer", "path": "AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2008-01-02.pdf"}
{"body": "AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority", "date": "2008-01-02", "page": 2, "text": "review will continue over the next 12-18 months. The conclusion of the peer review thus far is\nthat there are issues for which SunCal will discuss the mitigation techniques. SunCal has met\nwith multiple federal agencies, and their meeting with the Navy was to introduce them to the\nconcept that the PDC didn't work, and, as the existing term sheet is predicated on the PDC,\nSunCal will come back to the Navy in Jan-Feb with an outline on their strategy. Mr. Keliher\nexplained that the Alameda Point project is very complex, but nothing that is insurmountable.\nMember deHaan expressed concern with economics of the project and what issues SunCal was\nanticipating will be covered at the next public meeting. Mr. Keliher stated that it is SunCal's job\nto present more specifics on each of the different planning concepts, i.e., Measure A, non-\nmeasure A, or a hybrid of these two, etc.\nMember deHaan stated that the loose ends and driving force was the transportation issue. Mr.\nKeliher agreed that the transportation issue was a trigger and that it would take several years and\na\nlot of different agencies involved to tie up this loose end. Member deHaan commented that the\npublic meetings were well-received.\n4.\nORAL REPORTS\n4-A. Oral report from Member Matarrese, Restoration Advisory Board (RAB)\nrepresentative.\nMember Matarrese attended the 12/6/07 meeting and the main agenda item was a summary\nhandout of 2007 activities and a look-forward to 2008 with remediation at Alameda Point. He\nprovided the handout, \"Environmental Progress at Alameda Point\" and requested that it be\nprovided to ARRA members and posted on the City's website. He requested that the map\nidentifying the sites be included with the handout.\n5.\nORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (PUBLIC COMMENT)\nThere were no speaker slips.\n6.\nCOMMUNICATIONS FROM THE GOVERNING BODY\nnone.\n7. ADJOURNMENT\nMeeting was adjourned at 7:43 p.m. by Chair Johnson.\nRespectfully submitted,\nIrma Glidden\nARRA Secretary", "path": "AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2008-01-02.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2008-01-02", "page": 1, "text": "MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING\nWEDNESDAY - -JANUARY 2, 2008- -7:30 P.M.\nMayor Johnson convened the Regular Meeting at 7:44 p.m.\nROLL CALL - Present : Councilmembers\ndeHaan,\nGilmore,\nMatarrese, Tam, and Mayor Johnson - 5.\nAbsent :\nNone.\nAGENDA CHANGES\n(08-002) Mayor Johnson announced that the Public Hearing\n[paragraph no. 08-011] would be continued to January 15, 2008.\nPROCLAMATIONS, SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY AND ANNOUNCEMENTS\nNone.\nCONSENT CALENDAR\nMayor Johnson announced that the Minutes [paragraph no. 08-003]\nwere removed from the Consent Calendar for discussion.\nVice Mayor Tam moved approval of the remainder of the Consent\nCalendar.\nCouncilmember deHaan 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(08-003 - ) Minutes of the Special Joint City Council, Alameda Reuse\nand Redevelopment Authority, and Community Improvement Commission\nMeeting of December 4, 2007; Special City Council Meetings of\nDecember 5, 2007; Special City Council Meeting of December 11,\n2007; and Special and Regular City Council Meetings of December 18,\n2007.\nVice Mayor Tam stated that Page 7 of the Special Joint December 4\nminutes should state Vice Mayor Tam instead of Mayor Tam.\nVice Mayor Tam moved approval of the minutes with said correction.\nCouncilmember deHaan seconded the motion, which carried by\nunanimous voice vote - 5.\n( *08-004) - Ratified bills in the amount of $2,511,250.80\nRegular Meeting\n1\nAlameda City Council\nJanuary 2, 2008", "path": "CityCouncil/2008-01-02.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2008-01-02", "page": 2, "text": "(*08-005) Recommendation to approve Amendment No. One to the\nAgreement between the Navy and the City for conveyance of the Fleet\nIndustrial Supply Center (FISC) property attaching as a new\n\"Exhibit J\" a Memorandum of Agreement among the Navy, City and\nPalmtree Acquisition Corporation (PAC) allowing PAC to carry out\nremediation of the FISC property in order to construct the Alameda\nLanding Development. Accepted.\n(*08-006) Resolution No. 14163, \"Approving an Amended Boundary Map\nfor Community Facilities District No. 03-1 (Bayport Municipal\nService District) Adopted.\n(*08-007) Resolution No. 14164, \"Approving Revised Part-Time\nClassifications Salary Schedule Effective January 1, 2008. \"\nAdopted.\n(*08-008) Ordinance No. 2977, \"Amending the Alameda Municipal Code\nby Adding Section 4-4 to Article I (Littering and Maintenance of\nProperty) of Chapter IV (Offenses and Public Safety) to Prohibit\nPolystyrene Foam Food Service Ware and Amending Section 1-5.6 of\nChapter I (General) to Authorize Additional City Employees to Serve\nas Code Enforcement Officers. Finally passed.\nREGULAR AGENDA ITEMS\n(08-009) - Resolution No. 14165, \" Appointing Michelle Blackman as a\nMember of the Youth Commission. \" Adopted;\n(08-009A) Resolution No. 14166, \"Appointing Hannah Bowman as a\nMember of the Youth Commission. \" Adopted;\n(08-009B) Resolution No. 14167, \"Appointing Jordon Flores as a\nMember of the Youth Commission. \" Adopted;\n(08-009C) Resolution No. 14168, \"Appointing Ilya Pinsky as a member\nof the Youth Commission. Adopted;\n(08-009D) Resolution No. 14169, \"Appointing Anguli Sastry as a\nMember of the Youth Commission. \" Adopted\n( 08-009E) Resolution No. 14170, \"Appointing Priscilla Szeto as a\nMember of the Youth Commission. Adopted;\n(08-009F) Resolution No. 14171, \"Appointing Ben Ulrey as a Member\nof the Youth Commission. Adopted; and\nRegular Meeting\n2\nAlameda City Council\nJanuary 2, 2008", "path": "CityCouncil/2008-01-02.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2008-01-02", "page": 3, "text": "(08-009G) Resolution No. 14172, \"Appointing Angela Sterling Vick as\na Member of the Youth Commission. Adopted.\nCouncilmember Matarrese moved adoption of the resolutions.\nCouncilmember deHaan seconded the motion, which carried by\nunanimous voice vote - 5.\nThe City Clerk administered the Oath and presented certificates of\nappointment to Youth Commission Members.\n(08-010) Public Hearing to consider Resolution No. 14173, \"Amending\nMaster Fee Resolution No. 12191 to Revise Permit Fees Charged for\nInstallation of Photovoltaic Systems. Adopted.\nThe Building Official made a brief presentation.\nCouncilmember deHaan moved adoption of the resolution.\nCouncilmember Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by\nunanimous voice vote - 5.\n(08-011) Public Hearing to consider an appeal of the Historical\nAdvisory Board's denial of a Certificate of Approval (CA06-0031) of\ndemolition for 433 Taylor Avenue; and adoption of related\nresolution. [Continued to January 15, 2008]\n(08-012 ) Recommendation to accept the Corica Golf Complex\nOperational Review and authorize staff to begin the process to\nsecure a long-term operator for the Golf Complex.\nThe City Manager gave a brief presentation.\nRichard Singer, National Golf Foundation (NGF) Director of\nConsulting Services, provided a Power Point presentation.\nMayor Johnson inquired what was the extent of the Operational\nReview.\nEd Getherall, NGF Project Manager, responded several days were\nspent at the site; stated concentration was given to major\noperational issues.\nMr. Singer stated line items were reviewed; the review was\nextensive.\nMayor Johnson stated the report is more of an overview and not a\nRegular Meeting\n3\nAlameda City Council\nJanuary 2, 2008", "path": "CityCouncil/2008-01-02.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2008-01-02", "page": 4, "text": "detailed description of operational issues.\nMr. Singer stated detail was provided; significant, bottom line\nissues were reviewed.\nMayor Johnson stated Council needs to have detailed information\nregarding Golf Course management issues; all options should be\nconsidered; inquired whether the Golf Course could turn around\ngiven management issues over the past several years.\nMr. Singer responded the issue was not addressed; stated bigger\nissues were found labor costs are 13% higher than the standard;\nturning the Golf Course around would be very difficult under the\ncurrent management scenario.\nMr. Getherall stated many things could have been done better the\nbig picture is the numbers; the NGF would be irresponsible in\nsaying that better management would bring back 180,00 to 190,000\nrounds; decisions need to be made based on reality; everyone is\nfighting for market share; the expense side is a problem.\nMayor Johnson stated the cost per round is $38.67 and is based on\ncurrent operating costs; inquired what impact a fee increase would\nhave on the Golf Course.\nMr. Getherall responded fees would need to be raised significantly;\nstated the facility is priced appropriately for the product.\nMr. Singer stated more rounds would be lost if fees were raised.\nMayor Johnson concurred with Mr. Singer.\nCouncilmember Gilmore inquired when the General Fund would start\nsubsidizing the Golf Course under the \"as-is\" scenario.\nMr. Singer responded that he is not sure; stated a decision would\nneed to be made regarding whether making money or serving the\ncommunity is more important.\nMr. Getherall stated a $4 million loss is projected over the next\nfive years.\nMr. Singer stated that three to five years [for the General Fund to\nstart subsidizing the Golf Course] is a fair estimate.\nVice Mayor Tam inquired whether employees are represented by\norganized labor at profitable golf courses.\nRegular Meeting\n4\nAlameda City Council\nJanuary 2, 2008", "path": "CityCouncil/2008-01-02.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2008-01-02", "page": 5, "text": "Mr. Getherall responded there is every type of scenario.\nMr. Singer stated some golf facilities are self operated by a\nmunicipality with unionized labor and earn more in green fee\nrevenue than is needed to spend on facility maintenance; all\nmunicipalities are facing the same wage and benefit increases\nexpenses are being cut and positions are being reduced to make ends\nmeet.\nVice Mayor Tam stated the report itemizes a series of improvements\nin year one and two that add up to approximately $10 million; noted\nthat Mr. Singer mentioned that golfers only care about the\ncondition of the greens; the banquet facility is listed as the last\npriority; inquired which improvements are necessary.\nMr. Singer responded improvements were categorized according to\nthose which would lead to increased revenue; stated better drainage\nand irrigation are high priority issues; golfers care about the\ngreens, but fairways, tees, and sand traps are important also.\nMr. Getherall stated non-resident golfers are important; resident\ngolfers will play regardless [of conditions) ; people travel to play\ngolf; a Master Plan is needed.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated the report brought to light a lot of\nwhat was already known; inquired whether an analysis has ever been\nmade on a successful, local golf course.\nMr. Singer stated the NGF worked with the cities of Concord,\nLivermore, and San Francisco.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated Alameda's cost per round is lower or in\nthe middle compared to other listed golf courses inquired whether\nother courses will be in trouble, to which Mr. Getherall responded\nmany golf courses are in trouble.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated there has been a steady decline after\n1996.\nMr. Singer stated municipalities find it difficult to self operate\na golf facility with the current wage situation.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated a leasing option is not a cure all.\nMr. Singer stated leasing is not a cure all but is the best\nopportunity in terms of revenue to the City.\nRegular Meeting\n5\nAlameda City Council\nJanuary 2, 2008", "path": "CityCouncil/2008-01-02.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2008-01-02", "page": 6, "text": "Counci lmember deHaan stated all three scenarios have risk.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated San Mateo's golf course is the\nclosest type to Alameda's San Mateo's per round production cost is\n$10 less than Alameda's inquired what San Mateo is doing\ndifferently.\nMr. Getherall responded some municipalities included debt service,\nothers did not.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated San Mateo is operating under the\nsame constraints as far as salaries, etc; he has a hard time\nunderstanding how San Leandro produces rounds at $6.40.\nMr. Getherall stated $6.40 is the cost to San Leandro; maintenance\nexpenses accrue to the lessee.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated that there is money to be had so\nbreaking even should be possible; management affects the bottom\nline.\nMr. Singer stated some municipal golf courses lease or have some\ntype of management contract in place; private vendors bring in\nmanagement expertise.\nCouncilmember Matarrese inquired whether some management agreements\ndo not have a fixed fee but are performance based where gain is\nshared if rounds go up, and pain is shared if rounds go down, to\nwhich Mr. Singer responded in the affirmative.\nJane Sullwold, Golf Commission Chair, gave a brief presentation.\nMayor Johnson inquired whether consideration was given to moving\nthe Par 3 to the 4th nine-hole course.\nMs. Sullwold responded possibly; stated another idea would be to\nincrease fees and have the increase be dedicated to capital\nimprovements.\nCouncilmember Matarrese inquired whether Council would be getting\nan official recommendation from the Golf Commission.\nMayor Johnson requested that Ms. Sullwold go through the\nrecommendations.\nMs. Sullwold stated recommendations were to: 1) use half of the\nRegular Meeting\n6\nAlameda City Council\nJanuary 2, 2008", "path": "CityCouncil/2008-01-02.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2008-01-02", "page": 7, "text": "current Enterprise Fund for the banquet facility and driving range\nimprovements; 2) explore leasing out five to six acres behind the\nsouth course; 3) consider closing and leasing out the Mif Albright\nland; 4) advertise; 5) mothball nine holes of the Jack Clark Course\nand run the Course as a twenty-seven hole facility; and 6) have the\nCity stop taking Payment in Lieu of Taxes (PILOT), Return on\nInvestment (ROI), and surcharges.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated tough decisions need to be made; the\nMif Albright recommendation would be helpful.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated the banquet facility, driving range\npriorities, and cost savings that could be derived from alternative\nmethods were discussed.\nMs. Sullwold stated the Golf Commission feels that the banquet\nfacility and driving range were potential revenue generating\nimprovements.\nCouncilmember Gilmore thanked the Golf Commission for creative,\nout-of-the-box thinking; inquired whether the Golf Commission's\nrecommends continuing on a parallel course; stated Council could\ndecide to issue an RFP and also explore other options.\nMs. Sullwold responded exactly; stated recommendations may not be\nfeasible after hard cost estimates are obtained.\nMayor Johnson inquired what the Golf Commission thought of NGF's\npriority to put money into the Golf Course first.\nMs. Sullwold responded most of NGF's scenarios assume the banquet\nfacility first; stated other recommendations follow.\nOpponents (Not in favor of the staff recommendation) : George\nHumphreys, Alameda; Joe Williams, Alameda; Alan Elnick, Alameda\nCity Employees Association; James D. Leach, Global Perspectives;\nDon Peterson, Alameda; Connie Wendling, Alameda; Norma Arnerich,\nAlameda Ron Salsig, Alameda; Former Councilmember \"Lil\" Arnerich,\nAlameda; and Dan Gonzalez, Alameda.\nMayor Johnson stated the Golf Course needs to be run like a\nbusiness businesses advertise; there is a lot of room for\nimprovement in managing the Golf Course.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated a decision should not be made\ntonight ; he does not like the idea of leasing out the operation\ncompletely; the difference between what an outside company can make\nRegular Meeting\n7\nAlameda City Council\nJanuary 2, 2008", "path": "CityCouncil/2008-01-02.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2008-01-02", "page": 8, "text": "and what the City can make is made on the backs of the benefits\nprovided to employees; he reviewed labor cost increases versus\nraises given to each bargaining unit; benefits are the issue;\nsomeone will not have health insurance without benefits he would\nlike to see a breakdown to illustrate hard facts; San Mateo can\nproduce a round for $28; the issue should be studied; everyone\nagrees that City facilities suffer from deferred maintenance and\nthat [deferred maintenance] was how the City was able to transfer\nthe PILOT and ROI to the City's General Fund; the Golf Commission\ndid a great job in pulling together top priorities; a Master Plan\nis needed before moving forward with anything.\nCouncilmember Gilmore concurred with Councilmember Matarrese;\nstated it is important to follow up and explore the Golf\nCommission's ideas regardless of an RFP; money should be allocated\nfor a Master Plan; the golfing public needs to have a better\nunderstanding of transfers from the Golf Fund to the General Fund;\nthe General Fund pays for services such as public safety,\nlibraries, and parks; currently, there is no money in the General\nFund to run the Golf Enterprise as a public service; a community\ndiscussion may be instructional to find out whether the community\nfeels that the ability to play golf Is important enough to be\nwilling to pay increased fees or more taxes; she is not advocating\nmore taxes but the matter should be discussed.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated that he was at the Mif Albright Course\non Christmas Eve; seeing fathers play with sons and daughters was\nrewarding; the Junior Golf Program is a model; there is no\nsubstitute for good management challenges are there; formulating\npriorities is rewarding; the banquet facility is all important.\nMayor Johnson inquired what percentage of golfers are full fee,\nnon-resident golfers, to which the Recreation and Park Director\nresponded that he did not know.\nMayor Johnson stated that a lot of non-resident golfers have been\nlost.\nThe Recreation and Park Director stated non-resident golfers have\ngone down from 21% to 15.5%.\nMayor Johnson stated full fee golfers are not going to pay to play\nunder current conditions; a balanced budget is needed while taking\ntime to review the issue; Council needs to direct staff to review\nthe budget; loosing $40,000 to $50,000 per month is eating away at\nthe reserve; the reserve was not set aside for operation but was\nset aside for capital improvements; the fund cannot continue to\nRegular Meeting\n8\nAlameda City Council\nJanuary 2, 2008", "path": "CityCouncil/2008-01-02.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2008-01-02", "page": 9, "text": "dwindle; the fund needs to be preserved to every extent possible.\nCouncilmember Gilmore inquired what would be the timeframe for an\nRFP, to which the Recreation and Park Director responded nine\nmonths to a year.\nCouncilmember Gilmore inquired whether Council would have\napproximately nine months to explore other options if a two-track\napproach was considered, to which the Recreation and Park Director\nresponded in the affirmative.\nCouncilmember Matarrese inquired how much an RFP would cost, to\nwhich the Recreation and Park Director responded approximately\n$15,000 to $20,000 according to the NGF .\nCouncilmember Gilmore inquired how much a Master Plan would cost.\nThe Recreation and Park Director responded a Master Plan was\ninvestigated for the Recreation and Park Department four years ago;\nstated the cost was approximately $50,000 to $100,000.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated an RFP would be a learning process and\nwould help set priorities inquired when the PILOT was put into\nplace, to which the Recreation and Park Director responded\napproximately three years ago.\nCouncilmember deHaan inquired when the ROI was put into place, to\nwhich the City Manager responded the ROI was implemented in 2004\nand was reduced during the budget process.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated additional burdens were placed on the\nPILOT and ROI within the last couple of years in order to balance\nsome budget shortfalls within the General Fund.\nThe City Manager clarified that the PILOT has been in place since\n1993.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated that the issue should be brought back\ninto proper context i cost allocation is a percentage of operation\nand support; an expert would be needed to oversee a contract if the\nGolf Course was leased.\nMayor Johnson stated Golf Course administrative expenses have\nincreased substantially over the last ten years because of added\npositions the matter needs to be reviewed; a bloated bureaucracy\nis being funded at the Golf Course.\nRegular Meeting\n9\nAlameda City Council\nJanuary 2, 2008", "path": "CityCouncil/2008-01-02.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2008-01-02", "page": 10, "text": "Vice Mayor Tam stated that she is hearing that a City managed\nalternative is worth pursuing to fruition; the Golf Commission has\nsuggested renovating the back of the Clubhouse in lieu of building\na new, clubhouse; making driving range improvements advertising ;\nlooking at leasing five to six acres of the south course for\nrevenues; and potentially leasing ten to twelve acres of the Mif\nAlbright Course; it would be very helpful to get the NGF's help in\ncoming up with hard numbers for said suggestions.\nThe Recreation and Park Director stated staff could work with the\nNGF to attach a value to the options; a Master Plan would take\napproximately nine months by the time community outreach was done.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated nine months seems excessive; a lot\nof work has been done already a plan is essential even if the\noperation is leased out entirely; otherwise, a blank slate would be\ngiven to proposersi developing a Master Plan and attaching values\nto all ideas for reducing costs per round need to be done as\nquickly as possible; he would like to include a breakdown of labor\ncosts and true costs of a lease operation; the RFP would address\noperating the Golf Course in the current configuration.\nThe Recreation and Park Director stated the RFP would address\noperating the Golf Course and completing desired capital\nimprovements.\nMr. Getherall stated the City could solicit alternatives from\npotential operators.\nCouncilmember Gilmore stated that she does not like the idea of\nhaving a potential operator tell the City want the City wants; a\nMaster Plan should be provided to potential operators indicating\nwhat the City wants.\nCouncilmember Gilmore moved approval of allocating money for staff\nto start on a Master Plan, requesting the NGF to help the Golf\nCommission explore options discussed and potentially starting the\nRFP process that would provide enough wiggle language so that\nbidders understand that the City would have a Master Plan upon\nwhich to build.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated that he seconds the first part of\nthe motion regarding allocating money to put a Master Plan together\nand getting the value assignment for all suggested ideas for\nimplementation the RFP process should be a separate motion.\nCouncilmember Gilmore agreed to address the RFP later; stated\nRegular Meeting\n10\nAlameda City Council\nJanuary 2, 2008", "path": "CityCouncil/2008-01-02.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2008-01-02", "page": 11, "text": "options should be explored and dollar values established; she is\nnot sure whether ideas should be implemented before a report is\nreceived.\nCouncilmember Gilmore amended the motion to move approval of\nallocating money to start a Master Plan for the Golf Course as soon\nas possible and exploring the Golf Commission options and any other\nideas, with the assistance of the NGF .\nCouncilmember Matarrese seconded the motion.\nUnder discussion, Mayor Johnson stated that she would like to\ninclude looking at the issue of tightening up the budget she does\nnot want to put everything on hold for a year and deplete the\nreserve fund every month because of the unwillingness to review\nwhat needs to be done in the interim; she would like to direct\nstaff to look at staffing, particularly administrative to see\nwhether cuts can be made to help balance the budget so that the\nreserve fund is not depleted on a month-by-month basis.\nCouncilmember Matarrese amended the motion to include directing\nstaff to look at balancing the budget, particularly the\nadministrative area.\nCouncilmember deHaan concurred with Mayor Johnson; stated cost\nsavings is a concerning factor. inquired whether a contractor would\nbe able to service a debt such as the banquet facility; further\ninquired whether a contractor would encumber any City property.\nMr. Getherall responded that the banquet facility would be\nencumbered by the contractor\nMr. Singer responded a contractor would not be able to encumber\nagainst any City property.\nVice Mayor Tam inquired what a private lessee would bring in terms\nof resources that the City could not.\nMr. Singer responded capital stated operation funds have been\ndepleted.\nVice Mayor Tam stated a private vendor would try to recoup the\ncapital through management.\nCouncilmember Gilmore inquired how long it would take a contractor\nto recoup said costs, to which Mr. Singer responded ten years and\nperhaps longer.\nRegular Meeting\n11\nAlameda City Council\nJanuary 2, 2008", "path": "CityCouncil/2008-01-02.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2008-01-02", "page": 12, "text": "Mayor Johnson stated another arrangement would be a public/private\npartnership.\nMr. Singer stated a hybrid arrangement would be possible but would\nrequire the City to come up with a portion of the capital.\nCouncilmember deHaan inquired when the Master Plan would need to be\ndone.\nCouncilmember Gilmore responded nine months to a year; staff needs\nto initiate tasks as soon as humanly possible.\nMayor Johnson stated a balance budget is needed as soon as\npossible.\nCouncilmember Gilmore stated that she understands that the Golf\nFund would have a small profit without the ROI and surcharge; the\nconsultant's projections show that a dip into the reserves would be\nnecessary if operations continued as is even without the ROI and\nsurcharge.\nVice Mayor Tam stated the concern is allocating funding into a\ndepleting fund; a fund is being depleted right now to off set\noperating losses at the Golf Course and would be used to pay for a\nMaster Plan.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated that an advertising plan needs to be\nreviewed.\nMayor Johnson stated $70,000 or $80,000 was allocated when the\nbudget came to Council in June; allocations have increased to\napproximately $200,000; measures need to taken now.\nThe City Manager stated that the motion is three fold: 1) identify\nefforts needed to balance the current year budget through\noperational efficiencies; 2) work with staff to identify a Master\nPlan process and bring back the costs and process; and 3) review\nthe Golf Commission list to identify the feasibility and costs\nsavings.\nMayor Johnson inquired how much of the reserve fund was approved\nfor operational shortfalls, whether a cap was set for last fiscal\nyear, and whether a cap has been set now.\nThe City Manager responded a cap has not been set but is something\nthat has been identified in terms of a monthly report.\nRegular Meeting\n12\nAlameda City Council\nJanuary 2, 2008", "path": "CityCouncil/2008-01-02.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2008-01-02", "page": 13, "text": "Mayor Johnson stated it is important to be aware of how much money\nis spent every month.\nThe City Manager stated expenditures are on track; revenue is down;\nthere have been 8,000 fewer rounds than last year; the Golf Manager\nposition has not been filled.\nMayor Johnson stated that the Recreation and Park Director is doing\na great job.\nOn the call for the question, the motion carried by unanimous voice\nvote - 5.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated the Recreation and Park Director spends\npart time at the Golf Course; the intensity of management oversight\nhas to be ongoing; he leaves the possibility of a part-time Golf\nComplex Manager up to the City Manager Recreation and Park\nDepartment land has certain leasing restrictions; the legal aspect\nneeds to be reviewed.\nCouncilmember Gilmore stated that she would like to be prepared for\nany eventuality; she hopes that the City can continue to operate\nthe Golf Course in a more prudent manner.\nCouncilmember Gilmore moved approval of pushing forward with an RFP\nso that there is an option if it becomes apparent that there are\nthings the City cannot do; the RFP should be tied to the Master\nPlan; wiggle language should be added to the RFP so that the City\ncan tell the potential operator what the City would like done; the\nCity needs to have something to hold the potential operator's feet\nto the fire.\nCouncilmember deHaan inquired whether the RFP could be deferred to\na month or SO.\nCouncilmember Gilmore inquired what type of information would be\nprovided in a month from now that is not available now.\nCouncilmember deHaan responded Council would have quite a bit more\ninformation; strong facts would be coming from the Golf Commission.\nMayor Johnson stated that she thinks that the Golf Commission\nviewed the matter in a two prong process: 1) looking what the City\ncan do and 2) moving forward with an RFP; the RFP should have\nflexibility; concurred with Councilmember Gilmore regarding more\ninformation not being available in a month.\nRegular Meeting\n13\nAlameda City Council\nJanuary 2, 2008", "path": "CityCouncil/2008-01-02.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2008-01-02", "page": 14, "text": "Counci lmember deHaan stated the parameters of the RFP have changed.\nMr. Singer stated an open ended RFP is an option which would allow\npotential vendors to propose what should be done.\nMayor Johnson inquired whether preferences could be included in the\nRFP .\nMr. Singer responded in the affirmative; stated all four items\ncould be managed as one project simultaneously over the next three\nor four months.\nMayor Johnson stated that she would not like to go through an RFP\nprocess and have all responses be for long-term leases if that is\nnot what the City intends to do.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated that he does not think the City\nshould be in the business of leasing out the Golf Course entirely;\nhe supports an RFP that solicits various portions he cannot\nbelieve that someone holding the Master Lease would lay $10 million\non the table, make a profit, pay people decently, and be\nsuccessful.\nMayor Johnson stated she would like the RFP to include the\npossibility of a hybrid public/private partnership idea; questioned\nwhy the City should put out all the money to build a banquet\nfacility and whether the caterer could provide funding.\nCouncilmember Gilmore stated the consultant has been given a lot of\nideas regarding the RFP; the consultant should go forward with the\nMaster Plan and RFP and come back to Council with some language for\nCouncil review; Council's goal is to improve the Golf Course asset\nand play, and hopefully attract full fee, outsider golfers.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated a marketing plan is needed.\nMayor Johnson inquired whether a marketing plan could be part of\nthe Master Plan, to which Councilmember deHaan responded in the\naffirmative.\nCouncilmember Matarrese moved approval of directing the City\nManager to oversee the preparation of an RFP for Council review,\nwhich would include a variety of options with the stated preference\nnot to lease out the entire facility.\nThe City Manager stated the action is to prepare an RFP with a\nRegular Meeting\n14\nAlameda City Council\nJanuary 2, 2008", "path": "CityCouncil/2008-01-02.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2008-01-02", "page": 15, "text": "variety of options.\nMayor Johnson stated the RFP should indicate that Council's\npreference is not to lease out the entire facility.\nThe City Manager stated the RFP would include a facility Master\nPlan; staff would get back to Council regarding scope, cost, and\ntiming.\nCouncilmember deHaan inquired whether not wanting to lease out the\nwhole operation would cause problems with candidates.\nMr. Singer responded the issue is a big unknown; stated the NGF\ncould work with the City to craft what Council wants.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated contracting out the management portion\nwas reviewed and did not pencil out; inquired why the other portion\nwould pencil out.\nThe City Manager stated that the other portion did not pencil out\non a short-term - basis.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated long-term management was never\nexplored.\nMr. Singer stated a lot would be learned from an RFP .\nMs. Sullwold inquired whether the motion included having the NGF\nhelp cost out some of the Golf Commission's recommendations, to\nwhich Councilmember Gilmore responded in the affirmative.\nCouncilmember Gilmore seconded the motion, which carried by\nunanimous voice vote - 5.\nCouncilmember Gilmore thanked the Golf Commission and members of\nthe golfing public for coming tonight i encouraged everyone to play\nmore rounds of golf.\nORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA\n(08-013) - Ricardo Lopez and Diana Wong discussed the Homeowner and\nBank Protection Act.\nCOUNCIL REFERRALS\nNone.\nRegular Meeting\n15\nAlameda City Council\nJanuary 2, 2008", "path": "CityCouncil/2008-01-02.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2008-01-02", "page": 16, "text": "COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS\n(08-014) - Consideration of Mayor's nominations for appointment to\nthe Youth Commission.\nMayor Johnson nominated Lamant Carter, Vincent Margado and Bhaani\nSingh.\n(08-015 ) Councilmember deHaan thanked Public Works for removing\ntires from the San Leandro Bay\nADJOURNMENT\nThere being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the\nRegular Meeting at 11:11 p.m.\nRespectfully submitted,\nLara Weisiger\nCity Clerk\nThe agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown\nAct.\nRegular Meeting\n16\nAlameda City Council\nJanuary 2, 2008", "path": "CityCouncil/2008-01-02.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2008-01-02", "page": 17, "text": "MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL JOINT CITY COUNCIL AND\nALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (ARRA) MEETING\nWEDNESDAY- - -JANUARY 2, 2008- -6:00 P.M.\nMayor/Chair Johnson convened the Special Meeting at 6:15 p.m.\nROLL CALL :\nPresent : Councilmembers/Board Members deHaan,\nGilmore, Matarrese, Tam and Mayor/Chair\nJohnson - 5.\nAbsent :\nNone.\nThe Special Meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider :\n(08-001) Conference with Labor Negotiators (954957.6) ; Agency\nNegotiators: Marie Gilmore and Frank Matarrese; Employee: City\nAttorney.\n(ARRA) Conference with Real Property Negotiators (54956.8) ;\nProperty: Alameda Naval Air Station; Negotiating parties:\nARRA\nand Navy; Under negotiations Price and terms.\nFollowing the Closed Session, the Special Meeting was reconvened\nand Mayor/Chair Johnson announced that regarding Labor Council met\nwith the negotiators and provided direction; no action was taken;\nregarding Real Property, the Board met with negotiators and\nprovided instruction; no action was taken.\nAdjournment\nThere being no further business, Mayor/Chair Johnson adjourned the\nSpecial Meeting at 7:18 p.m.\nRespectfully submitted,\nLara Weisiger\nCity Clerk\nThe agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown\nAct.\nSpecial Joint Meeting\nAlameda City Council and Alameda\nReuse and Redevelopment Authority\nJanuary 2, 2008", "path": "CityCouncil/2008-01-02.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2008-01-02", "page": 18, "text": "MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION MEETING\nWEDNESDAY - -JANUARY 2, 2008- - -7:27 P.M.\nChair Johnson convened the Special Meeting at 7:32 p.m.\nROLL CALL -\nPresent : Commissioners deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese,\nTam, and Chair Johnson - 5.\nAbsent :\nNone.\nCONSENT CALENDAR\nCommissioner Matarrese moved approval of the Consent Calendar.\nCommissioner deHaan 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(*08-01) - Minutes of the Special Joint City Council, Alameda Reuse\nand Redevelopment Authority Meeting of December 4, 2007, and the\nSpecial Community Improvement Commission Meeting of December 18,\n2007. Approved.\n(*08-02) - Recommendation to approve the amended Contract with\nArchitectural Resources Group, Inc. by increasing the Contract\namount by $23, 840 to provide additional Construction Administration\nServices for the restoration and rehabilitation of the Historic\nAlameda Theater. Accepted.\nAGENDA ITEMS\nNone\nADJOURNMENT\nThere being no further business, Chair Johnson adjourned the\nSpecial Meeting at 7:33 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\nJanuary 2, 2008", "path": "CityCouncil/2008-01-02.pdf"}