{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2009-02-17", "page": 1, "text": "MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING\nTUESDAY - -FEBRUARY 17, 2009- -7:30 P.M.\nMayor Johnson convened the Regular Meeting at 7:39 p.m.\nCouncilmember Matarrese led the Pledge of Allegiance.\nROLL CALL - Present : ouncilmembers deHaan, Matarrese, and\nMayor Johnson - 3.\nAbsent :\nCouncilmembers Gilmore and Tam - 2.\nAGENDA CHANGES\n(09-069) Mayor Johnson announced that the Public Hearing to\nconsider an appeal [paragraph no. 09-078] would be continued to the\nMarch 3, 2009 Council Meeting at the request of the Appellant.\nPROCLAMATIONS, SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY AND ANNOUNCEMENTS\n(09-070) Proclamation declaring February 17, 2009, as Alameda\nChamber Day.\nMayor Johnson read and presented the proclamation to Blake Brydon,\nChamber President.\nMr. Brydon thanked the Council for the proclamation; stated the\nCity has been a tremendous help to the Chamber thanked the\ncommunity for the support.\n(09-071) Proclamation declaring March 1 through April 11, 2009 as\nthe period for the second annual \"Across the Pages an Alameda\nCommunity Reads\" Program.\nMayor Johnson read and presented the proclamation to Annemarie\nMeyer, Supervising Librarian, Adult Services.\nMs. Meyer thanked the Council for the proclamation; outlined\nprograms available to the community; provided mystery books to\nCouncil.\nCONSENT CALENDAR\nCouncilmember Matarrese moved approval of the Consent Calendar.\nVice Mayor deHaan seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous\nvoice vote - 3. [Absent Councilmembers Gilmore and Tam - 2] [Items\nso enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk preceding the\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n1\nFebruary 17, 2009", "path": "CityCouncil/2009-02-17.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2009-02-17", "page": 2, "text": "paragraph number. ]\n( (*09-072) - Minutes of the Special and Regular City Council Meetings\nheld on February 3, 2009. Approved.\n(*09-073) - Ratified bills in the amount of $1,852,353.63.\n(*09-074) Recommendation to authorize the execution of a Lead-Based\nPaint Hazard Reduction Grant Agreement with Alameda County Lead\nPoisoning Prevention Program. Accepted.\n(*09-075) Resolution No. 14309, \"Authorizing the City Manager to\nSubmit an Amended Application for Measure B Paratransit Funding for\nFiscal Year 2008-2009 and to Execute All Necessary Documents to\nImplement the Project. Adopted.\n(*09-076) Resolution No. 14310, \"Approving Parcel Map 9757 (1531- -\n1533 Morton Street) Adopted.\nCITY MANAGER COMMUNICATIONS\n(09-077) - The Deputy City Manager gave an update on the State budget\nand federal stimulus package.\nCouncilmember Matarrese inquired whether the lagoon system would\nqualify for funding since it is part of the City's urban runoff\nsystem.\nThe Deputy City Manager responded that lagoon projects might\nqualify for loans; stated the Bay Farm Island Shoreline and Seawall\nProject is listed as one of the 103 Corp of Engineers eligible\nprojects.\nVice Mayor deHaan noted the Community Development Block Grant\n(CDBG) funding has some shortfalls.\nThe Deputy City Manager stated there is always a need for CDBG\nfunding.\nMayor Johnson inquired whether the State budget eliminated funding\nfor local transit agencies, to which the Deputy City Manager\nresponded in the affirmative.\nCouncilmember Matarrese inquired whether the Water Emergency\nTransit Authority (WETA) is included.\nThe Deputy City Manager responded that she did not know; stated\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n2\nFebruary 17, 2009", "path": "CityCouncil/2009-02-17.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2009-02-17", "page": 3, "text": "WETA has a variety of funding sources.\nCouncilmember Matarrese requested information on whether WETA funds\nare in jeopardy due to the State cutting all funding for local\ntransit agencies.\nMayor Johnson stated the [WETA] transition plan should be completed\nby July.\nThe Deputy City Manager stated the transition plan would be\ncompleted in July, but the transition would not happen until\nJanuary 2010.\nVice Mayor deHaan inquired whether any environmental super funding\nhas been identified.\nThe Assistant City Manager responded a special $300 million line\nitem did not survive; stated super funds are only for non-federal\nproperty.\nMayor Johnson thanked the Deputy City Manager for doing a good job\nin keeping Alameda ahead of the game.\nREGULAR AGENDA ITEMS\n( *09-078) Public Hearing to consider an appeal of the Historical\nAdvisory Board's denial of a request to remove 2413 Buena Vista\nAvenue from the Alameda Historical Building Study List and denial\nof a certificate of approval to allow demolition of the structure;\nand adoption of related resolution. Continued to March 3, 2009.\n(09-079) Public Hearing to consider Introduction of an Ordinance\nAmending the Alameda Municipal Code by Adding Article XX to Chapter\nXIII (Building and Housing) and Amending Subsection 30-7.12\n(Reduction in Parking Requirements for Existing Facilities) of\nSection 30-7 (Off-Street Parking and Loading Space Regulations) of\nChapter XXX (Development Regulations) By Adding Subsection 30-\n7. 12 (c) to Allow for Reduction in Parking Requirements for Seismic\nRetrofit. Introduced.\nThe Building Official gave a Power Point presentation.\nMayor Johnson inquired whether a notification timeframe has been\nestablished.\nThe Building Official responded the first notifications would go\nout late April or early May; stated notifications for larger\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n3\nFebruary 17, 2009", "path": "CityCouncil/2009-02-17.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2009-02-17", "page": 4, "text": "buildings would be first.\nMayor Johnson inquired how the appeal process would work.\nThe Building Official responded the initial appeal would need to be\nfiled with the Building Official within thirty days; stated the\nAppellant could appeal the Building Official's decision to the\nHousing and Building Code Hearing and Appeals Board within 30 days ;\na lot of appeals are not expected; soft story identification is an\nengineering issue.\nSpeakers: Sandi Garcia, Alameda; James D. Leach, Alameda Rob\nPlatt, Alameda Association of Realtors; Carl Searway; John Fox;\nSteve Edrington, Rental Housing Association of Northern Alameda\nCounty; Mark Irons, Alameda; Karl Beckmann, Beckmann Engineering\nand Construction; Dennis Cox, Alameda; Betsy Mathieson, Alameda.\nVice Mayor deHaan inquired how many soft-story buildings are under\nfive units.\nThe Building Official responded that he does not have the number\nstated there are more buildings under five units than large\nbuildings.\nVice Mayor deHaan inquired whether the 2003 Code was a major\nupdate.\nThe Building Official responded the 2003 Code addressed existing\nbuildings; stated the International Existing Building Code is\ndifferent than the normal Code; Chapter A4 specifically addresses\nretrofit of soft-story buildings; work done in 1998 could meet\nChapter A4 requirements.\nVice Mayor deHaan inquired whether an engineering report would be\nrequired for retrofitting prior to 2003, to which the Building\nOfficial responded an engineering report may or may not be needed.\nVice Mayor deHaan inquired whether other cities have adopted a\nsoft-story ordinance.\nThe Building Official responded Berkeley adopted a similar\nordinance; stated Fremont adopted a mandatory retrofit ordinance;\nSan Francisco is in the process of establishing an ordinance;\nOakland is conducting a survey; most cities are taking the matter\nseriously.\nVice Mayor deHaan inquired whether the proposed ordinance is\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n4\nFebruary 17, 2009", "path": "CityCouncil/2009-02-17.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2009-02-17", "page": 5, "text": "similar to other cities ordinances.\nThe Building Official responded the proposed ordinance is similar\nto Berkeley's ordinance but differs from Fremont's mandatory\nretrofit ordinance.\nVice Mayor deHaan noted someone might want to turn a boxed in first\nfloor into livable space.\nThe Building Official stated the issue is a concern.\nVice Mayor deHaan inquired how parking spaces could be retained.\nThe Building Official responded the Planning and Building Director\nwould be able to allow some exceptions to parking requirements ;\nstated loosing a space or two might work on larger property.\nVice Mayor deHaan stated some existing street parking problems are\na result of units built in the 1950's and 1960 s ; inquired whether\nfinancial aid has been reviewed.\nThe Building Official responded CDBG funding has been reviewed.\nCouncilmember Matarrese inquired how many units are included in all\nof the large soft-story buildings, to which the Building Official\nresponded 4,500 units.\nCouncilmember Matarrese inquired whether affordable housing funds\ncould be used for a loan program.\nThe Development Services Director responded units would need to be\nlow and very Low-income units and be deed restricted.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated 4,500 units represent approximately\n10,000 people who could end up homeless; that he is interested in\npursuing a loan program.\nMayor Johnson stated the City should not be involved in making\nloans; the City could work with a lender. i inquired whether the\nimplementation phase includes a priority for rental units over\nowner occupied units.\nThe Building Official responded the priority is the size of the\nbuildings.\nMayor Johnson stated preserving parking should be emphasized;\ninquired whether mandatory upgrades would be the next phase.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n5\nFebruary 17, 2009", "path": "CityCouncil/2009-02-17.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2009-02-17", "page": 6, "text": "The Building Official responded mandatory upgrades would not be\naddressed for approximately two years.\nMayor Johnson inquired how other cities handled phasing the\nengineering reports and implementing mandatory retrofitting.\nThe Building Official responded Berkeley's engineering reports have\nbeen in place for approximately eighteen months Fremont is five\nyears ahead of Berkeley and Alameda.\nCouncilmember Matarrese inquired whether a reimbursement and\nassistance program could be applied for similar to the unreinforced\nmasonry buildings.\nThe Building Official responded staff reviewed some of the fee\nadjustments; a bigger deduction could be offered early on as an\nincentive.\nMayor Johnson inquired whether anything should be done with the gas\nlines in the interim.\nThe Building Official responded the Building Code requires that a\nshut off valve be installed whenever work is done on a gas line ;\nstated the fix is fairly inexpensive.\nMayor Johnson inquired whether the shut off valve requirement\nshould be added to the proposed ordinance.\nThe Building Official responded that staff would look into the\nmatter.\nVice Mayor deHaan inquired whether a shut off valve is required\nwhen property is sold, to which the Building Official responded in\nthe affirmative.\nVice Mayor deHaan stated information needs to be available to the\npublic.\nCouncilmember Matarrese moved introduction of the ordinance.\nVice Mayor deHaan seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous\nvoice vote - 3. [Absent : Councilmembers Gilmore and Tam - 2. ]\n(09-080) Discussion of alternative uses for the Mif Albright Golf\nCourse and provide direction.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n6\nFebruary 17, 2009", "path": "CityCouncil/2009-02-17.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2009-02-17", "page": 7, "text": "The Interim Golf Manager gave a brief presentation.\nVice Mayor deHaan inquired whether the Mif Albright Course closed\nbecause the Course lacked $20,000 [in revenue] per year to sustain\noperation, to which the Interim Golf Manager responded the Course\nlacked closer to $50,000.\nVice Mayor deHaan inquired why reopening the Course is not one of\nthe alternatives.\nThe Interim Golf Manager responded direction was to close the\nCourse.\nMayor Johnson stated Council direction was to look at other\nrecreation uses while the Course is closed.\nSpeakers : James D. Leach, Alameda; Jane Sullwold, Alameda Golf\nCommission. Norma Arnerich, Alameda; Mel Grant, North Loop Business\nGroup spoke on behalf of Eva Hom, North Loop Business Group\nMichael Robles Wong, Community of Harbor Bay isle; Nick Villa,\nIslandia Homeowners Association; Elizabeth dos Remedios, Islandia\nHomeowners Association; and Leslie Robey, Islandia Homeowners\nAssociation. Additional speakers Randy Rentschler, Alameda Soccer\nClub; Nick Villa, Islandia Homeowners Association.\nFollowing Mr. Leach's comments, Mayor Johnson inquired whether the\nfence cost $40,000, to which the Interim Golf Manager responded the\ncost was $18,000.\nMayor Johnson requested the Interim Golf Manager to provide\ninformation on the Mif Albright Course making money.\nThe Interim Golf Manager stated a concerted effort was made to\nreduce rates and have special promotions to generate more revenue;\nrounds increased but revenue dropped because fees were cut the\ndiscrepancy between the cost of running the Course and revenue is\napproximately $50,000.\nVice Mayor deHaan stated water was and still is a concern.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated open space would require some water.\nFollowing Ms. Sullwold's comments, Councilmember Matarrese inquired\nwhether the Golf Commission made a recommendation.\nMs. Sullwold responded that the Golf Commission was not aware of\nthe staff recommendation.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n7\nFebruary 17, 2009", "path": "CityCouncil/2009-02-17.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2009-02-17", "page": 8, "text": "Mayor Johnson stated that the Golf and Recreation Commissions\nshould review the recommendation.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated a [Golf Commission] discussion would\nbe valuable; the twelve acres should be looked at objectively.\nMs. Sullwold stated that a study should be performed regarding the\nneed for additional softball and soccer fields.\nMayor Johnson stated the demand for softball and soccer field is\nhuge; another issue is the highest and best use for the property;\nthe Poppy Ridge Course should be reviewed; a nine-hole course could\nbe structured back into the golf complex.\nMs. Sullwold stated there have been rumors that Ton Cowan's goal\nfor the Mif Albright Course is really a new Harbor Bay Club in\nexchange for the property he owns behind Peet's Coffee.\nMayor Johnson stated a lot of rumors come out of the Golf Course.\nVice Mayor deHaan stated there was some concern about play on\nSunday [in the rain] ; requested that the matter be reviewed.\nMs. Sullwold stated that Kemper Sports is doing everything possible\nto maximize revenues; Kemper Sports wants a long-term contract.\nFollowing Ms. Arnerich's comments, Mayor Johnson stated there\nshould be a nine-hole course; Kemper Sports should consider the\nmatter, but options should not be limited; Monarch Bay's nine-hole\ncourse is much better.\nFollowing Mr. Grant's comments, Vice Mayor deHaan inquired who\nrepresents the homeowners.\nMichael Robles Wong responded that he is the President of the Board\nfor the Community of Harbor Bay Isle.\nVice Mayor deHaan inquired whether Mr. Wong is speaking on behalf\nof the Homeowners Association or just exploring the matter.\nMr. Wong responded that he is expressing an opinion and requesting\nCouncil to explore the issue; stated no vote has been taken.\nVice Mayor deHaan stated Alameda Point has a soccer complex used by\nPiedmont soccer; the field can be brought back for Alameda use at\nany point ; revenue generation is the reason for allowing Piedmont\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n8\nFebruary 17, 2009", "path": "CityCouncil/2009-02-17.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2009-02-17", "page": 9, "text": "to use the field; the Mif Albright Course has activity all day i\nyouth sports utilize fields after school and on weekends ; the\nCourse provides an activity for seniors.\nMayor Johnson suggested that the matter be brought back at the next\nmeeting to allow Councilmembers Gilmore and Tam to comment.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated that he wants some direction to be\ngiven; playing fields are in bad shape; the Woodstock field becomes\na pool because there is no drainage; the City is short on fields ;\nthe City needs to take every opportunity to get the highest and\nbest use; Council should give direction to get input from the\nRecreation and Golf Commissions and Kemper Sports; stated that he\nwants to ensure that the contractor is not squeezing every dollar\nat the expense of the Course.\nThe Interim Golf Manager stated Kemper Sports does not have any\nfinancial interest in the Course.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated Kemper Sports' interest is in\ngetting a long-term contract; rules need to be clear the\nRecreation and Golf Commissions and Kemper Sports need to provide\ninput on possible uses before the matter comes back to Council.\nMayor Johnson stated that she does not want to limit Kemper Sports\nto look at the Mif Albright Course as the only way to provide a\nnine hole course; the matter should come back at the next Council\nmeeting; Councilmember Gilmore raised the issue and should be\nallowed to comment on the matter.\nVice Mayor deHaan stated that he concurs with direction given;\ntonight Council was to have a Closed Session regarding the price\nand terms of Village VI and Mif Albright Course; the matter was\npulled; that he does not want to see the matter come back to\nCouncil until there has been dialogue; the Closed Session was\npremature.\nMayor Johnson stated that she would like to review include looking\nat the Village VI issue.\nVice Mayor deHaan stated that he received a phone call regarding a\nfootball field option; inquired whether a football field would be\nconsidered.\nThe Interim Golf Manager stated the all weather soccer field\npotentially could be used as a football field.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n9\nFebruary 17, 2009", "path": "CityCouncil/2009-02-17.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2009-02-17", "page": 10, "text": "Mayor Johnson requested configurations for the Village VI and Mif\nAlbright sites.\nThe City Manager summarized Council's direction: 1) obtaining\nadditional input and recommendations from the Recreation and Golf\nCommissions and Kemper Sports; 2) addressing the Village VI issue;\nand 3) placing the matter on the next agenda for Councilmembers\nGilmore and Tam to comment.\nMayor Johnson stated that she would like to review having two\ncomplete 18-hole courses or two 18-hole courses and a nine-hole\ncourse.\nVice Mayor deHaan stated the community needs to be engaged in the\ndiscussion of options.\nORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA\nNone.\nCOUNCIL REFERRALS\n(09-081 - ) Follow up discussion and direction on Internal Service\nFunds repayment plan.\nMayor Johnson stated that the Internal Service Funds were discussed\nat the Saturday Budget Meeting; that she wants to have further\ndiscussion on paying back the workers' compensation short fall.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated that he thought the City had a\nbalanced budget back in June; the budget was not balanced because\nthe General Fund and other funds contributing to the workers'\ncompensation fund did not pay enough into the budget and showed up\nas a deficit in the Internal Service Funds (ISF) ; the deficit was\npushed onto the next year the fund balance absorbs the debt; that\nhe does not know how much unencumbered cash the City has because\nthe workers' compensation debt encumbers the cash.\nVice Mayor deHaan stated the solution discussed on Saturday was to\npay the debt over the next three years.\nMayor Johnson stated Information Technology (IT) has needs. the\nCity Treasurer does not support the idea of moving money out of the\nvehicle reserve fund; money should only be moved out of the vehicle\nreserve fund to go to IT; the workers' compensation deficit should\nstart to be paid for this year.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n10\nFebruary 17, 2009", "path": "CityCouncil/2009-02-17.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2009-02-17", "page": 11, "text": "Vice Mayor deHaan stated setting the Vehicle Reserve Fund aside was\na healthy move; taking money out now is not a good now; a question\nwas raised Saturday regarding the spending history over the last\nfive years; retirement expenses are outstanding; discussions\ninvolved bonds against the debti direction was given to review\nother options.\nThe City Manager stated the Other Post Employment Benefits (OPEB)\nfinancing options would be shared with the Fiscal Sustainability\nCommittee.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated the issue needs to move rapidly; a\ndrop-dead date is needed if the Fiscal Sustainability Committee\nwants input; the original direction was that the OPEB issue would\nbe addressed this year.\nThe City Manager stated the Interim Finance Director is working on\nthe [bond] validation suit with the City Attorney's office.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated a specific date needs to be set for\ndiscussion; direction was given in June; time is slipping away.\nMayor Johnson stated Council could address the matter at the second\nmeeting in March.\nThe City Manager inquired whether Council is requesting that the\nmatter come back for action.\nMayor Johnson stated Council is requesting that the matter come\nback with a final plan.\nVice Mayor deHaan stated financing during this year is a concern;\nthe news was concerning to Council; adjustments need to be made\nthis year.\nMayor Johnson inquired whether the $2.1 million workers'\ncompensation expense includes this year.\nThe City Manager responded $2. 1 million is a projection through\nJune 2009.\nVice Mayor deHaan stated a report should be provided on what was\naccumulated this year.\nThe City Attorney stated the City has a $2.1 million loss reserve\nfund this year for medical payments; $961,000 has been spent, which\nis different from the deficit.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n11\nFebruary 17, 2009", "path": "CityCouncil/2009-02-17.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2009-02-17", "page": 12, "text": "Mayor Johnson inquired how costs are allocated.\nThe City Attorney responded departments are charged back for\nparticipating in the insurance pool; stated the amount is based on\nthe number of employees within each department.\nMayor Johnson inquired whether each department is charged back at\nthe end of the year.\nThe City Attorney responded the question is a Finance issue.\nMayor Johnson requested that the Interim Finance Director provide\nan explanation at the next meeting.\nThe City Manager stated the Interim Finance Director would also\nexplain what is contributing to the projected deficit.\nMayor Johnson inquired whether money is set aside for medical\nexpenses.\nThe City Attorney responded the $2.1 million loss reserve fund is\nreal money that has been set aside; stated the City processes\nmedical payments through the fund; the workers' compensation budget\nfor 2008-2009 was approximately $3. 1 million; the biggest piece is\nthe loss reserve fund; the annual cost of participation in the risk\npool is approximately $600,000 medical payments and settlements\nrun against the loss reserve fund, which is different from Labor\nCode 4850, another component of Police and Fire workers'\ncompensation costs; carried by the Police and Fire Departments; the\nCity is required by law to report the combination of Labor Code\n4850 pay and all medical payments.\nMayor Johnson requested that the Interim Finance Director explain\nthe appropriate way to handle allocating workers' compensation\ncharges to departments.\nVice Mayor deHaan stated per capita does not seem to work; inquired\nwhether AMP is included, to which the City Attorney responded in\nthe affirmative.\nCouncilmember Matarrese requested that the Interim Finance Director\nprovide information on the root cause of the workers' compensation\ndeficit and proposed preventative action.\nVice Mayor deHaan stated the Planning and Building Department has\nseen a reduction in fees because of the economy ; the issue could be\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n12\nFebruary 17, 2009", "path": "CityCouncil/2009-02-17.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2009-02-17", "page": 13, "text": "Vice Mayor deHaan stated he IT issue should be addressed also.\nMayor Johnson inquired whether direction was given to pay for the\nIT expense out of the Vehicle Replacement Fund.\nVice Mayor deHaan responded in the negative; stated the Vehicle\nReplacement Fund has been frozen; the IT expense would be an\nobligation this year he would like to know the scope of work for\nthe IT item; the need to update the system is a result of the\naudit.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated the Interim Finance Director would\nbring back the IT proposal.\nMayor Johnson stated direction should be clear not to pay for the\nIT expense until further information is provided.\nThe City Manager stated the expenditure has not occurred; staff is\nprojecting the expense; any plan would need to come to Council\nbefore resources are allocated; staff wanted to note that the\nbudget did not have money for the expense this year; the proposal\nwas to take the money from the Vehicle Replacement Fund.\nMayor Johnson inquired whether the plan is to address a way to\nbuild the IT fund.\nThe City Manager responded in the affirmative; stated the IT fund\nwas implemented over the last three years.\nMayor Johnson stated the [IT] system is broken; upgrades need to be\naddressed; mandatory contributions should be established.\nVice Mayor deHaan inquired whether Council could reduce the amount\nauthorized for contracts, to which the City Attorney responded\nCouncil would need to adopt an ordinance.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated that he would like to see more\nvisibility for contracts over $50,000.\nMayor Johnson stated the matter could be placed on the next Council\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n13\nFebruary 17, 2009", "path": "CityCouncil/2009-02-17.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2009-02-17", "page": 14, "text": "meeting.\nVice Mayor deHaan stated that he does not want to micromanage but\nwould like to expand the communication level.\n(09-082 - ) Discussion and direction on the 90-day working capital\nfund balance for operating reserves in Special Revenue Funds.\nMayor Johnson stated Council needs to be clear on direction given;\na financial policy should be established immediately.\nThe City Manager stated the Special Revenue Funds (SRF) could be\nbrought back for discussion; there was no discussion about which\nfunds are in compliance and which are not.\nMayor Johnson stated Council could give direction on a general\npolicy and bring the matter back for adoption at the next Council\nmeeting; direction should be given to maintain a 90-day working\ncapital.\nThe City Manager stated the matter could be brought back to\nidentify impacts.\nMayor Johnson stated adopting a policy now is important, not six\nmonths from now.\nThe City Manager stated some funds have restrictions; the issue\nwould be brought back.\nMayor Johnson stated AMP might need to review the matter first.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated information should come back to\nCouncil because AMP is part of the City; the same financial\nprinciples apply; having a specified working capital fund is\nuniversal and is a good, prudent practice regardless of the number\nof days.\nMayor Johnson stated that she wants AMP to have a policy.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated Council needs to decide what needs\nto be done if less permits are coming to the Planning and Building\nDepartment and the department is overstaffed; information needs to\nbe provided on whether the fund balance is being spent down, and,\nif so, for how long; numbers need to be provided.\nVice Mayor deHaan stated too often the focus is on the General Fund\nonly; the SRF need to be reviewed; Council needs to decide what to\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n14\nFebruary 17, 2009", "path": "CityCouncil/2009-02-17.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2009-02-17", "page": 15, "text": "do when funds start disappearing.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated the ISF absorbed a deficit that\nshould have been attributed to the General Fund; the real cash\ndeficit was buried; that he wants to ensure that there is a broad\napproach for the entire City budget including AMP, Housing\nAuthority, and Enterprise Funds and that root causes are determined\nwhen there is a problem.\nVice Mayor deHaan stated more background is needed; taking $2. 1\nfrom liquid reserves is a pretty good hit and cannot be taken\nlightly.\nMayor Johnson stated operational reviews are being done for public\nsafety; consideration should be given to performing operational\nreviews for the entire City.\nVice Mayor deHaan inquired when the public safety review would come\nto Council, to which the City Manager responded the beginning of\nApril.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated the operational review is relevant\nto the 90-day working capital fund balance for operating reserves\nin SRF; that he would like to receive numbers on the affect that\nthe economic downturn has had on the Planning and Building\nDepartment in order to fix any problems and apply standards for\nSRF.\nThe City Manager stated staff might not be able to provide\ninformation at the next Council meeting.\nCouncilmember Matarrese inquired whether staff knows how much money\nis coming in and going out; stated that he wants information on\nwhether enough money is being brought in to cover operation and\nwhether there is a draw down on the fund balance; that he wants the\nnumber now.\nVice Mayor deHaan stated the economy has changed drastically;\nwhether other operational activities are having a downturn needs to\nbe understood; the economic ramp up could take three years.\nMayor Johnson stated the City would be out of money in thirty\nmonths if everything stays status quo.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated property assessments have declined\nand the City potentially could have less revenue next year.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n15\nFebruary 17, 2009", "path": "CityCouncil/2009-02-17.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2009-02-17", "page": 16, "text": "Vice Mayor deHaan stated costs are going up and revenue is going\ndown.\nCOUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS\n(09-083) - Vice Mayor deHaan commended the Public Works Department on\nthe work done during recent storms ; suggested an analysis and\nassessment on gutter ponding throughout the City be done while it\nis raining.\n(09-084) Mayor Johnson stated the Fire Department responded to an\napartment toilet leak, turned off the water and later went back to\nvacuum up the water; the response was not an appropriate use of\npublic funds; requested staff to work with the ICMA representative\nto ensure that taxpayers' money is not being abused.\nADJOURNMENT\nThere being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the\nRegular Meeting at 10:33 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\n16\nFebruary 17, 2009", "path": "CityCouncil/2009-02-17.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2009-02-17", "page": 17, "text": "MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING\nTUESDAY - -FEBRUARY 17, 2009- -6:00 P.M.\nMayor Johnson convened the Special Meeting at 6:10 p.m.\nROLL CALL - Present : Councilmembers deHaan, Matarrese, and\nMayor Johnson - 3.\nAbsent :\nCouncilmembers Gilmore and Tam - 2.\nThe Special Meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider :\n(09-066) Public Employee Performance Evaluation; Title: City\nManager.\n(09-067) Conference with Legal Counsel - Anticipated Litigation;\nInitiation of litigation pursuant to subdivision (c) of Section\n54956.9; Number of cases: One.\n(09-068) Conference with Real Property Negotiators (54956.8)\n;\nProperty: 1855 N. Loop Road and 1 Clubhouse Memorial Drive ;\nNegotiating parties Village VI and Golf Course (Mif Albright) ;\nUnder negotiation: Price and terms.\nFollowing the Closed Session, the Special Meeting was reconvened\nand Mayor Johnson announced that regarding Performance Evaluation,\nCouncil met for periodic review of City Manager performance; no\naction was taken; regarding Anticipated Litigation, Council gave\ndirection to Legal Counsel regarding a matter of anticipated\nlitigation; and regarding Real Property, the matter will be\ncontinued.\nAdjournment\nThere being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the\nSpecial Meeting at 7:30 p.m.\nRespectfully submitted,\nLara Weisiger\nCity Clerk\nThe agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown\nAct.\nSpecial Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nFebruary 17, 2009", "path": "CityCouncil/2009-02-17.pdf"}