{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2010-07-06", "page": 1, "text": "MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING\nTUESDAY--JULY 6, 2010-7:00 - P.M.\nMayor Johnson convened the meeting at 8:06 p.m.\nROLL CALL -\nPresent:\nCouncilmembers deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese, Tam\nand Mayor Johnson - 5.\nAbsent:\nNone.\nAGENDA CHANGES\n(10-320) Mayor Johnson announced that the Public Hearing to Consider Approving\nTentative Parcel Map No. 9876 [paragraph no. 10-336 would be continued to July 20,\n2010.\nPROCLAMATIONS, SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY & ANNOUNCEMENTS\n(10-321) Presentation of Certificates of Service\nMayor Johnson presented certificates of service to Jeff Cambra, Housing and Building\nCode Hearings and Appeals Board; Karen Butter, Library Board; Andrew Cunningham,\nPlanning Board; Ann McCormick, Public Utilities Board; and Michael Krueger,\nTransportation Commission; and commended the following members not in attendance:\nRoberto Rocha, Civil Service Board; Mark lrons, Historical Advisory Board; Anne Cook,\nPlanning Board; and Robert McFarland, Transportation Commission.\nCONSENT CALENDAR\nMayor Johnson announced that the Recommendation to Accept the Quarterly Sales\nTax\nReport [paragraph no. 10-324 and the Ordinance Approving Amendment to Master\nPlan [paragraph no. 10-331\nwere removed from the Consent Calendar for discussion.\nCouncilmember Tam moved approval of the remainder of the Consent Calendar.\nCouncilmember Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice\nvote - 5. [Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk preceding the\nparagraph number.]\n(*10-322) Minutes of the Regular City Council Meeting Held on June 15, 2010.\nApproved.\n(*10-323) Ratified bills in the amount of $4,447,643.92.\n(10-324) Recommendation to Accept the Quarterly Sales Tax Report for the Period\nEnding December 31, 2009.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n1\nJuly 6, 2010", "path": "CityCouncil/2010-07-06.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2010-07-06", "page": 2, "text": "Councilmember Tam stated having the City's sales tax update included in the Chamber\nof Commerce and Park Street and Webster Street Business Districts' newsletter would\nbe good.\nThe Interim City Manager stated Hinderliter de Llamas and Associates, the new\nconsultant, provides the newsletter to the City for free.\nCouncilmember Tam inquired why the Marina Village Business Park has the highest\ndecline in sales transactions; stated a lot of the 25 top sales tax contributors are not at\nMarina Village, with the exception of Lucky Market.\nThe Deputy City Manager - Administrative Services responded that she would get back\nto Council on the matter.\nCouncilmember Tam requested clarification of the 10% decrease [in revenue] being due\nto a one-time allocation adjustments by the Board of Equalization.\nThe Interim City Manager stated cities initiate appeals to the Board of Equalization\nbased upon sales tax possibly being attributed to another jurisdiction; every quarter has\na self-correcting method; the 10% decrease is not reflective of the Livermore issue.\nIn response to Councilmember Tam's inquiry regarding the 10% decrease; the Interim\nCity Manager stated the allocation is a one-time allocation adjustment based upon the\nevaluation for the quarter.\nCouncilmember Tam moved approval of the staff recommendation.\nCouncilmember Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice\nvote - 5.\n(*10-325) Recommendation to Accept the Work of J.J.R. Construction, Inc. for the\nRepair of Portland Cement Concrete Sidewalk, Curb, Gutter, Driveway, and Minor\nStreet Patching, Fiscal Year 2009/2010, Phase 10, No. P.W. 06-09-15. Accepted.\n(*10-326) Recommendation to Accept the Work of Schaaf & Wheeler Consulting Civil\nEngineers for the Assessment of the City of Alameda Sewer Pump Stations, No. P.W.\n06-08-16. Accepted.\n(*10-327) Recommendation to Adopt Plans and Specifications and Authorize Call for\nBids for the Cyclic Sewer Replacement Project, Phase 8, No. P.W. 01-10-03. (Public\nWorks)\n(*10-328) Resolution No. 14463, \"Requesting and Authorizing the County of Alameda to\nLevy a Tax on All Real and Personal Property in the City of Alameda as a Voter\nApproved Levy for the General Obligation Bonds Issued Pursuant to a General Election\nHeld on November 7, 2000.\" Adopted.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n2\nJuly 6, 2010", "path": "CityCouncil/2010-07-06.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2010-07-06", "page": 3, "text": "(*10-329) Resolution No. 14464, \"Designating a City Consultant as the Authorized\nRepresentative to Examine Certain Sales and Use Tax Records.\" Adopted.\n(*10-330) Resolution No. 14465, \"Calling for a General Municipal Election to be\nConsolidated with the Statewide General Election to be Held in the City of Alameda on\nTuesday, November 2, 2010, and Requesting the Alameda County Board of\nSupervisors to Permit the Registrar of Voters to Render Specified Services to the City\nRelating to the Conduct of Said Election.\" Adopted.\n(10-331) Ordinance No. 3018, \"Approving Amendment to Master Plan MP05-01 for\nGrand Marina Village to Reduce the Number of Required Affordable Housing Units.\"\nFinally passed.\nCouncilmember Tam stated at the June 15, 2010 meeting, she stated that having a pro\nforma would be helpful to understand how Warmington Homes' bottom line would be\naffected with four less affordable units.\nThe Planning Services Manager stated that he is sorry that said information has not\nbeen included in tonight's staff report; the Warmington Homes' pro forma has not been\nreviewed; usually, staff does not review private project pro formas; Warmington Homes'\nfinancing is based upon 15% affordable housing; Warmington Homes has financing for\nthe first phase; without the change to the Master Plan, Warmington Homes would not be\nable to continue without finding financing for remainder of the project.\nCouncilmember Tam stated that she thought the project was a few years in the making;\nWarmington Homes would have had to secure financing before 2009.\nThe Planning Services Manager stated Warmington Homes obtained financing under\nthe assumption that the 25% to 15% citywide rollback would apply to the project.\nCouncilmember Tam inquired whether Warmington Homes obtained financing with the\nexpectation that Council would allow a rollback to 15%.\nThe Planning Services Manager responded Warmington Homes thought that the project\nwould automatically be changed with the 15% rollback; Council changed the affordable\nhousing requirement from 25% to 15% Citywide before construction started; the City\npreviously adopted a Master Plan which stated that the Grand Marina Project would\nhave 25% affordable housing units.\nCouncilmember Gilmore stated Council did not change the affordable housing\nrequirement until December 2009; inquired when Warmington Homes applied for\nfinancing.\nMike McClellan, Warmington Homes, responded Warmington Homes delayed the\nproject until last year; stated Warmington Homes knew that Grand Marina was the only\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n3\nJuly 6, 2010", "path": "CityCouncil/2010-07-06.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2010-07-06", "page": 4, "text": "project not subsidized with 25% affordable housing; Warmington Homes received\nfinancing based upon ordinance approval; financing is based on six units instead of ten;\nsix low-cost affordable housing units would be provided to the City in very difficult times;\ntwo parks would be built in addition to other public improvements.\nCouncilmember Gilmore inquired whether Warmington Homes received financing after\nCouncil changed the ordinance; further inquired whether financing was pursued based\non what turned out to be the mistaken impression that Warmington Homes would be\nentitled to the reduction.\nMr. McClellan responded in the affirmative; stated the project has lasted for six years;\nreferenced financing relates to build out.\nCouncilmember Tam stated page 6 of the June 16, 2010 minutes notes that Mr.\nLeaman, Warmington Residential, stated Warmington Homes' financial status would be\nsignificantly impacted if Council does not grant the reduction and that Warmington\nHomes does not have out of pocket cash for the project; page 3 of the staff report states\nthat \"further, Warmington Residential and the Community Improvement Commission are\nnegotiating an Exclusive Negotiation Agreement (ENA) for the disposition and\nredevelopment of the City's Corporation Yard and Animal Shelter as new housing,\nwhich will also include new inclusionary units\"; requested that the City Attorney clarify\nwhen Council would need to authorize negotiations for an ENA with Warmington Homes\nfor sale of property.\nThe City Attorney stated Council would need to authorize entering into an ENA.\nCouncilmember Tam inquired whether Council would not need to authorize\nnegotiations; stated the staff report notes that the City is already negotiating an\nagreement; that she does not recall authorizing negotiations.\nThe City Attorney responded the matter couldn't be discussed [in open session]; stated\nclosed session items are not discussed in open session.\nThe Interim City Manager stated the developer approached staff after Council's decision\nregarding the reduction [10 15%] and 2008 black October and indicated that\nWarmington Homes could go forward and immediately start construction if four units\ncould be taken out; picking up the four units and jump starting the economy would not\nbe difficult given the state of the market, the fact that construction jobs and activity is\nneeded, and the City's focus on new projects coming down the pike with respect to\ninclusionary, low, and affordable housing; Council would have to approve an ENA and\nthen have Warmington Homes consider looking at expanding the project and possibly\npurchasing public property on the Marina [Corporation Yard/Animal Shelter] site; one\nquestion raised at the June 15, 2010 meeting was whether the process would be\ndefeated if four units were taken out; the City would discuss other projects in the next\nthirty days that would mitigate the four units and provide a larger vision for affordable\nunits in the City.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n4\nJuly 6, 2010", "path": "CityCouncil/2010-07-06.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2010-07-06", "page": 5, "text": "Vice Mayor deHaan stated that Councilmember Tam has a valid concern; Council has\nnot given direction to initiate an ENA.\nThe Interim City Manager stated that Council has not approved an ENA, but has\ndiscussed the terms of an ENA.\nCouncilmember Tam inquired whether procedurally; a closed session announcement\nwould have reflected whether Council gave direction to enter into negotiations toward\nan ENA with Warmington Homes to sell the Corporate Yard and Animal Shelter\nproperty.\nThe City Attorney responded an appropriate reading out of a closed session item would\nhave happened and did happen; stated any action would have been reflected; the\nannouncement could have been that Council or CIC provided negotiating direction to\nthe Interim City Manager; specific negotiating direction is not spelled out.\nCouncilmember Tam requested that the City Clerk read the reporting out\nannouncement.\nCouncilmember Gilmore stated the staff report states that a reduction in affordable units\nis critical and is a major financial consideration for Warmington Homes; Warmington\nHomes may enter into negotiations with the City through another deal in the near future;\nthat she has trouble understanding how Warmington Homes would be financially\nstrapped on the Grand Marina project, yet thinks another project could be done.\nMr. McClellan stated Warmington Homes is doing deals; economic times are still bad;\nWarmington Homes believes that the right marketing level has been found; houses can\nbe produced if the market remains the same; a legitimate land value could be paid\nbased on the values.\nThe Interim City Manager stated information in the report regarding a potential second\nphase or another project is not dependent upon tonight's decision; inquired whether\nWarmington Homes could get financing today with ten affordable units, to which Mr.\nMcClellan responded in the negative.\nCouncilmember Tam stated the staff report states that a future deal would be an\nopportunity for the City to promote inclusionary housing in accordance with policy,\nalthough the reduction would be made at this time; that she does not believe that the\ndeals are completely separate; Warmington Homes does not have out of pocket cash to\nbuild the four units, yet there is some expectation that out of pocket cash would be\navailable to purchase land and affordable housing at the potential new site.\nMr. McClellan stated Warmington Home projects are financed on a project-by-project\nbasis; Warmington Homes is prepared to go forward with the next phase and build out\nthe project; Warmington Homes is looking for other projects that would be successful for\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n5\nJuly 6, 2010", "path": "CityCouncil/2010-07-06.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2010-07-06", "page": 6, "text": "everyone.\nVice Mayor deHaan stated opportunities were discussed at the Saturday budget\nworkshop.\nThe Interim City Manager stated asset management was discussed; tonight's staff\nreport is discussing the Corporation Yard and Animal Shelter; no action would be taken\non the matter.\nVice Mayor deHaan moved final passage of the ordinance noting that there might have\nbeen some confusion.\nCouncilmember Matarrese seconded the motion.\nUnder discussion, Councilmember Matarrese stated the ordinance is consistent with\ndirection given for reducing the percentage of affordable housing; inquired whether the\nCity would receive in lieu fees.\nThe Interim City Manager responded only if the project does not get built.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated the City would be getting public improvements in a\nsorely needed area; the City would have zero affordable housing units in the project if\nthe ordinance does not pass; six affordable units would be built [if the ordinance is\nadopted].\nCouncilmember Gilmore requested that the motion be amended to include that a report\nbe provided on the number of jobs created by the project; stated the construction\nindustry is down 20%.\nVice Mayor deHaan and Councilmember Matarrese agreed to amend the motion.\nThe Interim City Manager stated job creation should be included in staff reports; one\nmajor economic development impact would be job creation.\nMayor Johnson stated jobs would be created without borrowing or stimulus money.\nOn the call for the question, the motion carried by the following voice vote: Ayes:\nCouncilmembers deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese and Mayor Johnson - 5. Abstentions:\nCouncilmember Tam - 1.\nREGULAR AGENDA ITEMS\n(10-332) Resolution No. 14466, \"Appointing Jose Villaflor as a Member of the Civil\nService Board. Adopted;\n(10-332 A) Resolution No. 14467, \"Appointing Joy Pratt as a Member of the Housing\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n6\nJuly 6, 2010", "path": "CityCouncil/2010-07-06.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2010-07-06", "page": 7, "text": "Commission.\" Adopted;\n(10-332 B) Resolution No. 14468, \"Appointing Catherine Atkin as a Member of the\nLibrary Board.' Adopted;\n(10-332 C) Resolution No. 14469, \"Appointing Eric Ibsen as a Member of the Planning\nBoard.\" Adopted; and\n(10-332 D) Resolution No. 14470, \"Appointing Philip Tribuzio as a Member of the\nTransportation Commission.\" Adopted.\nCouncilmember Matarrese moved adoption of the resolutions.\nCouncilmember Tam seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.\nThe City Clerk administered the Oath of Office and presented certificates of\nappointment to Jose Villaflor, Joy Pratt, Eric Ibsen and Philip Trubuzio.\nCITY MANAGER COMMUNICATIONS\n(10-333) The Interim City Manager introduced the Interim Police Chief.\nThe Interim Police Chief made brief comments.\n(10-334) Senior Safety Program\nThe Fire Safety Specialist gave a Power Point presentation.\nVice Mayor deHaan inquired how people volunteer or receive help.\nThe Fire Safety Specialist stated that her contact information is on flyers and brochures.\nVice Mayor deHaan inquired whether stair step light has been considered.\nThe Fire Safety Specialist responded in the negative; stated the Program has funding\nfor specific things; the Fire Department is actively pursuing more grants.\nIn response to Mayor Johnson's inquiry regarding a master list, the Fire Safety\nSpecialist responded a database has been initiated.\nMayor Johnson inquired whether people can add a name to the list through the website,\nto which the Fire Safety Specialist responded people can contact her.\nMayor Johnson inquired whether people are willing to call her, to which the Fire Safety\nSpecialist responded in the affirmative.\nMayor Johnson stated Boy Scouts are doing a great job; inquired whether other service\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n7\nJuly 6, 2010", "path": "CityCouncil/2010-07-06.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2010-07-06", "page": 8, "text": "organizations would be used.\nThe Fire Safety Specialist responded absolutely; stated ensuring that volunteers are\nable to get up and down a ladder is important.\nMayor Johnson stated an injury to a senior could be permanent.\nCouncilmember Tam thanked the Fire Safety Specialist for the presentation; stated the\nProgram is a great community service; currently, funding is provided through grants\nfrom the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and the Community\nDevelopment Block Grant (CDBG); inquired whether increased funding is needed.\nThe Fire Safety Specialist responded in the affirmative; stated the Fire Department is\nlooking for more grant funding.\nCouncilmember Tam inquired how long the grant lasts.\nThe Fire Safety Specialist responded one year; however, the Fire Department is\npetitioning for five more months.\nMayor Johnson inquired whether funding could be obtained through the Healthy Home\ninitiative, to which the Fire Safety Specialist responded that she would find out.\nREGULAR AGENDA ITEMS\n(10-335) Public Hearing to Consider Resolution No. 14471, \"Amending Master Fee\nResolution No. 12191 to Revise Fees.\" Adopted.\nThe Deputy City manager - Administrative Services gave a brief presentation.\nVice Mayor deHaan stated the increase would not be across the board; inquired how to\nidentify fees that would be increased.\nThe Deputy City Manager - Administrative Services responded said fees are called out\nin the staff report\nVice Mayor deHaan stated an annual review was done last year.\nThe Interim City Manager stated a review was done the year before last to determine\ncost recovery; a Consumer Price Index (CPI) has been done the last two years; usually,\nevery three to five years, a complete fee study is done to see if charges are sufficient\nwhich has to do with employees' hourly rate; the City has not performed a complete fee\nstudy for four or five years; the CPI will hold the City for a year or two.\nVice Mayor deHaan inquired whether a complete fee study should be done next year, to\nwhich the Interim City Manager responded fiscal year 2011-2012 would be a good time.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n8\nJuly 6, 2010", "path": "CityCouncil/2010-07-06.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2010-07-06", "page": 9, "text": "Mayor Johnson stated Mr. Brandt commented that individual building and permit fees\nseem reasonable but when combined seem higher than other communities; the matter\nshould be reviewed.\nCouncilmember Gilmore stated that she believes that the Planning and Building\nDepartment has reviewed the matter.\nMayor Johnson stated remodeling and on-going maintenance is a critical issue in\nAlameda.\nThe Interim City Manager stated a presentation on the issue could be provided under\nCity Manager Communications.\nVice Mayor deHaan stated that he saw a new, detailed breakdown when obtaining a\npermit; the City cannot charge more fees than needed [to cover costs].\nCouncilmember Tam stated in 2006, Council adopted a fee schedule to streamline and\nmake things easier for the Planning and Building and Public Works Departments;\ninquired whether said fees would also be affected by the 1.7% increase.\nThe Interim City Manager responded that she assumes the City changed the fee\nschedule to a per unit basis as opposed to a valuation table; some cities held on to the\nold method because cities made a lot of money; using the valuation table results in\ncharging more than the cost recovery in an administration fee.\nCouncilmember Tam moved adoption of the resolution.\nCouncilmember Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice\nvote - 5.\n(10-336) Public Hearing to Consider adoption of a Resolution Approving Tentative\nParcel Map No. 9876, Planning Application No. PLN09-0185 - a Parcel Map for the\nProposed Subdivision of the Site at 2318 Pacific Avenue into Two Parcels. Continued.\nMayor Johnson announced that the Public Hearing was continued to July 20, 2010.\n(10-337) Public Hearing to Consider Introduction of Ordinance Revising the City's\nSewer Service Charges. Introduced.\nThe Public Works Director and Mark Hildebrand, Red Oak Consulting, gave a Power\nPoint presentation.\n***\nCouncilmember Tam left the dais at 9:36 p.m. and returned at 9:41 p.m.\n* *\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n9\nJuly 6, 2010", "path": "CityCouncil/2010-07-06.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2010-07-06", "page": 10, "text": "Mayor Johnson inquired how air testing works.\nGisa Ju, RMC Water and Environment, responded non-toxic smoke is blown into a\nsewer and pathways lead smoke to the surface; crews observe what is coming out of\nyards; smoke cannot be detected from a basement connection.\nThe Public Works Director and Mr. Hildebrand continued the presentation.\nIn response to Mayor Johnson's inquiry, the Public Woks Director stated the current\ncommercial additional flow rate is $1.84 per hundred cubic foot [HCF] and would\nincrease to $2.81 HCF.\nCouncilmember Gilmore inquired whether Alameda has an additional issue with its\nsewer system because the water table is so high.\nThe Public Works Director responded inflow infiltration would increase if pipes or joints\nhave cracks.\nCouncilmember Tam stated Slide 18 shows the current rate for a single family home\nwould go from $14.91 to $22.09, which is a 48% increase over three years; spreading\n48% over three years equals 16% per year; inquired whether she is missing something\non Slide 16, which shows 14% per year.\nMr. Hildebrand responded the total amount increases to 48% over three years due to\ncompounding.\nCouncilmember Matarrese complimented staff on the analysis; stated people know that\nsewer charges increase by cost of living but cost of living does not account for\nregulation changes; Emeryville's rates are less, but Emeryville does not perform sewer\nlaterals like Alameda; inquired whether structuring residential rates similar to\ncommercial rates has been considered for the future; stated a two bedroom, one bath\nhome uses much less flow than a four bedroom, three and a half bath home.\nMr. Hildebrand responded a flow-based sewer rate is not commonly considered [for\nresidential rates]; stated administrative costs and data collection could pose a hurdle.\nVice Mayor deHaan stated a lot of seniors have concerns; inquired whether other\njurisdictions have some type of reduction for seniors.\nThe Public Works Director responded Proposition 218 prohibits using sewer rates to\nbuy down for seniors; stated an alternative funding source, such as the General Fund,\nwould be needed to do so.\nMr. Hildebrand stated Proposition 218 prohibits using one person's rate to pay down\nanother person's rate.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n10\nJuly 6, 2010", "path": "CityCouncil/2010-07-06.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2010-07-06", "page": 11, "text": "Vice Mayor deHaan stated rates would be increased incrementally; requirements have\nchanged; Alameda is in a better position than other cities.\nThe Public Works Director stated Alameda is ahead of the curve; the Environmental\nProtection Agency (EPA) is aware that Alameda is taking the lawsuit seriously and is\nimmediately making changes to ensure a funding source is established to take care of\nanticipated improvements.\nCouncilmember Gilmore stated requirements coming down from the EPA are another\nunfunded mandate; the City has to come up with a revenue source; the requirement\ndoes not go away if funding is not found; the City would have capital costs plus EPA\nlevied fines on top of everything.\nCouncilmember Matarrese moved introduction of the ordinance.\nCouncilmember Tam seconded the motion.\nUnder discussion, Councilmember Tam stated that Alameda is an island surrounded by\nthe Bay; Bay water quality is very important; the EPA imposed standards are intended\nto protect the Bay water; the proposed sewer charge increase is the price to pay for\nhigh water quality.\nOn the call for the question, the motion carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.\nORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA\n(10-338) Don Shafer, Alameda, provided a handout and discussed parking his trailer at\nIndependence Plaza.\nMayor Johnson inquired whether Housing Authority rules apply to Mr. Shafer's parking\nproblem.\nThe Interim City Manager responded that she would contact Mr. Shafter.\n(10-339) Robb Ratto, Park Street Business Association, expressed his support for the\nnew Interim Police Chief.\n(10-340) Joyce Larrick, Alameda, inquired about the Animal Shelter being closed.\nThe Interim City Manager stated the matter was not voted upon; if the matter goes\nforward, the shelter would be relocated.\n(10-341) David Howard, Alameda, stated workers are in the lobby sweeping light\nfixtures; inquired whether anything upstairs needs sweeping.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n11\nJuly 6, 2010", "path": "CityCouncil/2010-07-06.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2010-07-06", "page": 12, "text": "COUNCIL REFERRALS\nNone.\nCOUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS\n(10-342) Consideration of Mayor's nomination for appointment the Historic Advisory\nBoard. Continued.\n(10-343) Vice Mayor deHaan stated one of the top sales tax producers is Safeway Fuel;\nSafeway Fuel is no longer providing diesel fuel; Council mandated that diesel fuel be\nprovided; inquired whether the mandate has a sunset.\nThe Interim City Manager responded that she does not know; stated that she would\nreview the matter.\n(10-344) Vice Mayor deHaan stated that he sees a marked improvement in vehicles not\nbeing stored on streets.\nMayor Johnson stated work still needs to be done on Eagle Avenue.\n(10-345) Councilmember Tam stated on June 17th, she attended the League of\nCalifornia Cities (LCC) Environmental Quality Policy Committee Meeting; the LCC\ninitiative which would prevent the legislature from taking property and redevelopment\ntaxes from cities has qualified for the ballot; every legislator is very mad that the\ninitiative is being put on the ballot; the meeting had a very heated debate regarding\nAssembly Bill 1898 which is Assemblywoman Julia Brownley's ban on plastic bags; the\nban would require shoppers to bring reusable bags; otherwise shoppers would be\ncharged a nickel per bag up to a twenty-five cent cap.\nThe Interim City Manager inquired who would get the money, to which Councilmember\nTam responded the State.\nCouncilmember Gilmore inquired whether San Francisco enacted an ordinance on the\nban.\nCouncilmember Tam responded in the affirmative; stated Oakland has tried to enact an\nordinance, but the plastic industry demanded that an Environmental Impact Report be\nprepared to examine the social economic impact of the ban; the legislation has\nprovisions for the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) broader than just one\ncity; the LCC annual conference will be in San Diego in September.\n(10-346) Mayor Johnson stated as a result of the investigatory reports presented to the\nCouncil and to the public this evening, she thinks it is incumbent upon all of us to strive\nharder now to prove not only to ourselves, but to the community we serve, that there is\nintegrity in our public processes, and that special interests do not control Alameda;\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n12\nJuly 6, 2010", "path": "CityCouncil/2010-07-06.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2010-07-06", "page": 13, "text": "given the involvement in this matter of John Knox White, who is alleged in the\ninvestigatory report to have illegally received confidential Closed Session materials from\nCouncilmember Tam, and also to have participated in violations of the Brown Act,\nCalifornia's Local Government in the Sunshine Law, she is calling for the immediate\nresignation of John Knox White from the Sunshine Task Force, as she no longer\nbelieves he can service with credibility; unless the City receives Mr. Knox White's\nresignation prior to the next meeting of the Sunshine Task Force, she will ask the\nInterim City Manager to agendize his removal for City Council action as soon as\npossible.\nADJOURNMENT\nThere being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the meeting at 10:24 p.m.\nRespectfully submitted,\nLara Weisiger\nCity Clerk\nThe agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n13\nJuly 6, 2010", "path": "CityCouncil/2010-07-06.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2010-07-06", "page": 14, "text": "MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL JOINT CITY COUNCIL AND\nPUBLIC UTILITIES BOARD (PUB) MEETING\nTUESDAY- -JULY 6, 2010-- -5:00 P.M.\nMayor Johnson convened the Joint Meeting at 5:10 p.m.\nRoll Call -\nPresent:\nCouncilmembers deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese, Tam, and\nMayor Johnson; and Board Members Gallant, Holmes,\nMcCahan, and McCormick - 9.\nAbsent:\nBoard Member Hamm - 1.\nNote: Councilmember Tam was not present for Anticipated Litigation [paragraph no. 10-\n318 CC].\nThe meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider:\n(10-317 CC/PUB) Conference With Legal Counsel - Existing Litigation; Significant\nExposure to Litigation Pursuant to Subdivision (b) of Section 54956.9; Name of Cases:\nVectren Communication Services V. City of Alameda, Acting By and Through Alameda\nMunicipal Power; Bernard A. Osher, Trustee V. City of Alameda, et al City of Alameda\non Behalf of Itself and Alameda Municipal Power, et al V. Nuveen Municipal High\nIncome Opportunity Fund, et al.\n(10-318 CC) Conference with Legal Counsel - Anticipated Litigation; Initiation of\nlitigation pursuant to subdivision (c) of Section 54956.9; Number of cases: One.\n(10-319 CC) Liability Claims (54956.95) - Workers' Compensation Claim; Claimant:\nEsperanza Sanchez; Agency Claimed Against: City of Alameda.\nFollowing the Closed session, Mayor Johnson announced that regarding Anticipated\nLitigation, the City Council met in Closed Session with its Legal Counsel and outside\ncounsel, Michael Colantuono, to discuss evidence of serious official misconduct by\nCouncilmember Lena Tam regarding, among other things, providing attorney-client\nprivileged, personnel, and other confidential information to SunCal, International\nAssociation of Fire Fighters, and other parties against the interest of the City of\nAlameda and its taxpayers, and to consider whether to enjoin Councilmember Tam to\nprevent further conduct of this type; two investigatory reports, each with evidence of\nalleged official misconduct by Councilmember Tam, have been independently prepared\nby outside counsel, Michael Colantuono, and provided to the District Attorney; because\nthis matter is now before the District Attorney, and since the City has requested that the\nevidence be reviewed by the Alameda County Grand Jury, the City Council has\ndeferred any decision to pursue litigation against Councilmember Tam at this time;\nrather, in the interest of full public disclosure and to afford Councilmember Tam the\nability to review these reports, the City Council has voted to waive its attorney-client\nSpecial Joint Meeting\nAlameda City Council and\nPublic Utilities Board\nJuly 6, 2010", "path": "CityCouncil/2010-07-06.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2010-07-06", "page": 15, "text": "privilege, thereby enabling release of the investigatory report this evening to the public;\nthe City Council's decision in this regard was made in the best interest of open\ngovernment here in Alameda; the City Council looks to the District Attorney and the\nGrand Jury to do justice in this matter; the District Attorney's office has no objection to\nthe City Council releasing these reports; a copy of the investigatory reports will be\navailable in the City Clerk's office; additionally, a limited number of copies are available\nthis evening for review and will be distributed in the foyer at the conclusion of this\nstatement; if sufficient copies are not available, please leave your name and contact\ninformation on the card in the lobby, and the City Clerk will forward a copy to you; the\nvote to release this information to the public was: Mayor Johnson - yes; Vice Mayor\ndeHaan - yes; Councilmember Gilmore - yes; Councilmember Matarrese - yes; for\nobvious reasons, Councilmember Tam was not permitted to participate in this Closed\nSession;\n***\nMayor Johnson called a recess at 8:05 p.m. and reconvened the special meeting at\n8:15 p.m.\nFollowing the recess, Mayor Johnson announced that regarding Existing Litigation, the\nCouncil/Board received a briefing on the status of the telecom litigation and provided\ndirection to the litigation team; regarding Liability Claims, Council received a briefing\nfrom Legal Counsel and provided direction on settling the claim.\nAdjournment\nThere being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the Joint Meeting at 7:40\np.m.\nRespectfully submitted,\nLara Weisiger\nCity Clerk\nThe agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act.\nSpecial Joint Meeting\nAlameda City Council and\nPublic Utilities Board\nJuly 6, 2010", "path": "CityCouncil/2010-07-06.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2010-07-06", "page": 16, "text": "MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL JOINT COMMUNITY\nIMPROVEMENT COMMISSION (CIC) AND HOUSING\nAUTHORITY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS (HABOC) MEETING\nTUESDAY-JULY 6, 2010-- -6:55 P.M.\nChair Johnson convened the meeting at 8:02 p.m. Commissioner Torrey led the Pledge\nof Allegiance.\nROLL CALL -\nPresent:\nCommissioners deHaan, Gilmore,\nMatarrese, Tam, Torrey and Chair Johnson - 6.\nAbsent:\nNone.\nCONSENT CALENDAR\nChair Johnson announced that Resolution Amending the Rules and Procedures\n[paragraph no. HABOC was removed from the Consent Calendar for discussion.\nCommissioner Tam moved approval of the remainder of the Consent Calendar.\nCommissioner deHaan seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote -\n5. [Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk preceding the paragraph\nnumber.]\n(*HABOC) Recommendation to Approve the Minutes of the Special Board of\nCommissioners Meeting Held on April 6, 2010. Approved.\n(*10-50 CIC/HABOC) Recommendation to Approve a Second Amendment to\nthe\nAffordable Housing Agreement Between the Housing Authority and Community\nImprovement Commission Extending the Term of the Agreement Two Years to July\n2026. Accepted.\n(HABOC) Resolution No. 819, \"Amending the Rules and Procedures of the Housing\nAuthority, Effective January 1, 2010, Changing the Time to Start Regular Meetings of\nthe Board of Commissioners to 6:55 P.M.\" Adopted.\nCommissioner Torrey questioned whether changing the starting time would be logical;\nstated City Council meetings are supposed to start at 7:00 p.m., but start much later.\nThe City Clerk stated that the 6:55 p.m. start time is being proposed in order to have the\nHABOC meetings before City Council meetings.\nChair Johnson stated the only other way would be to have HABOC meetings after City\nCouncil meetings, which would not be a good idea.\nSpecial Joint Meeting\nCommunity Improvement Commission and\nHousing Authority Board of Commissioners\nJuly 6, 2010", "path": "CityCouncil/2010-07-06.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2010-07-06", "page": 17, "text": "Commissioner Gilmore moved adoption of the resolution.\nCommissioner deHaan seconded the motion, which carried by the following voice vote:\nAyes: Commissioners deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese, Tam and Chair Johnson - 5.\nAbstentions: Commissioner Torrey - 1.\nAGENDA ITEMS\n(HABOC) Recommendation to Award a Contract in the Amount of $106,680, Including\n$17,780 for Contingencies, to Replace the Brush Street Parking Lots at Esperanza to\nDRYCO Construction Inc., and to Authorize the Interim Executive Director to Execute\nthe Contract.\nCommissioner deHaan moved approval of the staff recommendation.\nCommissioner Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote\n- 6.\nADJOURNMENT\nThere being no further business, Chair Johnson adjourned the meeting at 8:05 p.m.\nRespectfully submitted,\nLara Weisiger, Secretary\nCIC\nThe agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act.\nSpecial Joint Meeting\nCommunity Improvement Commission and\nHousing Authority Board of Commissioners\nJuly 6, 2010", "path": "CityCouncil/2010-07-06.pdf"}