{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2011-06-21", "page": 1, "text": "MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING\nTUESDAY- - - JUNE 21, 2011--7:00 - P.M.\nMayor Gilmore convened the meeting at 7:06 p.m.\nROLL CALL -\nPresent:\nCouncilmembers Bonta, deHaan, Johnson, Tam and\nMayor Gilmore - -5.\nAbsent:\nNone.\nAGENDA CHANGES\n(11-305) Mayor Gilmore announced that the City Manager Communication on the\nAnimal Shelter Update [paragraph no. 11-331 would be addressed under the\nResolution [paragraph no. 11-337 on the 7:01 p.m. meeting.\nPROCLAMATIONS, SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY & ANNOUNCEMENTS\n(11-306) Mayor Gilmore welcomed the new City Manager.\n(11-307) Proclamation Declaring June 23, 2011 as Alameda Alliance for Health Day.\nMayor read and presented the Proclamation to Ingrid Lamirault, Alameda Alliance for\nHealth.\nORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA\n(11-308) Michael John Torrey, Alameda, invited everyone to the American Relay\nLeague event this weekend.\n(11-309) Kurt Peterson, Alameda, discussed his concern with the budget and requested\nthat the International Association of Fire Fighter resolution [paragraph no. 11-325 be\npostponed.\n(11-310) Richard Neveln, Oakland, stated public safety personnel involved in the Crown\nMemorial Beach drowning should be placed on administrative leave.\n(11-311) Adam Gillitt, Alameda, discussed the Crown Memorial Beach drowning.\nCONSENT CALENDAR\nMayor Gilmore announced that Item the Resolution Approving Revised Memorandum of\nUnderstanding [paragraph no. 11-325 was removed from the Consent Calendar\nfor\ndiscussion.\nCouncilmember Tam moved approval of the remainder of the Consent Calendar.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n1\nJune 21, 2011", "path": "CityCouncil/2011-06-21.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2011-06-21", "page": 2, "text": "Vice Mayor Bonta seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.\n[Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk preceding the paragraph\nnumber.]\n(*11-312) Minutes of the Special Joint City Council, Alameda Reuse and\nRedevelopment Authority and Community Improvement Commission Meetings held on\nMay 31, 2011; and the Special Joint City Council and Public Utilities Board Meeting and\nRegular City Council Meeting held on June 7, 2011. Approved.\n(*11-313) Ratified bills in the amount of $1,814,276.64.\n(*11-314) Recommendation to Authorize the City Manager to Execute a Joint\nUse/Operating Agreement with the Alameda Unified School District for the Operation of\nthe District Swimming Pools. Accepted.\n(*11-315) Recommendation to Award Contract for Legal Advertising for Fiscal Year\n2011-12. Accepted.\n(*11-316) Recommendation to Adopt Plans and Specifications and Authorize a Call for\nBids for Ferry Repair and Resurfacing of the Main Street Ferry Terminal Parking Lot,\nNo. P. W. 05-11-14. Accepted.\n(*11-317) Recommendation to Adopt Plans and Specifications and Authorize a Call for\nBids for the Cyclic Sewer Replacement Project, Phase 9, No. P.W. 03-11-05.\nAccepted.\n(*11-318) Recommendation to Accept the Work of Weber Tractor Service for the Repair\nof Portland Cement Concrete Sidewalk Curb, Gutter, Driveway, and Minor Street\nPatching, Fiscal Year 2010-2011, Phase 11, No. P.W. 06-10-14. Accepted.\n(*11-319) Recommendation to Adopt a First Amendment to Agreement to Harbor Bay\nBusiness Park Association for the Landscape Maintenance Management Contract for\nthe City of Alameda Island City Landscaping and Lighting District 84-2, Zone 5 - Harbor\nBay Business Park. Accepted.\n(*11-320) Recommendation to Reject the Bid, Adopt Revised Plans and Specifications\nand Authorize a New Call for Bids for Park Street Streetscape, Lincoln Avenue to Webb\nAvenue, and Central Avenue to San Jose Avenue, No. P.W. 10-09-30. Accepted.\n(*11-321) Recommendation to Approve a Third Amendment to Agreement for MV\nTransportation, Inc. to Operate the City of Alameda Paratransit Shuttle Service.\nAccepted.\n(*11-322) Recommendation to Approve a Fourth Amendment to Agreement for\nWelcome Transport Group to Provide Paratransit Taxi Services. Accepted.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n2\nJune 21, 2011", "path": "CityCouncil/2011-06-21.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2011-06-21", "page": 3, "text": "(*11-323) Recommendation to Authorize the City Manager to Enter into an Agreement\nwith Carducci Landscape Architects to Provide the Design and Project Management\nServices for the Renovation of Krusi Park in the Amount Not to Exceed $301,250.\nAccepted.\n(*11-324) Resolution No. 14574, \"Authorizing Acceptance of $25,000 in California\nDepartment of Alcoholic Beverage Control Grant Funding to Enhance Existing Alcohol-\nRelated Enforcement.' Adopted.\n(11-325) Resolution No. 14575, \"Approving Revised Memorandum of Understanding\n(MOU) Between the International Association of Firefighters, Local 689 and the City of\nAlameda for the Period Commencing January 3, 2010, and Ending June 29, 2013.\"\nAdopted.\nThe Human Resources Director gave a brief presentation.\nMayor Gilmore inquired whether putting off the MOU would have consequences.\nJoe Wiley, Chief Negotiator, responded the City would most likely find itself a\nrespondent in an unfair labor practice charge filed by the International Association of\nFirefighters (IAFF).\nMayor Gilmore stated the public feels that they have not had an opportunity to comment\nthroughout negotiations.\nMr. Wiley stated the comment period would need to come at the beginning of the\nbargaining process, not the end; the law does not require the City or a labor\norganization to provide a comment period.\nMayor Gilmore noted Mr. Wiley is the City's labor negotiator and outside legal counsel\nfor the City.\nCouncilmember deHaan requested further explanation of the 48/96 proposal.\nMr. Wiley stated the work schedule would change from one day on and one day off to\ntwo days on and four days off; the schedule would be a trail for both parties; either side\ncould stop the proposed work schedule if the schedule does not work; an evaluation\nwould be done at the end of the year.\nCouncilmember Tam inquired whether the 48/96 schedule and other items in the MOU\nare part of the list presented in November 2009.\nMr. Wiley responded that he does not know without reviewing his notes, stated the\n48/96 schedule has been discussed for a considerable length of time.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n3\nJune 21, 2011", "path": "CityCouncil/2011-06-21.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2011-06-21", "page": 4, "text": "Speakers: Nancy Hird, Alameda Citizen's Task Force (ACT); Noel Folsom, Alameda;\nRosemary McNally, Alameda; Gretchen Lipow, ACT; Lester Cabral, Alameda; Adam\nGillitt, Alameda; Red Wetherill, Alameda; Corinne Lambden, Alameda; Ashley Jones,\nAlameda; Kurt Peterson, Alameda; Trish Spencer, Alameda; Jim Sweeney, Alameda;\nKevin Kennedy, City Treasurer; Jon Spangler, Alameda; and Kevin Kearney, City\nAuditor.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated the Council put together a Fiscal Sustainability\nCommittee; an eye opening report was provided in 2009; $4.8 million needed to be\nsaved in last year's budget; one fire station was closed; closing City Hall West was\ninitiated; departments were consolidated; positions were reduced; programs were\neliminated; there were no pay increases; the City is still facing a shortfall; the can is\nbeing kicked down the road; Council has solved problems by using one time funding;\nthat he still has questions regarding discretionary funds; 30% of the budget will take a\nhit if nothing is done to change the 70% for public safety; manpower will need to be\nreduced if concessions are not made; library hours have been cut and more hours may\nhave to be reduced; Council cannot continue to window dress the budget; that he\nsupports delaying the MOU and will not support adoption of the resolution.\nMayor Gilmore stated the life of the MOU would cost $9,300; contract negotiations\nbegan in 2009; a five to ten percent pay cut has never been on the table; items cannot\nbe introduced in negotiations after a certain point of time; nothing has been\naccomplished in the last eighteen months; other cities have given bargaining units pay\nraises, but Alameda has not; previous contract costs would still be in full force if the\nMOU is not approved; costs would be locked in and the City would not be able to take\nadvantage of any savings; going back to the negotiating table might result in more\nconcessions; something needs to be done to solve structural problems; the City and\nunions have no interest in seeing the City go bankrupt; getting back to the negotiating\ntable might take years if the City goes to war with employees; lawyers would be the only\nones that would benefit; the Council has no power to impose pay cuts; a five to ten\npercent pay cut would be accomplished by cutting bodies, which would require a meet\nand confer process.\nVice Mayor Bonta stated the proposed MOU would make inroads and progress in areas\nthat have not been addressed in the past; the MOU has short-term, mid-term, and long-\nterm savings; the spousal retirement health care reform is very significant; $500,000 per\nyear would be saved; Cadillac plans would not be funded by the City; Firefighters have\nremoved the minimal staffing provision scheduled for the November election; the\nelection would have cost the City $300,000 and, if passed, would have cost $4 million\nper year.\nCouncilmember Tam stated negotiations have taken a long time; the City needs to have\ncertainty and accuracy in projections and estimates in order to ensure a balanced\nbudget; progress made over the last three months has been significant in giving\nmanagement some idea of how to look at balancing a budget that seems to have an\nincreasing deficit because of uncertainties with the State and economy; the MOU\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n4\nJune 21, 2011", "path": "CityCouncil/2011-06-21.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2011-06-21", "page": 5, "text": "represents Council and management respecting the collective bargaining process; that\nshe would support the MOU.\nCouncilmember Johnson stated the May 30th incident [Crown Beach drowning] should\nbe separate from the MOU issue; an outside investigation will be done, facts will be\nanalyzed, and findings will have consequences; the MOU addresses some of the\nstructural financial issues; a new City Manager is on board; the Police and Fire\nDepartments need to be restructured; that she would like to give the new City Manager\nthe opportunity to take a look at the matter; she does not want to delay the MOU\nunnecessarily; the public feels uncomfortable with not having an opportunity to review\nthe MOU; perhaps the MOU should be put off until the next Council meeting so the\npublic can review provisions and make comments; flattening management has been\ndiscussed for years; flattening management does not mean taking away supervisors;\nreorganization can be done without taking Police Officers and Firefighters off the streets\nor taking away supervision; overtime would go up with minimum staffing; delaying the\nMOU by two weeks would not hurt the process.\nIn response to Mayor Gilmore's inquiry, the City Manager stated that he is puzzled by\nthe idea of doing the budget first and determining costs later; costs would be locked in\nby approving the MOU; California law is extremely rigid in terms of labor negotiations\nregarding what can be public and what can be private; the public needs to be able to\nweigh in at the beginning of negotiations; weighing in cannot be done now; that he\nadvises approving the MOU; the 48 hour work schedule would not be locked in; the City\nor Union may walk away at any time; the City can pull out if the 48 hour work schedule\nresults in a lot of overtime; in September, the City will conduct a seminar with a panel of\nlabor law and labor negotiation experts; public commentary will be held for upcoming\nnegotiations; very few Bay Area cities can show a six year time period where public\nsafety personnel has not received pay increases, not even cost of living increases; an\narbitrator would look at contracts going back to January 2010 if negotiations break down\nand the matter goes to arbitration; basing the landscape on January, 2010 would have\nvery different concessions than today; the outcome may be less advantageous and\nwould be retroactive.\nMayor Gilmore stated Council wants to work with employees in partnership; the budget\nhas a significant hole not only this year but in coming years; the best way to tackle the\nsituation is through cooperation with employees; everyone has the same goal of\nkeeping Alameda on strong, stable, and sustainable footing.\nCouncilmember Johnson stated public safety has gone without wage increases for six\nyears; inquired whether the same level of service could be maintained over the next two\nyears if the MOU is approved.\nThe City Manager responded that he could only speak to next year's budget, which\ndoes not include a reduction in service because the MOU helps offset some of the\nincreases in health care costs; that he cannot guarantee future service levels because\nno one knows how long revenues will stay flat.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n5\nJune 21, 2011", "path": "CityCouncil/2011-06-21.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2011-06-21", "page": 6, "text": "Councilmember Johnson inquired whether there are other ways to make up shortfalls\nwithout cutting public service levels.\nThe City Manager responded that he does not know; stated that he does not think that\ncuts will happen next year; the City will have trouble two years out if trends do not\nchange.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated that he has reviewed public safety data for the past\ntwenty years; public safety received 24 pay increases; other bargaining units received\n16 pay increases; public safety had an eight-year contract which is unheard of and\naveraged a 2.5% increase every six months; when compounding increases over the last\ntwenty years, public safety has had an 118% increase in wages while other bargaining\nunits had a 76% increase, which is a 42% difference; Firefighters post employment\nbenefits increased 300% from 1999 to 2007; the Kaiser health plan rate for an\nemployee plus one dependent increased 70%; that he does not foresee that the City will\nbe hiring any new public safety employees in the next two years.\nThe City Manager stated every Bay Area city has had a similar pattern over the twenty\nyear period; the last six years has been flat; the next MOU would begin June 2013 if the\nMOU is approved; the hole in the budget has been twenty years in the making; setting\nthe ship aright will take at least five years.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated that he does not believe the City has five years to\ncorrect the course; Council could be sitting here two years from now asking what\nhappened; the issue needs to be addressed immediately.\nMayor Gilmore stated steps have been taken; things cannot change overnight; the City\nAuditor and City Treasurer have stated that the City would be out of money in two years\nif steps were not taken; every journey starts with a single step.\nCouncilmember Johnson stated AC Transit had a provision in its contract that allowed\nimposing a Contract, but an arbitrator required AC Transit to get to the bargaining table\nand negotiate causing; AC Transit to re do its budget; the City voted to change its\nordinance setting medical benefits for public safety retirees; an arbitrator required going\nto the bargaining table to do that; the Council does not have the authority to unilaterally\nchange things; Vallejo went to arbitration a number of times.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated outside employment has been stricken from the MOU\nbut is on the application; the following has been stricken from the MOU: \"No employee\nshall engage in outside employment during his/her regular working hours. No uniform\nemblem, badge or other employee identification shall be worn by any person while in\nthe employment of someone other than the City. All requests by the employee for\npermission to engage in outside employment shall be made on a form provided by the\nCity. No employee shall accept or continue employment other than occasional work\nfrom other than the City of Alameda without the approval of the City Manager, which\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n6\nJune 21, 2011", "path": "CityCouncil/2011-06-21.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2011-06-21", "page": 7, "text": "may be withheld if such employment constitutes a conflict of interest for the employee or\nthe City or which would interfere with the employee's ability to perform his or her City\njob\"; said language should remain in the MOU.\nMayor Gilmore stated the policy and procedure have not changed.\nThe Human Resources Director stated the policy has not changed; the [application]\nform includes all the specifics.\nMayor Gilmore inquired whether anything has changed, to which the Human Resources\nDirector responded in the negative.\nCouncilmember deHaan inquired whether said language is noted on the application, not\nthe MOU, to which the Human Resources Director responded in the affirmative.\nCouncilmember Tam stated the MOU would take steps toward fiscal sustainability and\nwould bring significant structural changes to the retiree health care program within the\nconfines of labor law; moved adoption of the resolution.\nVice Mayor Bonta seconded the motion.\nUnder discussion, Vice Mayor Bonta stated the issue is emotional; everyone wants to\nwork toward collective solutions; tonight's budget discussion will not be the last;\nCouncil's job is to ensure the financial health of the City.\nOn the call for the question, the motion carried by the following voice vote: Ayes:\nCouncilmembers Bonta, Johnson, Tam and Mayor Gilmore - 4. Noes: Councilmember\ndeHaan - 1.\nCouncilmember Johnson stated that she has confidence that the City Manager will\nguide the City through the process to balance the budget.\nMayor Gilmore called a recess at 9:07 p.m. and reconvened the meeting at 10:42 p.m.\n(*11-326) Resolution No. 14576, \"Approving Amendment to Memorandum\nof\nUnderstanding Between the Alameda City Employees Association and the City of\nAlameda for the Period Commencing July 1, 2009, and Ending June 30, 2011.\"\nAdopted.\nREGULAR AGENDA ITEMS\n(11-327) Public Hearing to Consider Resolution No. 14578, \"Approving the Engineer's\nReport, Confirming Diagram and Assessment, and Ordering Levy of Assessments,\nIsland City Landscaping and Lighting District 84-2, All Zones.\" Adopted.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n7\nJune 21, 2011", "path": "CityCouncil/2011-06-21.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2011-06-21", "page": 8, "text": "The Public Works Coordinator gave a brief presentation.\nCouncilmember deHaan moved adoption of the resolution.\nVice Mayor Bonta seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.\n(11-328) Public Hearing to Consider Resolution No. 14579, \"Approving the Engineer's\nReport, Confirming Diagram and Assessment, and Ordering Levy of Assessments,\nMaintenance Assessment District 01-01 (Marina Cove).' Adopted.\nThe Public Works Coordinator gave a brief presentation.\nCouncilmember deHaan moved adoption of the resolution.\nVice Mayor Bonta seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.\n(11-329) Public Hearing to Consider Approval of Tentative Parcel Map 10006 to Create\nFour Parcels at 2601 to 2901 Harbor Bay Parkway.\nContinued to July 5, 2011.\nCITY MANAGER COMMUNICATIONS\n(11-330) Presentation of Public Outreach Plan for the Lawrence Berkeley National\nLaboratory Second Campus at Alameda Point\nThe Deputy City Manager provided a handout and gave a brief presentation.\nMayor Gilmore suggested putting signs at the libraries and the Community\nDevelopment Department.\nCouncilmember deHaan suggested using the two telephone poles across Ralph\nAppezzato Way to hang a banner.\nCouncilmember Tam inquired what the turn out has been at the thirteen community\nmeetings, to which the Deputy City Manager responded the number varies depending\nupon the type of event.\nCouncilmember Tam suggested contacting educational groups, such as the Alameda\nEducation Foundation, which was very active in the Measure A campaign.\nThe Deputy City Manager stated that she would contact the Foundation.\nVice Mayor Bonta stated now is the time for the community to show support and\nexpress excitement.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n8\nJune 21, 2011", "path": "CityCouncil/2011-06-21.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2011-06-21", "page": 9, "text": "The City Manager thanked the Deputy City Manager for working so diligently on the\nproject; stated Alameda can deliver and demonstrate a unified public.\n(11-331) Animal Shelter Update\nAddressed under the Resolution on the Special City Council meeting [paragraph no. 11-\n337].\nORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA\nNone.\nCOUNCIL REFERRALS\n(11-332) Provide Direction on a Committee Formed to Focus on Alameda's Participation\nin the America's Cup in 2013.\nVice Mayor Bonta gave a brief presentation.\nIn response to Mayor Gilmore's request, Vice Mayor Bonta stated the committee would\ninclude experts in the boating industry, marinas, and hospitality and event planning.\nSpeaker: Jim Oddie, Alameda.\nCouncilmember Johnson stated that she agrees that there should be a committee; in\nthe past, Councilmembers have nominated members to a committee; the same process\nshould be followed.\nCouncilmember Tam stated Howard Ashcraft organized a committee and provided\nupdates to Council when the community wanted to submit an application for Google;\nCouncil did not appoint committee members.\nCouncilmember Johnson stated said committee was not a City committee; each\nCouncilmember should have a representative if the committee is an Ad Hoc Committee.\nCouncilmember Tam stated the scope should be clear if a City Ad Hoc Committee is\nformed versus just assigning people.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated last year, the former Economic Development Director\nwas directed to take the lead; other individuals got involved; that he is concerned with\nCouncil getting involved with who should be on the committee; staff should come back\nto Council with names.\nMayor Gilmore stated Alameda is a little bit behind in terms of timing; that she does not\nsee the need to appoint people to the committee; people have self-selected in terms of\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n9\nJune 21, 2011", "path": "CityCouncil/2011-06-21.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2011-06-21", "page": 10, "text": "enthusiasm, interest, and knowledge; the group would not be closed; anyone could join;\nsuggested that staff provide Council with a list of people; Council could appoint one\nperson to report back at regular intervals.\nThe Assistant City Manager suggested coming back every four to six weeks via City\nManager Communications.\nThe City Manager stated that he had a conversation with San Francisco Mayor Ed Lee\nregarding the American's Cup and Alameda's desire to participate; Mayor Lee has three\ndifferent committees covering different aspects; the conversation in terms of Alameda's\nparticipation was very warmly received; different teams will need to be staged at\ndifferent locations; Mayor Lee felt that Alameda was a natural player.\nCouncilmember Johnson suggested having a link to the Alameda Waterfront website.\nThe Assistant City Manager stated the City's home page has an announcement\nregarding the America's Cup with a link.\nCouncilmember Johnson stated the City's website should provide information on how to\njoint the committee and when meetings would be held.\nVice Mayor Bonta stated meetings would be publically noticed; that he would circulate a\nfull roster of members and affiliations; he would be happy to be the Council\nrepresentative and serve as the Co-chair along with Chris Siewald.\nCouncilmember Johnson inquired whether anybody could volunteer to be on the\ncommittee.\nVice Mayor Bonta responded allowing anybody to volunteer might be too broad; having\ntargeted segments of the community represented would be good; meetings would be\nopen.\nCouncilmember Tam inquired whether staff would do the noticing, to which Vice Mayor\nBonta responded that he would like staff to do the noticing.\nCouncilmember Johnson moved approval of formalizing the subcommittee.\nCouncilmember Tam seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.\nCOUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS\n(11-333) Consideration of Mayor's Nominations for Appointments to the Civil Service\nBoard, Commission on Disability Issues, Housing Commission, Library Board, Planning\nBoard, Public Utilities Board (PUB), Recreation and Park Commission, Social Service\nHuman Relations Board (SSHRB), and Youth Advisory Commission; and Consideration\nof Mayor's Appointment to the Rent Review Advisory Committee.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n10\nJune 21, 2011", "path": "CityCouncil/2011-06-21.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2011-06-21", "page": 11, "text": "Mayor Gilmore nominated Peter Horikoshi and Linda McHugh to the Civil Service\nBoard; Susan T. Deutsch, Steve R. Fort, Kelly Harp, Leslie A. Krongold, and Audrey\nLord-Hausman to the Commission on Disability Issues; Cullen L. Jones to the Housing\nCommission; Michael E. Hartigan and Gail Wetzork to the Library Board; Authur\nAutorino and Marilyn Ezzy Ashcraft to the Planning Board; Gregory L. Hamm to the\nPUB; Lola Brown and Gina Mariani to the Recreation and Park Commission; Cathy\nNielsen and Henry Villareal to the SSHRB; and Jeanette Mei to the Youth Advisory\nCommission.\n(11-334) Written Communication from the League of California Cities Requesting\nDesignation of a Voting Delegate for the 2011 Annual Conference.\nCouncilmember Johnson moved approval of designating Councilmember Tam as the\nvoting delegate; and Vice Mayor Bonta and Councilmember deHaan as the alternates.\nVice Mayor Bonta seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.\nADJOURNMENT\nThere being no further business, Mayor Gilmore adjourned the meeting at 11:20 p.m.\nRespectfully submitted,\nLara Weisiger\nCity Clerk\nThis meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n11\nJune 21, 2011", "path": "CityCouncil/2011-06-21.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2011-06-21", "page": 12, "text": "MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING\nTUESDAY-JUNE 21,2011--7:01 P.M. -\nMayor Gilmore convened the meeting at 9:22 p.m.\nROLL CALL -\nPresent:\nCouncilmembers Bonta, deHaan, Johnson, Tam and\nMayor Gilmore - 5.\nAbsent:\nNone.\nORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA\n(11-335) Brad Wick, Alameda Towne Center General Manager, stated the name of the\nCenter would be restored to South Shore Shopping Center.\n(11-336) Janet Gibson discussed the Crown Beach incident.\nAGENDA ITEM\n(11-337) Resolution No. 14577, \"Approving the Memorandum of Understanding Among\nthe City of Alameda, the Humane Society of Alameda, and the Friends of the Alameda\nAnimal Shelter Regarding the Future Operation of the Shelter.\" Adopted.\nThe Assistant City Manager and Police Chief gave a brief presentation.\nSpeakers: Tom Hyland, Save Our Shelter (SOS); Suzanne Renner, Alameda; Janet\nDavis, Alameda; Nancy Bianchi, Friends of the Alameda Animal Shelter (FAAS); Holly\nSchmalenberger-Haugen, Humane Society of Alameda; Brian Berg, Alameda; Gesine\nLohr, Alameda; Annie Choy, Mikaila Baskin, and Rachel Menendez, Alameda High\nSchool Humane Society Club; Len Grzanka, Alameda (submitted comments); Jean\nRichter, Alameda; Bonnie Peterum, Rosemary McNally, Alameda; Chris Allan,\nAlameda; Jon Spangler, Alameda; Robb Ratto, Park Street Business Association; and\nTrish Spencer, Alameda.\nThe Police Chief stated on May 31st, staff proposed outsourcing services to another\njurisdiction; closing the shelter was never discussed; the current proposal would provide\nan opportunity for the Police Department to work with groups to establish a sustainable,\nnon-profit organization that would have a vision of how the Animal Shelter should run.\nMayor Gilmore requested information regarding removing the Animal Shelter from the\nPolice Department and placing it in another department.\nThe Police Chief stated the Police Department does not run the Animal Shelter, but\nprovides management oversight, which is a small portion of the overall budget;\nremoving the Animal Shelter from the Police Department would still result in the same\nfixed costs.\nSpecial Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n1\nJune 21, 2011", "path": "CityCouncil/2011-06-21.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2011-06-21", "page": 13, "text": "The Assistant City Manager stated the Animal Shelter would still be a General Fund\noperation.\nMayor Gilmore stated Council has often discussed moving toward establishing\npublic/private partnerships; the proposal would be a win win for everyone.\nThe City Manager stated the Animal Shelter would not be the last public service\nconfronting a different model going forward; everyone needs to work together.\nCouncilmember Johnson stated one speaker mentioned the Warmington Project; the\nidea was to build extra shelter capacity to help off set operating costs and offer services\nto other cities to take animals.\nVice Mayor Bonta moved adoption of the resolution.\nCouncilmember deHaan seconded the motion with a caveat [to not use bequest money\nfor the four month bridge].\nUnder discussion, in response to Councilmember deHaan's inquiry, the Assistant City\nManager stated the non-profit idea was not part of the May 31st discussions when staff\nproposed outsourcing with another community and holding back two Animal Control\npositions; now, staff is looking at using bridge funding for four months; having the City\nrun the shelter is expensive because of unionized labor; a non-profit can determine\nsalaries and operations would be a lot cheaper than the City.\nCouncilmember deHaan inquired how much is the bequest money, to which the Police\nChief responded $327,495.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated that his second to the motion stands as long as the\nbequest money is not used for the four-month bridge.\nThe Assistant City Manager stated the money in next year's budget is not sufficient for\nfour months of operation.\nCouncilmember Johnson inquired whether there is another alternative for gap funding,\nto which the Assistant City Manage responded the only alternative would be to hold\nPolice Officer positions vacant.\nIn response to Councilmember Johnson's inquiry, the Police Chief stated currently, four\nPolice Officer positions are being held; a fifth position could be held; seed money would\nbe available one way or another.\nVice Mayor Bonta stated that he would keep his motion as is.\nCouncilmember Johnson stated that she would second the motion as is.\nSpecial Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n2\nJune 21, 2011", "path": "CityCouncil/2011-06-21.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2011-06-21", "page": 14, "text": "The Assistant City Manager stated there would be 88 sworn positions, which would be\ndown from 92; one more position could be held.\nCouncilmember Johnson stated that she would be nervous going below 88 positions.\nIn response to Councilmember deHaan's inquiry, the Police Chief stated the bequest\nmoney needs to be used for the operation of the shelter.\nCouncilmember Johnson stated that she would second the motion if hiring an officer\nwas delayed a month.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated that he would like to see some seed money for the non-\nprofit.\nThe City Manager stated staff would negotiate terms; that he does not advise beginning\nnegotiations now.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated that his second to the motion holds if seed money is\nconsidered.\nCouncilmember Tam stated the agreement already has provisions for the City to\nprovide fiscal support; either way, the City would provide funding.\nThe City Manager stated Section A-d of the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU)\nstates the objective of the cooperative agreement would be to define the City's ability to\nprovide a portion of fiscal support to the non-profit organization.\nCouncilmember Johnson stated good faith efforts are being made on both sides;\ninquired whether Councilmember deHaan's second still stands.\nCouncilmember deHaan responded as long as the funding is in consideration his\nsecond stands.\nVice Mayor Bonta stated the funding is inherently in consideration because of the terms\nof the MOU; that he does want to accept any friendly amendments to the motion for\nanything broader than what is in the MOU.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated that he seconded to motion.\nCouncilmember Tam inquired whether Councilmember deHaan's second included\nconditions, to which Councilmember deHaan responded in the negative.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated the bequest money was not part of the last discussion.\nSpecial Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n3\nJune 21, 2011", "path": "CityCouncil/2011-06-21.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2011-06-21", "page": 15, "text": "The Assistant City Manager stated the MOU notes that the City would agree to utilize\nShelter donations and money from the Police Department's operating budget to fund the\nShelter operation until November 1, 2011; the situation has been fluid.\nVice Mayor Bonta stated that he is supportive of the approach going forward; achieving\nthe goal in four months will be difficult but can be done with collective commitment;\nhaving a sense of urgency going forward is important.\nOn the call for the question, the motion carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.\nADJOURNMENT\nThere being no further business, Mayor Gilmore adjourned the meeting at 10:37 p.m.\nRespectfully submitted,\nLara Weisiger\nCity Clerk\nThe agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act.\nSpecial Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n4\nJune 21, 2011", "path": "CityCouncil/2011-06-21.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2011-06-21", "page": 16, "text": "MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING\nTUESDAY-JUNE 21, 2011--6:00 - P.M.\nMayor Gilmore convened the meeting at 6:10 p.m.\nRoll Call -\nPresent:\nCouncilmembers Bonta, deHaan, Johnson, Tam and Mayor\nGilmore - 5.\nAbsent:\nNone.\nThe meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider:\n(11-302) Conference with Labor Negotiators (54957.6); Agency negotiators: Joe Wiley\nand Human Resources Director; Employee organizations: All bargaining units.\n(11-303) Conference with Legal Counsel - Anticipated Litigation; Initiation of litigation\npursuant to subdivision (c) of Section 54956.9 Number of cases: Two.\n(11-304) Liability Claims (54956.95) - Workers' Compensation Claim; Claimant: Judy\nPe\u00f1a; Agency Claimed Against: City of Alameda.\nFollowing the Closed Session, the meeting was reconvened and Mayor Gilmore\nannounced that regarding Labor, the negotiators briefed Council on the status of\nbargaining with Alameda Police Officers Association, Alameda Police Management\nAssociation, International Association of Fire Fighters, Alameda Fire Managers\nAssociation, and Alameda City Employees Association; no action was taken; regarding\nAnticipated Litigation, Council provided direction; and regarding Workers'\nCompensation, Council provided direction.\nAdjournment\nThere being no further business, Mayor Gilmore adjourned the meeting at 6:55 p.m.\nRespectfully submitted,\nLara Weisiger\nCity Clerk\nThe agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act.\nSpecial Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nJune 21, 2011", "path": "CityCouncil/2011-06-21.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2011-06-21", "page": 17, "text": "MINUTES OF THE ANNUAL COMMUNITY\nIMPROVEMENT COMMISSION (CIC) MEETING\nTUESDAY- -JUNE 21, 2011-6:59 - P.M.\nChair Gilmore convened the meeting at 7:04 p.m. Commissioner Johnson led the\nPledge of Allegiance.\nROLL CALL -\nPresent:\nCommissioners Bonta, deHaan, Johnson, Tam and\nChair Gilmore -5.\nAbsent:\nNone.\nMINUTES\n(11-028) Minutes of the Special Joint City Council, Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment\nAuthority, and Community Improvement Commission Meetings held on May 31, 2011.\nApproved.\nCommissioner Tam moved approval of the minutes.\nCommissioner Bonta seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.\nAGENDA ITEMS\nNone.\nORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA\nNone.\nADJOURNMENT\nThere being no further business, Chair Gilmore adjourned the meeting at 7:05 p.m.\nRespectfully submitted,\nLara Weisiger\nSecretary\nThe agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act.\nAnnual Meeting\nCommunity Improvement Commission\nJune 21, 2011", "path": "CityCouncil/2011-06-21.pdf"}