{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2013-01-14", "page": 1, "text": "MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING\nMONDAY- - - JANUARY 14, 2013- 7:00 P.M.\nMayor Gilmore convened the meeting at 7:07 p.m.\nROLL CALL -\nPresent:\nCouncilmembers Chen, Daysog, Ezzy Ashcraft, Tam\nand Mayor Gilmore - 5.\nAbsent:\nNone.\nAGENDA CHANGES\nNone.\nPROCLAMATIONS, SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY & ANNOUNCEMENTS\n(13-013) Proclamation Recognizing T. David Edwards for over 25 Years of Excellent\nService on the Alameda County Mosquito Abatement District Board.\nMayor Gilmore read and presented the proclamation to Mr. Edwards.\n(13-014) The City Attorney introduced the new Assistant City Attorney, Alan Cohen.\nORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA\n(13-015) Jon Spangler, Alameda, discussed the lawsuit filed by East Bay Regional Park\nDistrict.\nCONSENT CALENDAR\nMayor Gilmore announced that the resolutions regarding alternate and reduce work\ntime options [paragraph no 13.-024 were removed from the Consent Calendar for\ndiscussion.\nCouncilmember Daysog moved approval of the remainder of the Consent Calendar.\nVice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote\n- 5. [Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk preceding the paragraph\nnumber.]\n(*13-016) Minutes of the Special City Council Meetings Held on December 11, 2012;\nand the Special and Regular City Council Meetings Held on December 18, 2012.\nApproved.\n(*13-017) Ratified bills in the amount of $5,305,239.49.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n1\nJanuary 14, 2013", "path": "CityCouncil/2013-01-14.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2013-01-14", "page": 2, "text": "(*13-018) Recommendation to Approve a Contract with David Sams for Management of\nGolf Course Improvements. Accepted.\n(*13-019) Recommendation to Accept the Work of Ranger Pipelines, Inc. for Cyclic\nSewer Repair Project, Phase 9, No. P.W. 03-11-05. Accepted.\n(*13-020) Recommendation to Accept the Work of Fort Bragg Electric, Inc. for the\nDublin Sewer Pump Station Backup Generator Installation Project, No. P.W. 04-10-10.\nAccepted.\n(*13-021) Recommendation to Accept the Work of Mountain Cascade, Inc. for the\nUpgrade of the City of Alameda Sewer Pump Stations, Bay Farm Island Pump Station\nRehabilitation, No. P.W. 12-10-35. Accepted.\n(*13-022) Recommendation to Allocate $29,120 in Contingencies and Award a Contract\nin the Amount of $194,280 to Harris & Associates for Engineering Consulting Services\nRelated to Alameda Landing. Accepted.\n(*13-023) Resolution No. 14761, \"Appointing Ryan Clausnitzer as Trustee to the\nAlameda County Mosquito Abatement District Board.\" Adopted.\n(13-024) Adoption of Resolution to Establish an Alternate Work Arrangement Policy.\nNot adopted; and\n(13-024 A) Adoption of Resolution to Establish a Reduced Work Time Option Policy.'\nNot adopted.\nThe Human Resource Director gave a brief presentation.\nIn response to Councilmember Tam's inquiry, the Senior Management Analyst\nresponded employees would have the two-thirds and three-quarters options because\nPERS health requires employees to work a minimum of 20 hours per week; if the\nemployee has a 36-hour work week, reduction to 50% would be 18 hours, which does\nnot meet the PERS healthcare requirement.\nCouncilmember Tam inquired if a 40-hour work week reduced by 50% would meet the\nPERS requirement of 20 hours, to which the Senior Management Analyst responded\nin the affirmative.\nCouncilmember Tam stated the reason Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) exempt\nemployees get administrative days and additional compensation is because they do\nnot get overtime; she struggles considering the benefit for FLSA exempt employees\nversus hourly employees; if an FLSA employee wants to work two-thirds or three-\nquarters, or even 50%, succession planning and promotional opportunities would be\nbeneficial.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n2\nJanuary 14, 2013", "path": "CityCouncil/2013-01-14.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2013-01-14", "page": 3, "text": "The Senior Management Analyst stated the City would not be prevented from\nassigning employees to different type of work; the City would still have flexibility to to\nassign employees to particular projects or programs.\nCouncilmember Tam inquired if another employee within the same department, but\ndifferent classification, would have the opportunity to take on some of the projects of\nan FLSA employees who decides to reduce to two-thirds time.\nThe Senior Management Analyst responded the City would retain the right to assign\nemployees to various work; stated if work not being covered by the employee on the\nalternate work arrangement could be reassigned to another employee, provided it is\nwithin the employee's classification and job responsibilities.\nThe City Manager stated the policy is intended to provide more flexibility for the\nemployees; the City wants to accommodate the reduced work schedule to keep from\nlosing the employee's talent, experience, and institutional memory.\nMayor Gilmore inquired if the policy would require the City to allow an employee not\nincluded in a protected category to go to three-quarter time.\nThe Senior Management Analyst responded in the negative; stated the request has to\nbe approved by the Department Head and City Manager after review by Human\nResources.\nMayor Gilmore inquired whether an employee doing the work of a reduced-time\nemployee would be promoted before the reduced-time employee if the City needs\nsomebody in the position.\nThe City Manager responded in the negative; stated that if the City needs somebody\nin the position full time, the person would not have been granted a reduced schedule.\nMayor Gilmore stated said scenario assumes needs stay static, which is not the case.\nThe City Manager stated an alternative work arrangement is not intended to be a\npermanent arrangement.\nThe Human Resources Director stated the person would have the right to return to full\ntime.\nMayor Gilmore inquired if there is a specified time frame, to which the Senior\nManagement Analyst responded in the affirmative; stated reduced schedules can be\nfor no more than the one fiscal year and cannot go on in perpetuity; the employee\nwould have to submit an application for each fiscal year.\nThe City Manager stated the reduced schedule can be for less than one fiscal year,\nnot longer.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n3\nJanuary 14, 2013", "path": "CityCouncil/2013-01-14.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2013-01-14", "page": 4, "text": "Councilmember Tam stated the issue is about job sharing and creating succession\nplanning; an employee on half-time can share the job with another person who\nhappens to have a lot of potential.\nThe City Manager stated the policy protects the person on the reduced hours;\nsuccession planning is a separate issue because the policy is an option, not a right.\nVice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the City would limit the number of\nemployees who could be on an alternative work arrangement at one time.\nThe City Manager responded circumstances would differ depending on a department's\nworkload.\nIn response to Vice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft's inquiry, the City Manager stated approval\nof a reduced time request is on a case-by-case basis and is entirely at the City's\ndiscretion.\nCouncilmember Chen inquired if anyone can apply for the reduced work schedule, to\nwhich the Human Resources Director responded in the affirmative; stated applying is\nvoluntary and each department examines the issues the request creates.\nCouncilmember Chen inquired if losing one employee to the reduced schedule would\ncause efficiency issues, to which the Human Resources Director responded the City\ncould always deny the request.\nIn response to Councilmember Chen's inquiry, the City Manager responded the policy\ndoes not create a right or an entitlement; the City would only approve requests which\nserve the City and the employee.\nCouncilmember Chen stated that he was still not comfortable with not setting criteria\nabout who can apply; there has to be a valid reason for an employee to work reduced\nhours, such as taking care of a sick baby or senior, or some other valid reason.\nCouncilmember Tam stated policies are in place; noted a previous City Attorney\nrequested part time and ended up working for another city; inquired whether there are\noutside employment restrictions.\nThe Senior Management Analyst responded all employees with outside employment\nare required to submit an application; stated the City's approval process is driven by\nthe City's needs.\nCouncilmember Daysog inquired whether other cities have a similar reduced work\npolicy in place, to which the Senior Management Analyst responded in the affirmative;\nstated other cities have prorated benefits for part-time employees but Alameda does\nnot.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n4\nJanuary 14, 2013", "path": "CityCouncil/2013-01-14.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2013-01-14", "page": 5, "text": "Councilmember Daysog moved adoption of the resolutions.\nVice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft seconded the motion.\nUnder discussion, Mayor Gilmore inquired whether the City has regular part-time\nemployees that work more than 20 hours, to which the Senior Management Analyst\nresponded in the affirmative.\nMayor Gilmore noted if the policy is approved, regular employees working 20 hours\nwill receive benefits, while part-time employees working more than 20 hours would not\nreceive benefits.\nThe Senior Management Analyst noted the program is only available for non-sworn,\nregular employees who have passed probation; the full time employees seeking the\nreduced work hours have all been through the civil service process to be appointed.\nCouncilmember Chen stated that he is very supportive of accommodating staff needs\nbut cannot support the work arrangement as written because there is no defined\ncriteria and there is not limit on the number of employees who can be on the program\nat the same time; his concern is efficiency in each department.\nOn the call for the question, the motion FAILED by the following voice vote Ayes:\nCouncilmembers Daysog and Ezzy Ashcraft - 2. Noes: Councilmembers Chen, Tam\nand Mayor Gilmore - 3.\nMayor Gilmore requested staff to make revisions and bring the matter back.\nThe City Manager requested direction on what areas the Council wants staff to\nchange.\nMayor Gilmore stated that staff should address the issue of different treatment;\nrequested an illustrative list of activities that would be considered if an employee\nwants reduced work hours.\n(*13-025) Resolution No. 14762, \"Approving an Amendment to the Alameda City\nEmployees Association Salary Schedule for Early Morning Street Sweeper.\" Adopted.\nREGULAR AGENDA ITEMS\n(13-026) Resolution No. 14763, \"Approving a Complete Streets Policy, in Accordance\nWith Requirements from the Metropolitan Transportation Commission and the Alameda\nCounty Transportation Commission.\" Adopted.\nThe Public Works Director gave a brief presentation.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n5\nJanuary 14, 2013", "path": "CityCouncil/2013-01-14.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2013-01-14", "page": 6, "text": "Stated the City was ahead of other cities in implementing policies; urged adoption: Jon\nSpangler, Alameda.\nCouncilmember Tam moved adoption of the resolution.\nVice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote\n- 5.\n(13-027) Recommendation to Approve the Revised Draft Prioritized Transportation\nProject Lists.\nThe Public Works Director gave a brief presentation.\nCouncilmember Chen left the dais at 7:56 p.m. and returned at 7:58 p.m.\nIn response to Mayor Gilmore's inquiry regarding public participation and acceptance,\nthe Public Works Director responded there are two mechanisms: 1) the annual review\nwould be publicized and provide the public an opportunity to give feedback, and 2) grant\napplications require a collaborative public outreach process.\nVice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft requested an explanation of the lifeline project designation.\nThe Public Works Director stated lifeline terminology is used by CalTrans for bridge\nstructures identified as usable after a credible, sizable seismic event; none of Alameda's\nbridges currently meet said criteria.\nVice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft requested an explanation of the \"Estuary Crossing Minor\nModifications to the tube\" project.\nThe Public Works Director stated several years ago the City went through a feasibility\nstudy for improving the estuary crossing for the Posey and Webster Tubes; several\ndifferent alternatives, the short term and long term were identified; Council accepted the\nshort term alternative and the City has worked with Caltrans; the intent is to bow the\nrailing on the West side of the bike lane to widen it; the long term option is to provide a\nseparate facility for bikes and pedestrians and to make sure that transit is\naccommodated.\nStated the list is good and will continue to improve; urged approval: Jon Spangler,\nAlameda.\nCouncilmember Tam moved approval of the staff recommendation.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice\nvote - 5.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n6\nJanuary 14, 2013", "path": "CityCouncil/2013-01-14.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2013-01-14", "page": 7, "text": "CITY MANAGER COMMUNICATIONS\n(13-028) The City Manager encouraged feedback on the City's new website; and\nannounced meetings are being held on the Alameda Beltline.\nORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA\n(13-029)\nCOUNCIL REFERRALS\nNone.\nCOUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS\n(13-030) Discussion of Mayor's Appointments to Outside Agencies.\nThe Deputy City Manager provided a handout and gave a brief presentation.\nMayor Gilmore appointed Vice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft to serve on the Alameda County\nTransportation Commission (ACTC) and selected Councilmember Chen as the ACTC\nalternate; selected Councilmember Daysog as the alternate for the AC Transit Inter-\nAgency Liaison Committee.\nADJOURNMENT\nThere being no further business, Mayor Gilmore adjourned the meeting at 8:17 p.m.\nRespectfully submitted,\nLara Weisiger\nCity Clerk\nThe agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Sunshine Ordinance.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n7\nJanuary 14, 2013", "path": "CityCouncil/2013-01-14.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2013-01-14", "page": 8, "text": "MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL JOINT CITY COUNCIL AND\nSUCCESSOR AGENCY OF THE COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT\nCOMMISSION (SACIC) OF THE CITY OF ALAMEDA MEETING\nMONDAY--JANUARY - 14, 2013- 6:59 P.M.\nMayor/Chair Gilmore convened the meeting at 7:05 p.m.\nROLL CALL -\nPresent:\nCouncilmembers / Commissioners Chen, Daysog,\nEzzy Ashcraft, Tam and Mayor/Chair Gilmore - 5.\nAbsent:\nNone.\nORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA\nNone.\nCONSENT CALENDAR\nCouncilmember/Commissioner Tam moved approval of the Consent Calendar.\nVice Mayor/Commissioner Ezzy Ashcraft seconded the motion, which carried by\nunanimous voice vote - 5. [Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk\npreceding the paragraph number.]\n(13-011 CC/13-003 SACIC) Minutes of the Special Joint City Council, City of Alameda\nFinancing Authority, and SACIC Meeting Held on December 18, 2012. Approved.\n(13-004 SACIC) Recommendation to Approve a Form of Gas Pipeline Easement\nAgreement between the Northern California Power Association and the Successor\nAgency to the Community Improvement Commission of the City of Alameda for a\nPortion of a Gas Pipeline at the Former Fleet Industrial Supply Center and Authorize the\nCity Manager to Execute the Agreement; and\n(13-012 CC) Recommendation to Approve a Form of Gas Pipeline Easement\nAgreement between the Northern California Power Association and the City of Alameda\nfor a Portion of a Gas Pipeline at the Former Fleet Industrial Supply Center and\nAuthorize the City Manager to Execute the Agreement. Accepted.\nADJOURNMENT\nThere being no further business, Mayor/Chair Gilmore adjourned the meeting at 7:07\np.m.\nRespectfully submitted,\nLara Weisiger\nCity Clerk\nThe agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Sunshine Ordinance.\nJoint Meeting\nAlameda City Council and Successor Agency\nto the Community Improvement Commission\nJanuary 14, 2013", "path": "CityCouncil/2013-01-14.pdf"}