{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2013-03-05", "page": 1, "text": "MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING\nTUESDAY- MARCH 5, 2013- 7:00 P.M.\nMayor Gilmore convened the meeting at 7:04 p.m. Councilmember Chen led the\nPledge of Allegiance.\nROLL CALL -\nPresent:\nCouncilmembers Chen, Daysog, Ezzy Ashcraft, Tam\nand Mayor Gilmore - 5.\nAbsent:\nNone.\nAGENDA CHANGES\n(13-079) Mayor Gilmore announced that the Public Hearing [paragraph no. 13-092 was\ncontinued to March 19, 2013.\nPROCLAMATIONS, SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY & ANNOUNCEMENTS\n(13-080) Mayor Gilmore read a statement regarding the season of non-violence word of\nthe day: hope.\n(13-081) Proclamation Declaring March as Red Cross Month.\nMayor Gilmore read and presented the Proclamation to Harry Hartman, Red Cross.\n(13-082) Proclamation Declaring March through May 2013 as Historic Preservation\nSeason.\nMayor Gilmore read and presented the Proclamation to Judith Lynch, Historical\nAdvisory Board; Robbie Dileo, Alameda Museum; and Jim Smallman.\nORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA\nNone.\nCONSENT CALENDAR\nCouncilmember Tam moved approval 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(*13-083) Minutes of the Special and Regular City Council Meetings Held on February\n5, 2013. Approved.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n1\nMarch 5, 2013", "path": "CityCouncil/2013-03-05.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2013-03-05", "page": 2, "text": "(*13-084) Ratified bills in the amount of $1,513,672.40.\n(*13-085) Recommendation to Accept the Quarterly Sales Tax Report for the Period\nEnding September 30, 2012. Accepted.\n(*13-086) Recommendation to Accept the Treasury Report for the Quarter Ended\nDecember 31, 2012. Accepted.\n(*13-087) Resolution No. 14776, \"Changing the Authorized Signors for\nthe City's Investment in the State's Local Agency Investment Fund.\" Adopted.\n(*13-088) Ordinance No. 3063, \"Approving and Authorizing Conveyance by Grant Deed\nof Meyers House Museum and Garden Located at 2021 Alameda Avenue, to the\nAlameda Museum, a Non-Profit Corporation.\" Finally passed.\nREGULAR AGENDA ITEMS\n(13-089) Resolution No. 14777, \"Appointing La Donna Franco as a Member of the\nCommission on Disability Issues.' Adopted;\n(13-089 A) Resolution No. 14778, \"Appointing Judith Frug\u00e9 as a Member of the\nCommission on Disability Issues.\" Adopted.\nCouncilmember Tam moved adoption of the resolutions.\nCouncilmember Chen seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.\nThe City Clerk administered the Oath of Office and presented a Certificate of\nAppointment to Ms. Franco.\n(13-090) Recommendation to: (1) Authorize the City Manager to Execute a Letter of\nSupport to the United States Navy for Modification to the Surplus Determination of Land\nat the Former Naval Air Station Alameda; (2) Approve a Non-Binding Term Sheet\nbetween the United States Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) and the City of Alameda\nin Substantial Conformance with the Proposed Term Sheet.\nThe Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point gave a brief presentation.\nMayor Gilmore inquired who currently owns the land being discussed, to which the\nChief Operating Officer - Alameda Point responded the U.S. Navy.\nMayor Gilmore inquired whether the Navy is contemplating a deal with the VA, which is\nanother federal entity.\nThe Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point responded in the affirmative.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n2\nMarch 5, 2013", "path": "CityCouncil/2013-03-05.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2013-03-05", "page": 3, "text": "Mayor Gilmore inquired whether the transaction could go forward whether or not the\nCity of Alameda agrees with proceeding.\nGeorge Schlossberg, Outside Counsel, responded in the affirmative; stated property\nheld by the United States (U.S.) is available for federal missions; the City negotiated a\nroad map in 2000, which allows the City to acquire and develop surplus property; last\nyear, there was a boundary change and the City agreed to absorb the submerged land,\nwhich was originally planned to go to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USF&WS);\nwhen USF&WS dropped out, the Navy was looking for a way to satisfy its obligations\nand the City agreed to accept the land, which will be part of the next conveyance; the\naction tonight is part of the on-going boundary adjustments.\nMayor Gilmore stated that as the owners of the land, the U.S. is entitled to decide what\nhappens with the land; the U.S. could decide to transfer custody to another federal\nentity, such as the VA, or could decide to transfer the land to the City; inquired whether\nthe City does not have a say in the custodial change from one federal agency to another\nfederal agency.\nMr. Schlossberg responded in the affirmative.\nCouncilmember Tam stated the Council has received letters expressing concern about\npublic outreach and participation; requested staff to explain when the change was\ncontemplated and the extent of the public outreach; stated the City received a notice\nabout the project from the VA about two meetings which would be held on March 14th\non the USS Hornet; issues have been raised about accessibility for the disabled,\nparticularly disabled veterans; inquired whether there is any opportunity to provide City\nfacilities, which might be more accessible.\nThe Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point responded the project has been underway\nfor over two years; the Biological Opinion released in August 2012 addresses the\nmodified VA project; the matter has been in the news and there has been public\ndiscussion; tonight is the first public hearing before the City Council in open session;\nUSF&WS has done outreach to environmental organizations; the decision to hold the\nmeetings on the USS Hornet was made by the Navy and VA; the City discussed using\nthe O'Club; stated the VA could explain why the USS Hornet was selected.\nVice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she hopes the Navy and VA would reconsider\nholding the meetings on the USS Hornet; the meetings should be as publically\naccessible as possible.\nLarry Jaynes and Richard Crowe, VA, gave a brief presentation and showed Power\nPoint slides.\nMayor Gilmore inquired whether Mr. Crowe operated the USS Hornet lift, to which Mr.\nCrowe responded that he watched the lift being operated; stated a lift operator would be\npresent at the meetings.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n3\nMarch 5, 2013", "path": "CityCouncil/2013-03-05.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2013-03-05", "page": 4, "text": "Councilmember Tam stated although the lift makes the USS Hornet accessible, uneven\nsurfaces on board would be difficult for people with mobility issues; inquired whether the\nvenue could be changed or if an additional meeting could be held at a City facility, which\nis more disabled friendly.\nMr. Crowe responded setting logistics for the acquisition process takes many weeks or\neven months.\nCouncilmember Tam stated the City would offer assistance.\nMr. Crowe noted the Congress sets the federal acquisition process.\nThe City Manager stated Congress would not need to approve scheduling another\nmeeting to satisfy community concerns; suggested either moving the meetings off of the\nUSS Hornet or scheduling an additional meeting at another location to allow everyone\nto attend.\nMr. Crowe stated the USS Hornet is ADA accessible and the area on board being used\nis flat; scheduling another meeting could be discussed.\nMayor Gilmore suggested that the VA agree to hold another meeting at an alternate site\nto let the public provide additional input.\nMr. Jaynes noted a meeting was held on the USS Hornet in 2008; continued his\npresentation.\nCouncilmember Chen inquired what would happen to the site if the Least Terns move to\nanother location or are taken off the endangered list.\nMr. Jaynes responded currently, the VA has no plans to develop the rest of the site.\nIn response to Councilmember Chen's inquiry regarding the Biological Opinion, Mr.\nJaynes stated the VA has to live by the terms of the Biological Opinion in perpetuity;\nstated the VA could go through the process of asking for another Biological Opinion in\nthe future if the Least Tern is de-listed; at this time, there is no indication the VA would\ndo so.\nCouncilmember Chen inquired how the process works and what would trigger a request\nfor another Biological Opinion.\nMr. Jaynes responded the VA would have to want to do something on the property; the\ncurrent planning addresses northern Alameda County's needs; that he is not aware of\nadditional need.\nCouncilmember Chen inquired whether the VA would use bunkers for storage space\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n4\nMarch 5, 2013", "path": "CityCouncil/2013-03-05.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2013-03-05", "page": 5, "text": "and land for emergency drills in the off-season [when Least Terns are not breeding].\nLaura Kelly, VA, responded the plan for emergency management would be to do drills\nonly on the developed site; there are no plans to do training on the undeveloped\nproperty; in the event of a national emergency, the Alameda Point location would allow\nsupplies and people to be moved using the water; if training occurs, it would be every\n14 months and would not be during the Least Tern breeding season; the VA would be\nrespectful of residents during training.\nCouncilmember Chen expressed concern about training involving large equipment and\nhelicopters, which could disturb the Least Tern; inquired how the VA would focus on the\neffectiveness of the drill and still be sensitive to the Least Tern.\nMs. Kelly stated VA exercises are not like the Department of Defense (DOD) exercises\ninvolving large equipment; the VA exercises involve moving simulated patients; staff\nmembers practice moving simulated patients into the clinic and staging the patients; in\nan emergency, Moffett Field is the primary location and Alameda would be the next area\nif something happens to Moffett Field; equipment would be simulated during exercises;\nthe cost of using equipment for exercises is not conceivable.\nVice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated the Biological Opinion mentions the emergency\ntraining exercises and using the bunkers for emergency supplies; however, specifics are\nnot included; inquired whether the 250 on-site personnel would be the only participants\nin the emergency training exercises or whether outside personnel would participate;\nfurther inquired how many people would participate in the training.\nMs. Kelly responded the participants are all VA staff volunteers; the entire staff does not\nvolunteer and there would be 75 to 100 participants at most.\nVice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether staff from other areas would attend, to\nwhich Ms. Kelly responded that she would hope staff would come from other VA\nfacilities, but the budget would prevent outside personnel from attending training every\n14 months; further stated three bunkers would be retained for storage.\nIn response to Vice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft's inquiry regarding items in storage, Ms. Kelly\nstated storage would be used to hold: cots, blankets, emergency generators, water and\nitems which would not require expiration dates to be checked.\nVice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the training exercise would be coordinated\nwith local emergency responders.\nMs. Kelly responded the San Francisco VA Medical Center is the federal coordinating\ncenter for the Bay Area and has agreements with 30 hospitals; the hospitals would not\nmove patients to Alameda Point, but would prepare to accept patients requiring greater\ncare.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n5\nMarch 5, 2013", "path": "CityCouncil/2013-03-05.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2013-03-05", "page": 6, "text": "Regular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n6\nMarch 5, 2013", "path": "CityCouncil/2013-03-05.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2013-03-05", "page": 7, "text": "USF&WS could not move forward; then, the Navy started working with the VA.\nVice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the VA objects to designating an area as a\nwildlife refuge.\nMr. Jaynes responded the VA has no intent of creating a national wildlife refuge at\nAlameda Point; the matter is out the VA's control.\nMayor Gilmore stated the VA is negotiating with USF&WS to maintain the undeveloped\nland; inquired what the VA's stance would be if USF&WS decides designating the\nproperty as a national wildlife refuge is appropriate.\nMr. Jaynes responded that he is not sure; the matter has not come up before; the VA\ndoes not intend to ask USF&WS to do so.\nMayor Gilmore stated Alameda residents and the City Council could lobby USF&WS to\nmake the area a wildlife refuge; the matter might be worth internal discussion at the VA.\nMr. Jaynes concurred; stated the matter should be discussed with USF&WS.\nVice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether there is a reason a wildlife refuge would not\nbe a good neighbor to the VA, to which Mr. Jaynes responded the appearance would be\nsimilar to current conditions.\nIn response to Vice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft's further inquiry, Mr. Jaynes stated that he\nbelieves there are reasons USF&WS never designated the area a national wildlife\nrefuge; the City should ask USF&WS said question.\nCouncilmember Chen stated that he likes the proposed map; however, there is no\nguarantee the map will remain the same after 10, 20 or 50 years; noted that he is\nproposing a resolution designating the undeveloped area as a wildlife refuge; inquired\nwhether the VA would object to the resolution.\nMr. Jaynes stated the VA is not here to support a wildlife refuge; supporting a wildlife\nrefuge is not the VA's purpose; stated the comments are valid and would be better\naddressed as part of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Environmental\nAssessment (EA); noted experts would be present to answer questions.\nCouncilmember Chen requested staff to explain the staff report mentioning that the non-\nbinding term sheet is an agreement to take actions with regard to: infrastructure, site\naccess and transit.\nThe Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point stated the term sheet contemplates future\nagreements that the City and VA would enter into, which would most likely be\neasements; provided examples of potential future access and utility easements.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n7\nMarch 5, 2013", "path": "CityCouncil/2013-03-05.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2013-03-05", "page": 8, "text": "Councilmember Chen inquired whether the letter of support legally binds the City to a\nparticular course of action.\nThe Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point responded in the negative.\nMr. Schlossberg stated the VA's project is undergoing environmental review; until the\nreview is done, the VA cannot proceed; the City also needs to do environmental review;\nneither party can enter into binding agreements at this time; the federal government\nwants to know the City's view, however, the actions are unilateral; hopefully, the federal\ngovernment will continue to cooperate with, and listen to, the City and take the City's\ninterests into account; the ability to exclude the 74 acres is a unilateral action; the\nnature of the action tonight is not binding and is cooperation between two governments;\nbinding agreements may come about from the action tonight after full NEPA and\nCalifornia Environmental Review Act (CEQA) review.\nCouncilmember Chen stated the letter has two components: 1) redrawing the VA\nundeveloped area boundary; and 2) the City asking the VA for help with infrastructure\nand access; inquired what guarantees the City will have that by supporting the Navy\ngiving the VA the 74 acres, the City hopes to save millions of dollars in public access\nand infrastructure.\nMr. Schlossberg responded neither side can give binding commitments until both sides\ncomplete environmental review; the cooperative effort is born out of geography; to\naccess the federal parcel, the VA will travel through the City and Alameda residents will\ntravel through the VA property to access the park area; there is a mutual interest;\neverything is subject to change as the environmental documents proceed, public\ncomment is received and alternatives are raised.\nVice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated the staff report indicates the term sheet includes VA\ncoordination with the local transit authority; inquired whether the local transit authority is\nAC Transit or the Metropolitan Transportation Commission.\nThe Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point responded AC Transit.\nVice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated the term sheet states: the VA shall contact the local\ntransit authority to seek to obtain extended public transit services to the facilities at no\nadditional costs to the VA and subject to the applicable federal law and the availability of\nfunds; inquired whether doing more than is listed in the term sheet is possible; and\nwhether the VA could operate a shuttle bus; stated 250 VA employees will serve around\n543 patients during the weekdays and around 70 patients on weekends; in addition,\nthere will be special events with from 1,000 to 5,000 attendees; individual cars would be\na burden; the clause does not go far enough.\nThe Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point responded the non-binding term sheet is a\nroad map for how the two agencies coordinate together; City staff wanted to include\nsomething about transit; the City is reviewing the VA's environmental document and will\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n8\nMarch 5, 2013", "path": "CityCouncil/2013-03-05.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2013-03-05", "page": 9, "text": "submit comments addressing transit.\nMr. Jaynes stated the VA is concerned about transportation to the facility; the VA staff\nmet with AC Transit staff on July 24, 2012 to review the demographics of the staff,\npatients and trips; AC Transit staff indicated the route to Alameda Point could be\nextended; the VA's architect designed a bus stop as part of the project; the VA will have\nto submit an application to the AC Transit Board for rerouting the bus line in 11/2 to 2\nyears; further stated the VA will run a shuttle during the clinic's hours of operation.\nVice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated the Biological Opinion references the City working with\nEast Bay Regional Park District (EBRPD); that she has great concern and objection to\ndoing anything with EBRPD while the District is suing the City; inquired whether the\nreferences in the Biological Opinion commit the City to any actions.\nThe Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point responded the statements do not commit\nthe City; stated the 150 acre park is discussed; however, a particular service provider is\nnot identified; the USF&WS has to approve the provider to ensure capability to operate\nadjacent to an endangered species colony; nothing in the Biological Opinion or term\nsheet commit the City to work with a specific provider.\nVice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated there is reference to EBRPD holding a conservation\neasement over the undeveloped land; that she does not believe the conservation\neasement is still being considered; inquired whether or not the easement is being\nconsidered.\nThe Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point responded that she understands there\nhave been numerous conversations between USF&WS and the VA about placing a\nconservation easement on federal land; a determination was made that the federal\ngovernment cannot place a conservation easement on its own land.\nIn response to Vice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft's inquiry regarding the Biological Opinion\nrestricting the number of ferry crossings, the Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point\nstated Water Emergency Transit Authority (WETA) plans to lease land from the City; the\nferries stationed at the site would leave and return through the breakwater gap; the\nbreakwater gap might also be used if the ferry terminal is moved to the sea plane\nlagoon; the language was included to build in flexibility.\nVice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the City faces risks due to a statement in\nthe term sheet about the VA access road being subject to the availability of funds.\nThe Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point responded the entire VA project is subject\nto the availability of funds; stated presumably, the VA would not start the project or road\nconstruction if funds are not available.\nVice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft noted the clause was not included in other areas of the term\nsheet.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n9\nMarch 5, 2013", "path": "CityCouncil/2013-03-05.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2013-03-05", "page": 10, "text": "The Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point stated there is some risk.\nThe City Manager noted the VA is not included in the current sequestration.\nExpressed concern with holding the meetings on the USS Hornet and urged future\nmeetings be held in ADA friendly locations: Audrey Lord-Hausman, Commission on\nDisability Issues.\nUrged changes be better explained, adequate time be provided, and there be\nopportunity for meaningful public participation: Kate Quick, League of Women Voters\n(submitted letter).\nUrged the VA meetings and public input take place prior to Council sending the support\nletter: Joe Van Winkle, Alameda.\nUrged the term sheet and letter of support not be approved unless language is added to\nprotect the wildlife habitat: Irene Dieter, Alameda.\nOpposed giving up park land; urged a longer review period and additional meetings be\nheld in other locations: Jon Spangler, Alameda.\nUrged that the Community Reuse Plan be followed, the 512 acres be designated as a\nwildlife preserve and the letter of support be delayed: Jane Sullwold, Alameda.\nQuestioned the the VA being able to close the trail for national security reasons; stated\nspecies other than the Least Tern should be considered, such as the Burrowing Owl:\nurged the vision be discussed more and a statement be added that the VA would look\nout for all wildlife: Richard Bangert, Alameda.\nExpressed concern with holding the meeting on USS Hornet; and urged a longer review\nperiod: Carol Gottstein, Alameda.\nUrged that the City not consent to the 74 acres, which were supposed to be transferred\nto the City, being transferred to the VA; stated the Economic Development Conveyance\nis binding a contract: Robert Sullwold, Alameda.\nUrged approval of staff report Alternate 2, which is a good compromise to balance\ngrowth and protect wildlife; stated that she supports designating the undeveloped area\nas a wildlife refuge: Karen Bey, Alameda.\nExpressed concern with sending a letter of support since the Council solicited the VA\ntwo years ago, which seems like a conflict of interest, and urged better use of the\nwaterfront: Ferda Martin, Alameda.\nCouncilmember Tam noted that the Golden Gate Audubon Society and Sierra Club\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n10\nMarch 5, 2013", "path": "CityCouncil/2013-03-05.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2013-03-05", "page": 11, "text": "approached the City Council in 2011 advocating that the Council speak to the VA about\nbetter ways to protect the Least Tern colony and find ways to configure the VA project\nto be more protective of the birds; the issue is being considered by the VA due to the\nCity Council representing the environmental community.\nThe City Manager inquired whether the Council discussion two years ago about the\nproject would constitute a conflict of interest, to which the City Attorney responded in the\nnegative; stated a conflict of interest arises if a particular Councilmember has a financial\ninterest in the outcome.\nCouncilmember Chen inquired whether the language on the agenda complies with the\nSunshine Ordinance.\nThe City Attorney responded in the affirmative; stated the agenda items have to allow a\nperson of average intelligence to understand the matter being discussed; the language\non the agenda adequately gave notice; anyone interested in additional information could\nhave read the staff report, which was available when the agenda was published.\nIn response to Vice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft's inquiry regarding the relationship between\nthe March 14th environmental hearings and the Council action tonight, the Chief\nOperating Officer - Alameda Point stated the Navy and VA released a joint, draft\nEnvironmental Assessment (EA); meetings are being held to discuss and receive\ncomments on the EA, which is part of the standard NEPA process; the term sheet lays\nout a project road map, which is subject to environmental review; the finalized NEPA\nand CEQA documents may change the results of the final agreement; following\nenvironmental review, staff will return to Council with binding agreements, such as\neasements.\nVice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired what the City would do with the comments by the\npublic and City Council as the process moves forward.\nThe City Manager responded the process is a federal process, not a City process; staff\nwanted VA staff present tonight to hear the comments firsthand.\nVice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether staff would not be summarizing the issues\nand concerns raised.\nThe City Manager responded that staff does not intend to summarize issues and\nconcerns beyond the meeting minutes, which can be forwarded to the VA.\nVice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she would like to see more description of transit\noptions; the VA representative addressed communications with AC Transit and future\nsteps; that she was hoping to capture said comments.\nThe City Manager stated the City has the right to comment on the environmental\ndocument; staff intends to submit comments consistent with the Council discussion\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n11\nMarch 5, 2013", "path": "CityCouncil/2013-03-05.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2013-03-05", "page": 12, "text": "tonight.\nVice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the comments would be on the Biological\nOpinion or the EA.\nThe City Manager responded the EA.\nMayor Gilmore noted various City departments would be providing comments; Public\nWorks would comment on transit.\nVice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether a park would still be located in the\nNorthwest Territories, to which the Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point responded\nin the affirmative; stated 250 acres of parks and open space are being contemplated on\nthe land which is intended to come to the City; said land does not include the 511 acres\nof preserve area on the rest of the property.\nVice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the City's park area is along the waterfront,\nto which the Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point responded in the affirmative.\nVice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated opening up public access to the waterfront is exciting.\nThe Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point stated the City anticipates having an\naccess easement around the VA site and having a Bay Trail around the Northwest\nTerritories.\nVice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated the land does not belong to the City yet; the public has\nweighed in on the clinic and columbarium; read from the September 10, 2010 Alameda\nReuse and Redevelopment Authority Resolution (ARRA), which solidifies her motivation\nto move forward with the staff recommendation; stated Veteran causes need to be\nsupported; the ARRA resolution indicates the VA project will create local construction,\npermanent jobs and have a positive impact on local revenues.\nCouncilmember Chen stated that he would request the Council to consider delaying the\nletter of support so that it will coincide with the wildlife refuge resolution being\nconsidered on March 19th and to give the public time to study the staff report and EA.\nCouncilmember Daysog stated there is enthusiasm for the VA clinic and columbarium;\nideally all issues would be resolved; that he supports having such a facility in Alameda.\nCouncilmember Daysog moved approval of the staff recommendation; stated the City\nCouncil and City staff can work on issues raised; the wildlife refuge resolution can\nhappen independent of the action tonight.\nVice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft seconded the motion.\nUnder discussion, Councilmember Tam stated that she would not support the motion;\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n12\nMarch 5, 2013", "path": "CityCouncil/2013-03-05.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2013-03-05", "page": 13, "text": "that she concurs with Councilmember Chen; stated the letter of support and non-binding\nterm sheet are essentially a comment on the EA being considered at the March 14th\nmeetings; from a timing standpoint, including the matter as part of the City's comments\non the EA would be more organized and consolidated.\nOn the call for the question, the motion carried by the following voice vote: Ayes:\nCouncilmembers Daysog, Ezzy Ashcraft, and Mayor Gilmore - 3.\nNoes:\nCouncilmembers Chen and Tam - 2.\n(13-091) Introduction of Ordinance Approving a Lease and Authorizing the City\nManager to Execute Documents Necessary to Implement the Terms of a Lease\nAmendment with the Artemis Racing, USA Extending Their Current Lease for Up to One\nYear in Building 12 Located at 1050 West Tower, a Portion of Taxiway H and Access to\nthe Seaplane Lagoon at Alameda Point. Introduced.\nThe Economic Development Division Manager gave a brief presentation; mentioned the\nLuna Rossa team would also be locating at Alameda Point.\nVice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft suggested the Luna Rossa team give a presentation.\nVice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft moved introduction of the ordinance.\nCouncilmember Tam seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.\n(13-092) Public Hearing to Consider a Resolution to Certify a Final Environmental\nImpact Report (EIR), Introduction of an Ordinance to Amend the Alameda Municipal\nCode for the North Park Street Planning Area, and a Resolution to Approve\nAmendments to the Design Review Manual Regulating Development Within the Area\nBounded by the Oakland-Alameda Estuary, Tilden Way, Lincoln Avenue, and Oak\nStreet. Continued to March 19, 2013.\nCITY MANAGER COMMUNICATIONS\n(13-093) The City Manager announced that staff reached tentative agreements with the\nFire Managers and Police Managers Associations on the outstanding issue; the contact\nwould be brought to Council and job description changes would be presented to the\nCivil Service Board prior to the contracts commencing on July 1st.\nORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA\nNone.\nCOUNCIL REFERRALS\nNone.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n13\nMarch 5, 2013", "path": "CityCouncil/2013-03-05.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2013-03-05", "page": 14, "text": "COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS\n(13-094) Mayor Gilmore made announcements about Councilmembers serving on\nregional boards; stated that she would bring the matter back at the next meeting.\nCouncilmember Daysog inquired whether the Alameda County Associated Community\nAction Program (ACAP) still exists, to which Councilmember Tam responded in the\nnegative; stated ACAP dissolved.\n(13-095) Councilmember Tam announced that she attended the East Bay Division\nLeague of California Cities meeting; provided meeting highlights; further announced that\nshe, along with Councilmembers Ezzy Ashcraft and Chen, attended the Beltline Tour\norganized by the Recreation Director; and that she and Councilmember Daysog\nattended the 30th Anniversary Memorial for Robert Davey, Junior.\n(13-096) Vice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft announced that she, along with the Mayor and\nCouncilmembers Tam and Daysog, attended the grand opening of the Ala Costa Center\nat Little John Park.\n(13-097) Councilmember Chen announced that he attended the Alameda County\nTransportation Commission retreat on behalf of Vice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft.\nADJOURNMENT\n(13-098) There being no further business, Mayor Gilmore adjourned the meeting at 9:46\np.m. in memory of Ryan Kellogg.\nRespectfully submitted,\nLara Weisiger\nCity Clerk\nThe agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Sunshine Ordinance.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n14\nMarch 5, 2013", "path": "CityCouncil/2013-03-05.pdf"}