{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2013-12-03", "page": 1, "text": "MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING\nTUESDAY- - DECEMBER 3, 2013- -600 P.M.\nMayor Gilmore convened the meeting at 6:05 p.m.\nRoll Call -\nPresent:\nCouncilmembers Chen, Daysog, Ezzy Ashcraft, and Mayor\nGilmore - 4.\nAbsent:\nCouncilmember Tam - 1.\nThe meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider:\n(13-543) Conference with Legal Counsel - Anticipated Litigation; Initiation of litigation\npursuant to subdivision (c) of Section 54956.9; Number of cases: One (As Plaintiff - City\nInitiating Legal Action)\n(13-544) Conference with Legal Counsel - Anticipated Litigation; Initiation of litigation\npursuant to subdivision (c) of Section 54956.9; Number of cases: One (As Plaintiff - City\nInitiating Legal Action)\nFollowing the Closed Session the meeting was reconvened and Mayor Gilmore\nannounced that regarding Anticipated Litigation, Council gave direction to staff; and\nregarding Initiation of litigation, Council gave direction to staff.\nAdjournment\nThere being no further business, Mayor Gilmore adjourned the meeting at 7:15 p.m.\nRespectfully submitted,\nLara Weisiger\nCity Clerk\nThe agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Sunshine Ordinance.\nSpecial Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nDecember 3, 2013", "path": "CityCouncil/2013-12-03.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2013-12-03", "page": 2, "text": "MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING\nTUESDAY- - -DECEMBER 3, 2013- 7:00 P.M.\nMayor Gilmore convened the meeting at 7:22 p.m. Councilmember Daysog led the\nPledge of Allegiance.\nROLL CALL -\nPresent:\nCouncilmembers Chen, Daysog, Ezzy Ashcraft, and\nMayor Gilmore - 4.\nAbsent:\nCouncilmember Tam - 1.\nAGENDA CHANGES\nNone.\nPROCLAMATIONS, SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY & ANNOUNCEMENTS\n(13-545) Proclamation Declaring December 12, 2013 as Thomas S. Woods Day.\nMayor Gilmore read the Proclamation and presented it to the Public Works Director who\naccepted on behalf of Mr. Woods.\nORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA\n(13-546) Former Councilmember Frank Matarrese, Alameda Sister City Association,\nand Cynthia Bonta, discussed the potential of establishing a Sister City with\nDumaguete, Philippines; stated a letter and gift from the Mayor of Dumaguete would be\nprovided to the City.\nCouncilmember Chen commended Ms. Bonta; noted a Sister City conference would be\nheld in the Bay Area and Mayor Gilmore would serve as a host.\nMayor Gilmore thanked former Councilmember Matarrese and Ms. Bonta.\nCouncilmember Daysog expressed his excitement.\nCONSENT CALENDAR\nCouncilmember Chen moved approval of the Consent Calendar.\nVice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote\n- 4. [Absent: Councilmember Tam - 1.] [Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by\nan asterisk preceding the paragraph number.]\n(*13-547) Minutes of the Joint City Council and Public Utilities Board Special Meeting,\nthe Joint City Council and Successor Agency to the Community Improvement\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n1\nDecember 3, 2013", "path": "CityCouncil/2013-12-03.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2013-12-03", "page": 3, "text": "Commission Meeting, and Regular City Council Meeting Held on November 5, 2013.\nApproved.\n(*13-548) Ratified bills in the amount of $2,646,647.03.\n(*13-549) Recommendation to Accept the Affordable Housing Ordinance Annual\nReview Consistent with Section 27-1 of the Alameda Municipal Code and California\nGovernment Code Section 66001 and Accept the Annual Report. Accepted.\nREGULAR AGENDA ITEMS\n(13-550) Recommendation to Receive Report and Comment on Draft City-wide\nPerformance Measures.\nThe City Manager gave a brief presentation and Nancy Hetrick, Management Partners,\ngave a Power Point presentation.\nMayor Gilmore inquired how performance measures tie into performance evaluations.\nThe City Manager responded in 2014 all City employees will have performance\nevaluations; stated Department Heads would be evaluated on performance measures;\nstated performance measures are objective measures that provide information about\nefficiency, effectiveness, accountability and transparencies; information would not be\ngathered until the next 2017/2019 budget cycle.\nVice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired what are priority one calls referenced under the\nPolice Department's benchmark measures.\nThe Police Chief responded priority one calls are crimes such as robbery, homicide,\nsexual assault, or a crime in progress; stated examples of priority two calls are cold car\nthefts or prior incidents.\nVice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated under the Public Works benchmark measures, she\nbelieves residents may be less concerned with the number of trees pruned, but more\nconcerned about the conditions of streets and sidewalks.\nMayor Gilmore stated streets are already listed in the benchmarks for Public Works.\nMs. Hetrick stated additional measures could be crafted to address the Vice Mayor's\nconcerns.\nCouncilmember Daysog stated there has to be a correlation between the\nmeasurements of how internal business is conducted relative to service outcomes; the\ngoal at the end of the day is to improve the quality of life for Alameda's citizens.\nCouncilmember Chen suggested adding the number of complaints under the Police\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n2\nDecember 3, 2013", "path": "CityCouncil/2013-12-03.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2013-12-03", "page": 4, "text": "Department benchmark measures and response time for ambulance services under the\nFire Department.\nMs. Hetrick stated the ambulance response time is already incorporated under\nEmergency Medical Services (EMS) response time.\nMayor Gilmore inquired if ambulances and Fire trucks are dispatched at the same time\non a priority one call.\nThe Acting Deputy Fire Chief responded in the affirmative; stated both a Fire engine\nand ambulance are dispatched, although not necessarily from the same station; in a\nworse-case scenario, if all of Alameda's ambulances are dispatched, the responder\nwould be Paramedics Plus, which is dispatched from the County.\nCouncilmember Chen requested a breakdown of the response times.\nThe Acting Deputy Fire Chief stated a breakdown would be included.\nCouncilmember Chen inquired if a public survey which rates road and sidewalk\nconditions could be added, to which the Public Works Director responded in the\naffirmative.\nCouncilmember Chen inquired whether the overall rating of the Permit Center could be\nincluded as a line item, to which Ms. Hetrick responded in the affirmative.\nIn response to Councilmember Chen's inquiry, Ms. Hetrick stated the Library tracks the\nnumber of new library cards issued.\nCouncilmember Chen inquired why a measure is not included under Alameda Point that\ntracks the percent change in number of tenants.\nThe Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point responded tracking the change in number\nof tenants has not been proposed because tenants would leave since the goal is to\nultimately tear down the buildings to redevelop the property.\nThe City Manager stated there is a difference between a measure and a goal;\nrecommended Councilmember Chen have a conversation with the Chief Operating\nOfficer to frame a different method of addressing his concern regarding Alameda Point\nleasing.\nCouncilmember Daysog stated paying down Other Post Employment Benefits (OPEB)\nshould be tracked.\nMayor Gilmore stated that she would like to add a list of examples of quality of life\nservice requests under Public Works and add a measure about the rate at which the\nCity adopts or deploys new technology under Information Technology (IT).\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n3\nDecember 3, 2013", "path": "CityCouncil/2013-12-03.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2013-12-03", "page": 5, "text": "Vice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired if the technology measurement would be compared\nto other cities.\nThe City Manager noted the measurements could vary widely between cities; data\ncollected would have to be standardized.\nMayor Gilmore stated that she would like to measure how successful Alameda is in\ndeploying new technology, whether it is efficient and provides information and\ntransparency.\nThe Assistant City Manager stated Alameda County City Managers Association\nLeadership Academy will be reviewing the matter; baseline information would be\navailable in the spring.\nMayor Gilmore stated IT tracking does not have to be part of performance measures;\nbut should be tracked to determine whether or not Alameda is becoming more efficient\nand transparent and if the City is realizing a return on its investment; provided an\nexample: the Council uses iLegislate to receive packets on iPads and the Clerk's office\nreduced from 40 paper packets to five.\nSuggested measure should be added regarding disability access and library computers:\nCarol Gottstein, Alameda.\nMayor Gilmore inquired whether there will be public meetings or electronic\ncommunications to engage the public regarding the performance measures.\nThe Assistant City Manager responded the City would use both public meetings and\ncommunications, to engage as many citizens as possible; stated there at least three\nmeetings will be held.\nThe City Manager stated the public meetings will be held at Mastick, the West End, and\nHarbor Bay.\n(13-551) Adoption of Resolution Regarding Project Stabilization Agreement Policy at\nAlameda Point. Not adopted.\nThe Administrative Services Director gave a brief presentation.\nVice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the $2.5 million threshold is project cost as\nopposed to labor cost, to which the Administrative Services Director responded in the\naffirmative.\nThe Administrative Services Director stated Tom Marshall of Catellus provided a large\nscale view of Catellus' experience with Project Labor Agreements (PLAs); Catellus finds\nPLAs very effective for horizontal construction projects such as backbone infrastructure\nand streets; for Alameda Landing, the PLA was limited and Catellus allowed it to expire.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n4\nDecember 3, 2013", "path": "CityCouncil/2013-12-03.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2013-12-03", "page": 6, "text": "Councilmember Daysog inquired if the $2.5 million is the value of the project through\nthe building permit process.\nThe Administrative Services Director responded in the negative; stated there are two\ntypes of projects: Public Works and development; Alameda Point is a development\nproject, the $2.5 million applies to the construction estimate only and subtracts the land\nacquisition and entitlement costs; Alameda would be careful in tailoring the PLA\nrequirements to be suitable to the type of project, such as projects that carve out sub-\ncontracting or specialty areas which increase project costs.\nExpressed support for the Project Stabilization Agreement Policy; suggested thresholds\nbe determined during negotiations: Mike Croll, Operating Engineers Local 3.\nStated Alameda has had PLAs in the past; expiration dates should not be included;\ndiscussed career pathways; stated thresholds should be set as part of negotiations;\nsuggested clarifying resolution language: Andy Slivka, Carpenters Union and Building\nTrades Council.\nMayor Gilmore inquired if the City of Berkeley had to go outside Alameda County to\nreach its goal of providing jobs.\nThe Administrative Services Director responded in the negative; stated the City of\nBerkeley had a parameter of Berkeley residents first, the Green Corridor second, and\nAlameda County last; and exceeded the 30% goal; Alameda's parameter should be\nAlameda City residents first, then Alameda County as second tier, and not utilize the\nGreen Corridor at all to reach the 30% goal.\nVice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired if the Veteran's Helmets to Hardhats program and\nother internship programs would be included in the agreement.\nThe Administrative Services Director responded in the affirmative; stated staff has\nstrategized on how an internship program could work.\nVice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired if an apprenticeship opportunity for students could\nalso be included.\nMr. Slivka responded in the affirmative; stated every PLA negotiated in Alameda County\nhas a specific section on the Helmets to Hardhats program; he is very supportive of\nlocal hires, students and young adults because they are the future of the trades; invited\nCouncil to visit the Cypress Mandela Training Center to see the pre- apprenticeship\nprogram.\nCouncilmembers Daysog and Chen expressed support for the apprenticeship program\nand jobs opportunities for students and locals.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n5\nDecember 3, 2013", "path": "CityCouncil/2013-12-03.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2013-12-03", "page": 7, "text": "Councilmember Chen inquired why Alameda is setting the limit at $2.5 million project\ncost.\nThe Administrative Services Director responded the City of Berkeley had workforce\nissues and exceeded staff time; Alameda is also concerned about staff resources and\ndetermined $2.5 million is appropriate for Alameda Point.\nCouncilmember Chen inquired how many projects were between $1 to $2 million, to\nwhich the Administrative Services Director responded five projects.\nCouncilmember Chen inquired how many projects were over $2.5 million, to which the\nAdministrative Services Director responded three projects.\nCouncilmember Chen stated that he recommends having staff negotiate with the labor\nunion; setting a $2.5 million threshold is premature.\nCouncilmember Daysog stated that he is open to calibrating thresholds according to the\nvarying projects.\nVice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated vertical construction and costs are higher; she is\nconcerned about affordable housing and advocates starting cautiously; the threshold\ncould be negotiated and lowered if feasible.\nMayor Gilmore inquired if the one-year and three-year look back were built into\nBerkeley's contracts up front.\nThe Administrative Services Director responded in the affirmative; stated Berkeley is\nlooking at a one-year extension.\nThe City Manager stated the City of Berkeley is meeting tonight; staff would have more\ninformation for the Council after the meeting.\nMayor Gilmore stated the agreement should have two look backs; that she concurs with\nCouncilmember Daysog on different limits for horizontal versus vertical projects;\nsuggested data be collected to evaluate and determine whether or not to bifurcate the\nthreshold; stated that she would like to keep the threshold at staff's recommendation.\nCouncilmember Daysog inquired how far the project needs to go to collect data.\nThe Administrative Services Director responded Berkeley's initial term was three years;\nAlameda would start with shorter term with two check-ins; stated the results on very\nlarge projects are not known for 5 to 10 years; however, but staff would have bid\ninformation.\nMayor Gilmore inquired if staff can move forward without Council adopting the\nresolution.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n6\nDecember 3, 2013", "path": "CityCouncil/2013-12-03.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2013-12-03", "page": 8, "text": "The City Attorney responded in the affirmative; stated the resolution adopts Project\nStabilization, the Council can take action to authorize staff to begin negotiating.\nCouncilmember Daysog inquired if language needs to be added that clearly states the\nthreshold may be altered at the check-in.\nMayor Gilmore responded she did not want to wordsmith the language of the resolution\nat tonight's meeting; stated the comments reflected in the minutes will be enough\ndirection for staff to begin negotiating.\nVice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she would like to see a breakdown between\nhorizontal versus vertical; she agrees with Mayor Gilmore that the check-in language\ndoes not need to be added to the resolution; staff and consultants are capable.\nCouncilmember Daysog inquired if the $2.5 million threshold is a deal killer for the\nBuilding Trades representatives.\nMr. Slivka responded the matter should be worked out at the negotiation table; stated\nthe Berkeley agreement should be considered as a whole; any kind of suggestions to\nnegotiators should be vetted at the negotiation table; suggested the Council hold back\nuntil an agreement is done.\nThe City Manager concurred with Mr. Slivka; suggested Council direct staff and the\nnegotiator to take comments into consideration, negotiate a tentative agreement and\nreturn with a resolution.\nCouncilmember Chen moved approval of directing staff to negotiate a tentative\nagreement, and bring a revised resolution back to Council.\nCouncilmember Daysog seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote -\n4. [Absent: Councilmember Tam - 1.]\n(13-552) Recommendation to Approve the 2014 Federal Legislative Agenda.\nThe Assistant City Manager gave a Power Point presentation.\nCouncilmember Chen inquired whether $144,000 budget for a lobbyist is realistic.\nThe City Manager responded staff is confident regarding the budget constraints.\nCouncilmember Chen suggested scaling back and prioritizing the most urgent needs.\nThe Assistant City Manager stated the standard practice with federal contracts is three\nyears, not one year, which is more reasonable.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n7\nDecember 3, 2013", "path": "CityCouncil/2013-12-03.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2013-12-03", "page": 9, "text": "Mayor Gilmore stated progress on any given item is generally incremental; at the end of\nthree years, the hope is to have progress on most of the issues; a relationship has to be\nbuilt with the lobbyist.\nVice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft moved approval of the 2014 Federal Legislative Agenda.\nCouncilmember Chen seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 4.\n[Absent: Councilmember Tam - 1.]\n(13-553) Recommendation to Approve the 2014 State Legislative Agenda and the\nContract with Perata Consulting, LLC, in the amount of $90,000, to pursue the City's\nCalifornia Legislative Agenda, which is a $144,000 Program In Total.\nThe Assistant City Manager gave a brief presentation.\nIn response to Vice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft's inquiry about advocating processes for infill\ndevelopment, the City Manager stated Alameda wants to be prepared to discuss\nCalifornia Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) reform because it impacts Alameda Point.\nCouncilmember Daysog inquired what is meant by the conclusion of Webster-Posey\nTube traffic improvements.\nThe Assistant City Manager responded the Webster-Posey Tube project to lessen\ncongestion is funded but has been stalled for over a decade; stated Alameda, Oakland,\nand the County are involved.\nThe City Manager clarified that the Webster-Posey Tube project is the Broadway/\nJackson interchange; Alameda does not have transportation infrastructure, and\nresidents have to go off the island for major transportation resources, such as interstate\nhighways, BART or light rail; a concept of better connection between Interstate 880 and\nthe tube has been considered for 11 years; the issue is regional, not just Alameda.\nCouncilmember Daysog stated that he would like Alameda to play a leading role in the\nWebster-Posey Tube project.\nMayor Gilmore stated Alameda has attempted to take leading role and a solution has\nnot been reached for the past decade; she concurs with the City Manager; if Alameda\ntakes the lead, it is viewed as Alameda's problem; if the County takes the lead as a\nregional issue, there is more potential for Alameda to work collaboratively with the\nCounty and other players to reach a solution and be successful in developing Alameda\nPoint.\nCouncilmember Daysog stated that he would like Alameda be the lead in a stalemate\nsolution, rather than give up leadership to the County in hopes they will break the\nstalemate.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n8\nDecember 3, 2013", "path": "CityCouncil/2013-12-03.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2013-12-03", "page": 10, "text": "Vice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated Perata Consulting has experience and institutional\nknowledge and would keep the issue in Alameda's control.\nThe City Manager stated he is happy to provide a briefing to Councilmember Daysog on\nthe details of the transportation issues; achieving a solution is high on his list.\nCouncilmember Chen stated that he supports the Legislative Agenda; inquired whether\na new crossing could be considered to help mitigate the traffic issue.\nThe City Manager responded the issue could be captured under State and County\nTransportation Funding; stated Alameda can accomplish a lot if all parties put aside\nbureaucratic imperatives for a regional solution.\nThe Assistant City Manager stated the total amount the Council is approving tonight is\n$90,000 because the remaining contracts do not require Council approval; the\nRockefeller Foundation grant would be worth three times Alameda's total lobbying\nbudget for State and federal, which is a fantastic return on investment.\nCouncilmember Daysog inquired when an update would be provided to the Council.\nThe Assistant City Manager responded staff talks to the Federal team weekly; stated a\nprogress report from the State level could be provided in a year.\nCouncilmember Daysog inquired if a progress report could be provided in six months\ninstead of a year, to which the Assistant City Manager responded in the affirmative.\nCouncilmember Daysog moved approval of the staff recommendation.\nCouncilmember Chen seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 4.\n[Absent: Councilmember Tam - 1.]\n(13-554) Summary: Declares Intent to Form a Community Facilities District (\"CFD\") at\nAlameda Landing and Authorizes the City to Issue Bonds to Finance Public\nInfrastructure for the CFD.\nResolution No. 14872, \"Declaring Intention to Establish a Community Facilities District\nand to Authorize the Levy of Special Taxes Therein - Alameda Landing Public\nImprovements.\" Adopted.\n(13-554) A) Resolution No. 14873, \"Declaring Intention to Incur Bonded Indebtedness of\nthe Proposed City of Alameda Community Facilities District No. 13-1 (Alameda Landing\nPublic Improvements). Adopted.\n(13-554 B) Notice of Public Hearing on January 7, 2014 - Declaring Intention to\nEstablish A Community Facilities District (CFD) and to Incur Bonded Indebtedness of\nthe Proposed City of Alameda Community Facilities District No. 13-1.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n9\nDecember 3, 2013", "path": "CityCouncil/2013-12-03.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2013-12-03", "page": 11, "text": "The Community Development Director gave a brief presentation.\nVice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired why East Bay Municipal Utilities District (EBMUD)\nwould not be paying for improvements on a water system it is going to own.\nThe Community Development Director responded Alameda has a joint use agreement\nwith EBMUD; stated having developers pay for infrastructure is standard practice.\nVice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated an election of the property owners in the CFD would\nbe conducted to establish the CFD, the levy of special taxes, and issuance of bonds;\ninquired if there are any property owners.\nThe Community Development Director responded in the affirmative; stated the\nSuccessor Agency and TriPoint are property owners eligible to vote.\nCouncilmember Chen moved adoption of the resolutions.\nCouncilmember Daysog seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote -\n4. [Absent: Councilmember Tam - 1.]\n(13-555) Summary: Declares Intent to Form a Community Facilities District (\"CFD\") at\nAlameda Landing and Authorizes the City to Levy Special Taxes on Property in the\nCFD.\nResolution No. 14874, \"Declaring Intention to Establish A Community Facilities District\nand to Authorize the Levy of Special Taxes Therein - Alameda Landing Municipal\nServices District. Adopted.\n(13-555 A) Notice of Public Hearing on January 7, 2014 - Declaring Intention to\nEstablish a Community Facilities District for the Provision of Maintenance and Municipal\nServices.\nThe Community Development Director gave a brief presentation.\nCouncilmember Chen moved adoption of the resolution.\nCouncilmember Daysog seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote -\n4. [Absent: Councilmember Tam - 1.]\nCITY MANAGER COMMUNICATIONS\n(13-556) The City Manager announced Alameda was awarded a Rockefeller\nFoundation Grant for a Chief Resiliency Officer for disaster preparedness.\nThe Community Development Director made an announcement regarding the City's\nshop local campaign, called Alameda Island Shopper.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n10\nDecember 3, 2013", "path": "CityCouncil/2013-12-03.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2013-12-03", "page": 12, "text": "ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA\nNone.\nCOUNCIL REFERRALS\nNone.\nCOUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS\n(13-557) Councilmember Chen discussed \"Around the World\", a Boy and Girls Club's\nprogram to educate children about cultural diversity.\nADJOURNMENT\nThere being no further business, Mayor Gilmore adjourned the meeting at 10:00 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\n11\nDecember 3, 2013", "path": "CityCouncil/2013-12-03.pdf"}