{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2014-05-06", "page": 1, "text": "MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING\nTUESDAY- - -MAY 6, 2014- -6:00 P.M.\nMayor Gilmore convened the meeting at 6:03 p.m.\nRoll Call -\nPresent:\nCouncilmembers Chen, Daysog, Ezzy Ashcraft, Tam and\nMayor Gilmore - 5.\n[Note: Councilmember Daysog arrived at 6:04 p.m.]\nAbsent:\nNone.\nThe meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider:\n(14-156) Public Employees Performance Evaluations; Pursuant to Government Code\n$54957; Positions Evaluated: City Attorney - Janet Kern and City Manager - John\nRusso\n***\nMayor Gilmore called a recess at 7:05 p.m. and reconvened the meeting at 12:45 a.m.\n***\nFollowing the closed session, the meeting was reconvened and Mayor Gilmore\nannounced no action was taken.\nAdjournment\nThere being no further business, Mayor Gilmore adjourned the meeting at 1:30 a.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\nMay 6, 2014", "path": "CityCouncil/2014-05-06.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2014-05-06", "page": 2, "text": "MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING\nTUESDAY- - -MAY 6, 2014- -7:00 P.M.\nMayor Gilmore convened the meeting at 7:11 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\nNone.\nPROCLAMATIONS, SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY & ANNOUNCEMENTS\n(14-157) Proclamation Declaring May 5 to May 9, 2014 as Saint Joseph Notre Dame\nHigh School Pilots Cross Country Week.\nMayor Gilmore read and presented the proclamation to Simon Chiu, Chis Pondok, Tony\nFong and the Cross Country Team from Saint Joseph Notre Dame High School.\n(14-158) Proclamation Declaring May 8, 2014 as Bike-to-Work Day.\nMayor Gilmore read and presented the proclamation to Patty St. Louis and Jeff Cambra,\nBike Walk Alameda.\nMs. St. Louis made brief comments.\nIn response to Vice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft's inquiry, Ms. St. Louis announced the five\nlocations.\n(14-159) Proclamation Declaring May 9 to May 18, 2014 as the 18th Annual East Bay\nAffordable Housing Week: \"East Bay Housing Organization (EBHO) at 30: Built to Last.\"\nMayor Gilmore read and presented the proclamation to Darin Lounds and Liz Barella,\nEBHO, and Dian Lichtenstein and Patricia Young, Alameda Home Team.\nMs. Lichtenstein submitted information; made brief comments.\nMs. Young made brief comments.\nMr. Lounds submitted information; made brief comments.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n1\nMay 6, 2014", "path": "CityCouncil/2014-05-06.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2014-05-06", "page": 3, "text": "(14-160) Alameda Museum Annual Report on the Meyers House and Garden.\nJudith Lynch, Alameda Museum President, gave a Power Point presentation and\nsubmitted information.\n(14-161) Greenway Golf 2014 Annual Report for the Chuck Corica Golf Complex.\nGeorge Kelley and Marc Logan, Greenway Golf, gave a Power Point presentation.\nMayor Gilmore stated the feedback from the golf community has been positive; inquired\nabout work on the slough.\nMr. Logn responded only preliminary work has been done.\nVice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she volunteered at the 87th Commuters\ntournament; the Golf Course is a wonderful resource.\nCouncilmember Tam commended Greenway for the design innovations that have\nresulted in using almost 100% recycled water and a 40% reduction in water use;\ninquired whether there are any challenges that require the City's assistance.\nMr. Logan responded City staff has been responsive whenever anything arises;\nGreenway believes the next phase will be completed without any hiccups.\n(14-162) The City Attorney introduced the newly hired Assistant City Attorney.\nORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA\n(14-163) Peter Fletcher, Harbor Bay Neighbors, submitted information; expressed\nopposition to Harbor Bay Isle Associates plans to build a new club.\n(14-164) Bob Shannon, Harbor Bay Club Member and Alameda resident, spoke in\nsupport of relocating the Harbor Bay Club.\n(14-165) Catherine Veerwidth, Harbor Bay Club Member and Alameda resident,\ndiscussed changes at the Harbor Bay Club; stated the space has been outgrown and\nneeds to be updated.\n(14-166) Kathy Moehring, Harbor Bay Group of Companies, read from a letter Harbor\nBay's Legal Counsel wrote dated April 24, 2014 discussing the Harbor Bay Isle Project.\nCONSENT CALENDAR\nMayor Gilmore announced that the Resolution regarding Island City Landscaping and\nLighting District [paragraph no. 14-170]; the Resolution regarding Leydecker Park\n[paragraph no. 14-173]; and the Ordinance [paragraph no. 14-174 were removed from\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n2\nMay 6, 2014", "path": "CityCouncil/2014-05-06.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2014-05-06", "page": 4, "text": "the Consent Calendar for discussion.\nCouncilmember Tam 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(*14-167) Minutes of the Special and Regular Council Meeting of April 1, 2014.\nApproved.\n(*14-168) Ratified bills in the amount of $3,219,345.36.\n(*14-169) Recommendation to Authorize Call for Bids for Legal Advertising for the\nFiscal Year Ending June 30, 2015. Approved.\n(*14-170) Resolution No. 14914, \"Preliminarily Approving the Annual Report Declaring\nthe City's Intention to Order the Levy and Collection of Assessments, and Providing for\nNotice of Public Hearing on June 17, 2014 - Island City Landscaping and Lighting\nDistrict 84-2.\" Adopted.\nThe City Clerk announced a random drawing was done since three Councilmembers\nhave a conflict and Councilmember Chen was chosen to participate.\nMayor Gilmore and Councilmember Daysog recused themselves and left the dais.\nThe Public Works Administrative Services Manager gave a brief presentation.\nCouncilmember Chen inquired how long the City has been levying the assessment, to\nwhich the Public Works Administrative Services Manager responded 30 years.\nCouncilmember Chen inquired whether the levy will be passed on to tenants, to which\nthe Public Works Administrative Services Manager responded in the affirmative.\nIn response to Councilmember Chen's inquiry, the Public Works Administrative Services\nManager stated the three maintenance areas are sidewalk cleaning, litter cans, and\nlandscape.\nCouncilmember Chen inquired whether the City gives the business association the\nassessment funds.\nThe Public Works Administrative Services Manager responded the assessment revenue\nis in a segregated account separated by seven zones which funds a maintenance\nservices contract.\nCouncilmember Tam moved adoption of the resolution.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n3\nMay 6, 2014", "path": "CityCouncil/2014-05-06.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2014-05-06", "page": 5, "text": "Councilmember Chen seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 3.\n[Absent: Councilmember Daysog and Mayor Gilmore - 2.]\n(*14-171) Resolution No. 14915, \"Preliminarily Approving the Annual Report Declaring\nthe City's Intention to Order the Levy and Collection of Assessments and Providing for\nNotice of Public Hearing on June 17, 2014 - Maintenance Assessment District 01-01\n(Marina Cove). Adopted.\n(*14-172) Resolution No. 14916, \"Authorizing the City Manager to Sign a Cooperative\nAgreement with the Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District Concerning Improvements\nfor the Line 51 Corridor.\" Adopted.\n(*14-173) Resolution No. 14917, \"Authorize the Under Armour Logo and Stephen Curry\nSignature on the Leydecker Park Outdoor Basketball Court. Adopted.\nThe Recreation and Parks Director gave a Power Point presentation.\nVice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether funds for other Alameda parks can be\nobtained.\nThe Recreation and Parks Director responded the Under Armour grant funds are\nallotted one per City; stated obtaining grant funds from another sponsor is possible; cell\ntower revenues are available for one-time park projects; Washington Park may be next\nproject.\nCouncilmember Tam moved adoption of the resolution.\nVice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote\n- 5.\n(*14-174) Summary: Adopt an Ordinance Amending the Alameda Municipal Code by\nRevising the Webster Street Business Improvement Area (BIA) Boundaries and Setting\na new Surcharge for Large, Single Stand Alone Retail Stores within the BIA Boundaries\nand Determining that Adoption of the Ordinance is not a \"Project\" under California\nEnvironmental Quality Act (CEQA).\nOrdinance No. 3095, \"Amending Alameda Municipal Code Chapter VI, Sections 6-\n7.2(a), 6-7.2(b), and 6-7.5(j), and Adding Sections 6-7.5(a)6 and 6-7.5(e) to Revise the\nWebster Street Business Improvement Area (BIA) Boundaries and Setting a New BIA\nSurcharge Fee for Large, Single, Stand-Alone Retail Stores; Action is not a Project\nUnder CEQA because it is Organizational or Administrative Activities of Government\nthat will not Result in Direct or Indirect Physical Changes to the Environment.\" Finally\npassed.\nCouncilmembers Chen and Daysog recused themselves and left the dais.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n4\nMay 6, 2014", "path": "CityCouncil/2014-05-06.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2014-05-06", "page": 6, "text": "Vice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft moved final passage of the ordinance.\nCouncilmember Tam seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 3.\n[Absent: Councilmembers Chen and Daysog - 2.]\nCouncilmember Tam left the dais at 8:35 p.m. and returned at 8:37 p.m.\n***\nREGULAR AGENDA ITEMS\n(14-175) Receive an Update on the City of Alameda's Disaster Preparedness Program\nand the Community Emergency Response Team's (CERT) Activities.\nThe Deputy Fire Chief and Assistant Fire Marshall for Disaster Preparedness and Fire\nPrevention gave a Power Point presentation.\nVice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired how citizens would subscribe to Nixel 360.\nThe Assistant City Manager responded the City will launch a campaign to get residents\nto sign up.\nCouncilmember Tam inquired what types of unified response would be planned in the\nfuture.\nThe Deputy Fire Chief responded an Incident Action Plan can be used for day-to-day\nevents; stated table-top exercises are conducted to create incidents in a controlled\nenvironment and to discuss efficient operation and communication plans.\nCouncilmember Tam inquired whether CERT volunteers can handle bilingual issues\nduring a disaster.\nThe Assistant Fire Marshall responded interpreters can be hired with grant funds; stated\nthe website has bilingual links and volunteers are vetted for their bilingual skills during\ntraining.\nCouncilmember Daysog inquired if there are youth volunteers, to which the Deputy Fire\nChief responded in the affirmative; stated the youngest volunteers can be trained at 14\nwith an accompanying adult; youths from the Boys and Girls Club and Scouting are\ninvolved.\nCouncilmember Chen stated his son has signed up for the next CERT training; inquired\nhow the City's 1,400 volunteers are coordinated during a disaster.\nThe City Manager clarified 1,400 citizens have been trained to know what to do in the\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n5\nMay 6, 2014", "path": "CityCouncil/2014-05-06.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2014-05-06", "page": 7, "text": "event of a disaster; there are only 114 CERT trained citizens; stated the goal is to have\n1,000 CERT trained volunteers in five years.\nIn response to Councilmember Tam's inquiry, Jerry Jarhala, Alameda CERT Executive\nCommittee (ACEC), stated ACEC provides advice and structure for volunteers; team\nleaders teach 15 to 20 classes per year in disaster preparedness; team exercises are\nalso conducted throughout the year.\nMayor Gilmore recognized and thanked the volunteers for their time and effort; including\nthe HAM radio operators.\n***\nVice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft left the dais at 9:04 p.m. and returned at 9:07 p.m.\n(14-176) Public Hearing to Consider Adoption of the Fiscal Year 2014-15 Community\nDevelopment Block Grant/HOME Partnership Investment Program Action Plan and\nAuthorize the City Manager to Negotiate and Execute Related Documents, Agreements,\nand Modifications.\nThe Housing and Community Development Director gave a Power Point presentation.\nStated seniors found Alameda Family Services; case management services are being\napplied to a new population; discussed funding: Irene Couracas, Alameda Family\nServices.\nVice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft\nVice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired if Legal Assistance for Seniors has a service cap of\n45, to which Ms. Dandrea responded in the negative; stated Legal Assistance for\nSeniors always exceeds goals; clients are screened by age, not by income; the number\nof clients is based on an average within a year.\nVice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired if the agency is based in Alameda, to which Ms.\nDandrea responded in the negative; stated Legal Assistance for Seniors is based in\nOakland but is a County Agency and provides service to all cities in Alameda County.\nVice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether citizens have to go to Oakland for legal\nservices, to which Ms. Dandrea responded in the negative; stated the agency provides\nhome-visit services.\nVice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the agency has made a presentation at\nMastick Senior Center, to which Ms. Dandrea responded in the affirmative; stated an\nattorney provides private client meetings once a month at Mastick; the agency provides\ncommunity education wherever asked.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n6\nMay 6, 2014", "path": "CityCouncil/2014-05-06.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2014-05-06", "page": 8, "text": "Councilmember Daysog inquired whether the Alameda Food Bank sacrificed funds to\nallow other crucial safety-net providers better access to funding.\nThe Housing and Community Development Director responded the Food Bank received\na substantial cash donation from another source and is not cash strapped this year;\nstated staff met with the Food Bank and determined the smaller award would not\ncompromise service levels.\nCouncilmember Tam stated the fund allocation for the Food Bank was cut by 84%; that\nshe appreciates their generosity in requesting a lesser amount; inquired how increasing\nneeds can be addressed with the reallocation of funds to other programs.\nSteve Sokil, Food Bank volunteer, responded other associations need more funding;\nthat he is not privy to specific details of the allocations.\nCouncilmember Tam inquired whether Alameda Family Services (AFS) overlap with\nother service programs.\nThe Housing and Community Development Director responded AFS's proposal is to\nprovide social work case management services; stated there is some overlap of legal\nservice needs, but AFS provides more individual case management.\nVice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft commended the Food Bank and Alameda community for their\ngenerosity; stated she supports the $5,000 recommendation for the Food Bank.\nCouncilmember Chen inquired whether the scoring matrix was created in collaboration\nwith the SSHRB and the needs assessment.\nThe Housing and Community Development Director responded in the affirmative, stated\nthe matrix was presented as part of the application, which was circulated to the SSHRB\nand agreed to as format.\nCouncilmember Chen inquired how staff determined AFS would not receive additional\nfunding.\nThe Housing and Community Development Director responded the scores were\ngenerally in the 34 to 35 range with a maximum of 38; stated AFS scored 28; staff made\nthe decision to fund all of the higher scoring applicants with the objective to be impartial.\nCouncilmember Chen inquired why staff did not follow the SSRHB recommendation.\nThe Housing and Community Development Director responded staff developed the\nrecommendation independently and forwarded the information to the SSRHB; when the\nSSHRB presented alternative scoring, staff felt that changing the recommendation\nwould compromise the process and undermine the intent to use the scoring matrix as\nan objective measure; staff and SSHRB recommendations are equally valid and Council\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n7\nMay 6, 2014", "path": "CityCouncil/2014-05-06.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2014-05-06", "page": 9, "text": "can decide to allocate funds.\nCouncilmember Chen stated that he did not see ECHO funded through the public\nservice portion of CDBG in any prior years.\nThe Housing and Community Development Director responded the Fair Housing\nProgram is a Housing and Urban Development (HUD) requirement; stated Fair Housing\nwas funded from the CDBG Administration line item until last year; in prior years, staff\nwas funded using other city resources, primarily the redevelopment agency; the end of\nredevelopment, and greater administration costs, leave no room to pay for service\nprograms from administration.\nCouncilmember Chen inquired whether there is another source of revenue to\nsupplement the $25,000 shortfall if Council selects the SSHRB recommendation.\nThe Housing and Community Development Director responded she is not aware of any\nother funding source.\nIn response to Councilmember Chen's inquiry, the Housing and Community\nDevelopment Director stated HUD requires a fair housing provider within every city; it is\ncustomary for the funding source to come from general funds, CDBG, and other funding\nsources, including the County.\nCouncilmember Chen inquired what would happen if the HUD mandate to provide fair\nhousing is not maintained.\nMayor Gilmore responded electing the SSHRB recommendation would satisfy the HUD\nrequirement for fair housing, but it will not fund tenant-landlord services; funding for\nECHO Landlord/Tenant Services was supplemented by the administrative fund and\nremained consistent until FY11/12 through 12/14; the staff recommendation seeks\nprogram funding instead of from the administrative funds; the SSHRB recommendation\nis consistent with the level of funding for last ten years.\nCouncilmember Chen inquired what services would be compromised if Council selects\nthe SSHRB recommendation.\nThe Housing and Community Development Director responded HUD requires reports to\ntrack performance, stated all applicants are required to state the number of households\nthey intend to serve; reduced funding means reduced commitment.\nCouncilmember Chen inquired how program services would be sustained if the Food\nBank applies for an increased amount next year.\nThe Housing and Community Development Director responded the primary reason the\nAFS scored lower is because they did not have a past funding, nor a clear future\nfunding source; staff is seeking to apply the dollars in a way where it is most clear that\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n8\nMay 6, 2014", "path": "CityCouncil/2014-05-06.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2014-05-06", "page": 10, "text": "the performance would be strong based on past performance and based on outside\nsources.\nOutlined Alameda Family Services (AFS) case management services, including\nexpansion to seniors; provided an example: Ebony Brown, AFS.\nMayor Gilmore inquired how many seniors were served through the AFS program, to\nwhich Ms. Brown responded approximately 60 seniors.\nMayor Gilmore inquired whether AFS's requested funding is just for the senior\ncomponent, to which Ms. Brown responded in the affirmative; stated the funding would\nextend the existing program to include a dedicated case manager just for seniors.\nVice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired how many hours per week would the case worker\nprovide, to which Ms. Brown responded 20 hours: 16 hours for case management\nservices and four hours for outreach.\nIn response to Vice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft's inquiry, Ms. Brown stated the case worker\nwould not be a licensed social worker.\nCouncilmember Daysog stated AFS seems to be youth-focused, inquired whether AFS\nhas experience assisting the elderly.\nMs. Brown responded providing direct service to the elderly is a new focus for AFS;\nstated AFS developed a partnership with Mastick Senior Center after learning about\nseniors' needs.\nCouncilmember Chen inquired whether other agencies can help seniors apply for the\nservices AFS provides.\nMs. Brown responded that she is not aware of any other agency providing the in-home\nsupport services in Alameda.\nCouncilmember Chen inquired without similar services, the case manager is much\nneeded; inquired what would happen if AFS loses income next year.\nMs. Brown responded sustainability is an on-going issue; AFS is always looking for\nfunding streams; even if AFS only provides the service for one year, seniors can\nconnect to the family support center.\nCouncilmember Chen inquired whether AFS would lose the family support center if\nthere is no funding.\nMs. Brown responded in the negative; stated AFS has provided services in Alameda for\n34 years; if the new senior case management program is not funded, AFS still has other\nprograms.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n9\nMay 6, 2014", "path": "CityCouncil/2014-05-06.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2014-05-06", "page": 11, "text": "Vice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired how AFS plans to market their services.\nMs. Brown responded AFS will provide community teach-ins, maximize relationships\nwith other organizations and community groups including Mastick Senior Center,\nchurches, Food Bank, medical centers, and the adult schools; AFS has an open door\npolicy; people know how to access AFS.\nCouncilmember Tam inquired how other communities provide similar services and what\nare their funding sources.\nMs. Brown responded senior programs are always first to have funding cut; stated the\nCity of Oakland has very few senior services and certain limitations to access services;\nAlameda would be unique in prioritizing case management services for the senior\npopulation.\nIn response to Councilmember Tam's inquiry, Ms. Brown stated resources for seniors\nare often less than those allocated for youth; there are not many services that provide a\nsimilar type of case management.\nStated AFS is not looking to change its mission; AFS did not seek out the senior\npopulation; seniors found AFS because there were no other resources; AFS was not\naware of the scoring matrix; clarification on how proposals are reviewed would have\nbeen helpful for agencies; sustainability is an issue for all agencies; getting funding\nwithout a track record is more difficult: Irene Kudarauskus, AFS Executive Director,\nVice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether AFS tried referring seniors to other\nagencies, to which Ms. Kudarauskus responded in the affirmative; stated AFS would not\nbe asking for funding if there were other agencies providing the services.\nStated Alameda Family Services is a trusted organization which would like to help\nseniors: Kathy Moehring, AFS.\nStated Legal Assistance for Seniors (LAS)does not provide case management services;\nLAS is a County agency but is not fully funded by the County; outlined funding;\ndiscussed potential service impacts: Francel Dandrea, LAS.\nVice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether LAS refers clients to other agencies, to\nwhich Ms. Dandrea responded in the affirmative; stated LAS has a huge referral base\nfor when they are unable to assist with cases.\nOutlined the needs statement; discussed ratings and proposals: Doug Biggs, Social\nService Human Relations Board (SSHRB).\nVice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether cases are documented, to which Mr. Biggs\nresponded in the affirmative; stated as a CDBG agency, AFS is required to document.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n10\nMay 6, 2014", "path": "CityCouncil/2014-05-06.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2014-05-06", "page": 12, "text": "In response to Councilmember Chen's inquiry, Mr. Biggs stated other agencies also feel\nthe loss of redevelopment agency funds; the SSHRB chose to fund the agencies\nidentified as having the most critical needs and housing counseling is not a critical need.\n(14-177) Councilmember Daysog moved approval of considering the Park Street\nBusiness Improvement Area Report [paragraph no. 14-179 after 10:30 p.m.\nCouncilmember Chen seconded the motion, which carried by the following voice vote:\nAyes: Councilmembers Chen, Daysog, Ezzy Ashcraft and Mayor Gilmore - 4. Noes:\nCouncilmember Tam - 1.\nStated ECHO would be facing a 32% cut in fair housing and no funding for\nTenant/Landlord Services if the SSHRB recommendation is adopted; discussed\nservices: Mary Anne Reno and Angie Hajjem, ECHO.\nIn response to Mayor Gilmore's inquiry, Ms. Hajjem stated ECHO served 190 tenants,\n13 of which were resolved successfully.\nCouncilmember Tam inquired how many seniors did ECHO serve, to which Ms. Hajjem\nresponded she does not have an exact number at the moment but would provide the\ninformation later.\nCouncilmember Tam inquired whether ECHO has seen a large increase in seniors\nneeding services, to which Ms. Hajjem responded in the affirmative; stated there is in an\nincrease in the number of seniors who have lived in Alameda for a long time.\nIn response to Councilmember Tam's inquiry, Ms. Hajjem stated ECHO provides\nservices to help seniors reach stability, including rent increase mediation and referrals\nto the Rent Review Advisory Commission (RRAC).\nCouncilmember Chen inquired why ECHO does not just refer seniors to the RRAC, to\nwhich Ms. Hajjem responded the RRAC only handles rent increases; stated the RRAC\ndoes not deal with habitability issues, lease violations, unlawful entry or harassment, all\nof which ECHO does.\nVice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired what was the outcome of the remainder 177 tenants\nserved.\nMs. Hajjem responded the other 177 tenants were either referred to other agencies or\nthey just needed questions answered.\nSafety net services for seniors has been identified as a need; outlined the review\nprocess: Michael Radding, SSHRB.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n11\nMay 6, 2014", "path": "CityCouncil/2014-05-06.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2014-05-06", "page": 13, "text": "Stated the Midway Shelter has the highest outcomes in the County; outlined program\nactivities and funding; stated the San Leandro shelter would be closing due to State\nfunding cuts: Liz Varela, Building Futures for Women and Children.\nStated that she submitted a letter in support of ECHO; discussed rental issues; urged\napproval of the staff recommendation: Laura Thomas, Renewed Hope.\nExplained the past Countywide process used to establish the funds allocated to Eden\nI&R; discussed the services provided by Eden I & R: Alison DeJung, Eden I&R and 211.\n***\n(14-178) Vice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft moved approval of continuing the meeting past\n11:00 p.m.\nCouncilmember Chen seconded the motion, which carried by the following voice vote:\nAyes: Councilmember Chen, Daysog, Ezzy Ashcraft and Mayor Gilmore - 4.\nCouncilmember Tam - 1.\n***\nCouncilmember Tam stated a comment from a speaker made an impression; there is so\nmuch discussion over $25,000 out of a $2 million budget; that she supports the SSHRB\nrecommendation and recommends finding the $25,000 shortfall from the Housing\nAuthority (HA) budget to restore the funding cut from Eden I&R and ECHO.\nCouncilmember Chen concurred with Councilmember Tam; stated AFS has not proven\na need for a part time case manager; AFS needs a track record in a year or two that\nshows the need; supports the SSRHB recommendation but suggested AFS funding be\nreduced to $20,000 and $5,000 should go to ECHO, and the HA should match the\n$5,000 for a total of $10,000 to ECHO.\nVice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated the AFS proposal is new and more broadbased; the\nduplication of services could be resolved with more effective referrals; she cannot vote\nto take money away from ECHO or Eden I&R; that she supports the staff\nrecommendation and checking to see if there is money from the HA for AFS.\nCouncilmember Daysog stated his approach to the CDBG process is to look at gap\nfunding for organizations that have an existing history with other funding streams, not\nfunding new programs; the City has an affirmative obligation to fair housing; that he\nsupports the staff recommendation.\nMayor Gilmore stated that she would like the scoring process clarified, made\ntransparent to applicants, and be a collaboration between the HA and SSHRB; there\nwas no close collaboration between staff and SSHRB to arrive at a single\nrecommendation; inquired whether the Council can direct the HA to find funds to fill the\ngap.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n12\nMay 6, 2014", "path": "CityCouncil/2014-05-06.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2014-05-06", "page": 14, "text": "The City Attorney responded in the negative; stated the HA is a separate entity and the\nCity Council cannot direct the HA to find additional funding; in the staffing services\nagreement, the HA agreed to administer and implement programs formerly done by the\nCity, including CDBG program funds; the administrative fees category in the CDBG\nbudget may allow flexibility; Council makes final decisions about how CDBG allocations\nare made.\nMayor Gilmore inquired whether Council has authority to collaborate with the SSHRB; to\nwhich the City Attorney responded in the affirmative.\nThe Housing Authority Executive Director concurred with the City Attorney; stated the\nservices agreement with the City is to operate the CDBG; the HA makes\nrecommendations and the City Council makes decisions; CDBG is City funds, not HA\nfunds; other funding sources need to be reviewed and evaluated to determine whether\nthey can be reallocated; the sources include Affordable Housing Funds and In-lieu fees\nthe City receives for development.\nMayor Gilmore stated the timeframe is very tight; if the HA does not have the\ninformation tonight, it needs to brought back.\nVice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated additional CDBG funds are not available any more\nthan last year.\nThe Housing Authority Executive Director concurred; stated the end of redevelopment\nwas the reason for funds diminishing this year; hard decisions have to be made.\nCouncilmember Tam inquired whether there is flexibility this year to fund the $25,000\nfrom the CDBG administrative fund.\nThe Housing Authority Executive Director responded there are not any savings in this\nyear's fund because the FY starts July 1, 2014; stated if money from other program\nfunds can supplant the administrative fund, then the administrative fund could be\nallocated to the public services.\nCouncilmember Chen stated the City is mandated by HUD to fund fair housing; inquired\nwhether the HA is compliant if ECHO is not completely funded.\nThe City Attorney responded the City must fund fair housing as a recipient of CDBG\nfunds; the landlord/tenant portion of ECHO's program is not mandated.\nCouncilmember Tam inquired whether the fair housing requirement can come out of the\nadministrative fund and the landlord/tenant portion come out of a different pool.\nThe City Attorney responded in the affirmative; stated administrative fund cuts could\nimpact the HA's ability to implement the CDBG program.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n13\nMay 6, 2014", "path": "CityCouncil/2014-05-06.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2014-05-06", "page": 15, "text": "The Housing Authority Executive Director stated $170,000 of the $250,000 in the\nadministrative fund is for staff and the balance is for operating costs; shifting\nadministrative costs to other programs may be possible.\nCouncilmember Chen inquired how much of the administrative costs can be spared\nwithout impacting the HA's level of service, to which the Housing Authority Executive\nDirector responded he cannot answer.\nThe City Manager inquired whether there are any staff vacancy savings that can be\napplied to FY14/15 appropriations, to which the Housing and Community Development\nDirector responded in the negative; stated the HA is overextended and there are no\nsurplus funds; the HA needs direction on how to amend the action.\nThe Housing Authority Executive Director stated Council can adopt either\nrecommendation or a hybrid of both and the HA will make it work.\nCouncilmember Chen inquired whether the HA would add $5,000 for ECHO.\nThe City Attorney responded Council cannot ask the HA to come up with funds.\nVice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired what would the HA do if the Food Bank requests\n$31,500 next year.\nThe Housing Authority Executive Director responded the issue would be addressed next\nyear; stated there will be less money next year; an additional $31,000 request would\nmean something else will get cut; the HA would fulfill the direction from the City Council.\nThe City Manager added the HA will follow Council's direction without increasing the\ntotal allocation of $191,058.\nIn response to Councilmember Chen's comment, the City Manager stated if the door to\nthe General Fund is opened, there will be no end; the solution is more aggressive\npartnership between public agencies and the private sector for fund raising.\nVice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft moved approval of following the staff recommendation with\nthe proviso that if the HA locates any additional funding within their organization this\nyear, it can go toward the AFS proposal; added funding next year is not a guarantee.\nMayor Gilmore stated the motion would not be within the $191,000 allocation; it would\nbe $191,000 plus additional funding.\nThe City Manager concurred, stated any additional funds found by the HA would not be\nCDBG funds.\nThe Housing Authority Executive Director clarified the Affordable Housing Funds and In\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n14\nMay 6, 2014", "path": "CityCouncil/2014-05-06.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2014-05-06", "page": 16, "text": "Lieu funds would be used, which are mostly for development.\nIn response to Mayor Gilmore's inquiry, the Housing Authority Executive Director stated\nTarget is an example of in lieu funds; Target pays an in-lieu fee for affordable housing.\nCouncilmember Daysog inquired whether money would be taken from funds that would\ngo toward purchasing an asset to provide for services' to which the Housing Authority\nExecutive Director responded in the affirmative; stated it may or may not be allowable.\nThe City Attorney added there could be legal restrictions.\nMayor Gilmore stated using other funding sources would need Council approval.\nThe City Manager stated one motion would take care of the HUD requirement; another\nmotion is needed to direct the City Manager to work with the HA to find funds for the\nSSHRB recommendation.\nVice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft moved approval of the staff recommendation.\nCouncilmember Daysog seconded the motion, which FAILED by the following voice\nvote: Ayes: Councilmembers Daysog and Ezzy Ashcraft - 2. Noes: Councilmembers\nChen, Tam and Mayor Gilmore - 3.\n***\nCouncilmember Tam left the dais at 12:01 p.m. returned at 12:03 and Councilmember\nDaysog left the dais at 12:02 and returned at 12:03 p.m.\nCouncilmember Chen suggested ECHO and AFS share the burden; stated the risk is\nthe same for both agencies if the HA can come up with remaining balance.\nCouncilmember Daysog stated that he would not support Councilmember Chen's\nrecommendation; the obligation is for fair housing and he does not want to shift the\nallocation.\nCouncilmember Tam stated that she supports Councilmember Chen's recommendation;\nthe mandated programs should come out of the agency's budget, not from a pool where\nother services are competing,\nCouncilmember Chen moved approval of the SSHRB recommendation with\nmodifications: 1) reducing AFS to $12,711, 2) increasing ECHO to $30,028, and 3)\nwaiting for the HA to find the remaining $12,000 for AFS.\nMayor Gilmore stated the areas that differ significantly between the two\nrecommendations are AFS, Eden I&R, Legal Assistance for Seniors, and ECHO.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n15\nMay 6, 2014", "path": "CityCouncil/2014-05-06.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2014-05-06", "page": 17, "text": "Vice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated there will be negative implications if Eden I&R is cut\nfurther.\nCouncilmember Daysog stated that he is concerned about making budget numbers on\nthe fly independent of the organizational capacity to achieve the social safety net; the\nstaff recommendation is anchored to a certain level of service.\nVice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated cutting important services that address different needs\nis a shame, inquired what the Mayor's objections are to the staff recommendation.\nMayor Gilmore responded not all agencies competing for funds had equal footing;\nstated two agencies providing mandated service were put in the same pool and should\nhave been taken off the top instead.\nVice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she agrees with the Mayor about clarifying the\nscoring, but the people who would pay for the misstep are the end users who would\nbenefit from the service.\nMayor Gilmore stated there are not enough funds and it is a struggle for everyone.\nCouncilmember Chen moved approval of the staff recommendation, with reducing\nECHO to $17,173, allocating $13,877 to AFS, and waiting for the HA to come up with\navailable funds to fill the gap.\nVice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether ECHO could be restored to $31,050 if the\nHA finds available funding.\nCouncilmember Tam seconded the motion.\nIn response to Vice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft's inquiry, Councilmember Tam stated Council\nis not arguing the merits of the services; the discussion is about allocation and directing\nstaff to seek out $25,711 to allocate between ECHO and AFS.\nVice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she would rather the cut to ECHO not be so\ndrastic; it sends the wrong message.\nCouncilmember Daysog made a substitute motion to approve the staff recommendation\nfor all public services except AFS and ECHO.\nVice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft seconded the substitute motion, which carried by unanimous\nvoice vote - 5.\nCouncilmember Chen moved approval of $13,877 being allocated to AFS and $17,173\nbeing allocated to ECHO.\nCouncilmember Tam seconded the motion.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n16\nMay 6, 2014", "path": "CityCouncil/2014-05-06.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2014-05-06", "page": 18, "text": "Under discussion, Vice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the $17,173 for ECHO\nwas for the fair housing portion, to which the City Attorney responded in the affirmative.\nCouncilmember Chen clarified his motion is approval of $13,877 being allocated to AFS\nand $17,173 being allocated to ECHO for fair housing.\nCouncilmember Tam seconded the motion which carried by the following voice vote:\nAyes: Councilmembers Chen, Tam and Mayor Gilmore - 3. Noes: Councilmembers\nDaysog and Ezzy Ashcraft.\nCouncilmember Tam moved approval of directing the City Manager to work with the\nHousing Authority and staff to seek $25,711 in funding sources and return with a\nproposal to the Council on how to distribute the funds between ECHO and AFS.\nCouncilmember Chen seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.\nCouncilmember Daysog moved approval of the staff recommendation for the remaining\nfunds.\nCouncilmember Tam seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.\n***\nMayor Gilmore called a recess at 12:23 a.m. and reconvened the meeting at 12:30 a.m.\n***\n(14-179) Public Hearing to Consider Resolution No. 14918, \"Confirming the Park Street\nBusiness Improvement Area (BIA) Report for FY2014-15 and Levying an Annual\nAssessment on the Park Street BIA.\" Adopted.\nCouncilmember Chen recused himself and left the dais.\nThe Economic Development Manager gave a brief presentation.\nVice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired why the Park Street Landing mall is not part of the\nBIA.\nThe Economic Development Manager responded the mall would have to go through a\nprocess similar to the WABA BIA amendment.\nStated PSBA is reviewing the matter and would be making a recommendation: Donna\nLayburn, PSBA President\nVice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft moved approval of the staff recommendation.\nCouncilmember Daysog seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote\n-\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n17\nMay 6, 2014", "path": "CityCouncil/2014-05-06.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2014-05-06", "page": 19, "text": "4. [Absent: Councilmember Chen - 1.]\nCITY MANAGER COMMUNICATIONS\n(14-180) The City Manager provided a flyer and announced the upcoming broker event.\nORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA\n(14-181) Irma Garcia, Alameda, discussed the transport of hazardous material in the\nTube.\nCOUNCIL REFERRALS\nNone.\nCOUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS\n(14-182) Consideration of Mayor's Nomination for Appointment to the Golf Commission.\nMayor Gilmore nominated Cheryl Saxton for appointment to the Golf Commission.\n(14-183) Vice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she attended the Association of Bay\nArea Governments Assembly; suggested that Alameda submit Jack Capon Villa for an\naward next year.\n(14-184) Councilmember Tam stated that she attended the League of California Cities\nAdvocacy Days; the League is seeking support regarding massage parlors.\nADJOURNMENT\nThere being no further business, Mayor Gilmore adjourned the meeting at 12:41 a.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\n18\nMay 6, 2014", "path": "CityCouncil/2014-05-06.pdf"}