{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2015-01-20", "page": 1, "text": "MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING\nTUESDAY- - -JANUARY 20, 2015- -6:00 P.M.\nMayor Spencer convened the meeting at 6:00 p.m.\nRoll Call -\nPresent:\nCouncilmembers Daysog, Ezzy Ashcraft, Matarrese, Oddie\nand Mayor Spencer - 5.\nNote:\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft arrived at 6:01 p.m. and\nCouncilmember Daysog arrived at 6:07 p.m.\nAbsent:\nNone.\nThe meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider:\n(15-034) Conference with Legal Counsel - Anticipated Litigation; Initiation of litigation\npursuant to subdivision (c) of Section 54956.9; Number of cases: Three (As Plaintiff\n-\nCity Initiating Legal Action)\nFollowing the Closed Session, the meeting was reconvened and Mayor Spencer\nannounced direction was given to staff.\nAdjournment\nThere being no further business, Mayor Spencer adjourned the meeting at 6:51 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\nJanuary 20, 2015", "path": "CityCouncil/2015-01-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2015-01-20", "page": 2, "text": "MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING\nTUESDAY- - -JANUARY 20, 2015- -7:00 - P.M.\nMayor Spencer convened the meeting at 7:01 p.m. The Fire Chief led the Pledge of\nAllegiance.\nROLL CALL -\nPresent:\nCouncilmembers Daysog, Ezzy Ashcraft, Matarrese,\nOddie and Mayor Spencer - 5.\nAbsent:\nNone.\nAGENDA CHANGES\n(15-035) Mayor Spencer stated that she would like the First Quarter Financial Report of\nthe Joint CC/SACIC meeting to be heard on February 3rd.\nVice Mayor Matarrese stated he is concerned about pushing items to the next meeting\nand would like to wait until the decision to move items needs to be made.\nMayor Spencer stated in the interest of time, she would like to start with the Joint\nmeeting because an outside auditor is present.\nThe City Clerk stated the auditor has not arrived yet.\nMayor Spencer stated that she would like to address the Council Referrals after the first\nfour resolutions on the Regular Agenda, and then, hear the rental housing issue\n[paragraph no. 15-051].\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she would not like to change the agenda;\nmembers of the public may not have arrived yet if items are moved; agendas are\npublished ahead of time for the public to economize their time.\nMayor Spencer stated moving the Council referrals to the top of the meeting was a prior\nagreement from the last meeting.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated there are many people present for the Alameda\nPoint items.\nMayor Spencer requested input from other Councilmembers.\nCouncilmember Daysog stated that he is fine with the referrals staying at the end of\nmeeting as long as they are addressed tonight.\nVice Mayor Matarrese suggested moving the commendation resolutions to the front of\nthe agenda as there are lots of standing audience for the commendations.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n1\nJanuary 20, 2015", "path": "CityCouncil/2015-01-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2015-01-20", "page": 3, "text": "Mayor Spencer inquired whether Council agrees to move the resolutions to the\nbeginning.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated Council should move through the agenda as published.\nCouncilmember Daysog concurred with Councilmember Oddie; stated there should be\nno agenda changes.\nPROCLAMATIONS, SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY AND ANNOUNCEMENTS\n(15-036) The Housing Authority Program Manager provided handouts and reviewed the\nHousing Rehabilitation Program and opening of the Section 8.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether assistance is available for those not\ntechnically savvy.\nThe Housing Authority Program Manager responded in the affirmative, stated 15\npartners are available to assist people in completing the forms.\nORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA\n(15-037) Tim Scates, Golf Commission, stated that the tower at the Golf Course has not\nbeen used for 15 years; urged it to be demolished and removed.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether staff could follow up, to which the City Manager\nresponded in the affirmative.\n(15-038) Kurt Peterson, Alameda, stated a development item is on the agenda and\nshould not move forward without a traffic plan in place; the cart is being put ahead of the\nhorse.\n(15-039) Ken Peterson, Alameda, expressed concern over Council disregarding\nrequirements in ordinances; cited the Del Monte issue as an example; stated the Del\nMonte ordinances were passed illegally and there is no contract.\nCONSENT CALENDAR\nMayor Spencer announced final passage of the ordinance [paragraph no. 15-042 was\nremoved from the Consent Calendar for discussion.\nVice Mayor Matarrese moved approval of the remainder of the Consent Calendar.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice\nvote - 5. [Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk preceding the\nparagraph number.]\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n2\nJanuary 20, 2015", "path": "CityCouncil/2015-01-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2015-01-20", "page": 4, "text": "(*15-040) Minutes of the Special and Regular Meetings Held on December 16, 2014.\nApproved.\n(*15-041) Ratified bills in the amount of $2,951,104.22\n(15-042) Ordinance No. 3119, \"Approving a Lease and Authorizing the City Manager to\nExecute Documents Necessary to Implement the Terms of a Lease with Wrightspeed,\nInc., a Delaware Corporation, for Seven Years with Two Additional Five-Year Options\nand an Opportunity to Purchase Building 41 Located at 650 West Tower Avenue at\nAlameda Point.\" Finally passed.\nStated solar collectors on the building would collect 20,000 mega watt hours (MWH) of\nelectricity; suggested use of thermal collectors be considered: Ken Peterson, Alameda.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated a press event was held today at Alameda Point\nregarding the signing of the lease; the current 150 employees will hopefully grow to 300;\nemployees are renters who would like to live in the same city in which they work; the\nfocus is on getting the adjacent Site A development going.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft moved final passage of the ordinance.\nVice Mayor Matarrese seconded the motion.\nUnder discussion, Mayor Spencer clarified that the motion pertains strictly to\nWrightspeed and does not include Site A.\nOn the call for the question, the motion carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.\nREGULAR AGENDA ITEMS\n(15-043) Resolution No. 15000, \"Appointing Bruce Edwards as Member of the Pension\nBoard.' Adopted.\nVice Mayor Matarrese moved adoption of the resolution.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice\nvote - 5.\nThe City Clerk administered the Oath of Office and presented a Certificate of\nAppointment to Mr. Edwards.\n(15-044) Resolution No. 15001, \"Commending Alameda Fire Department Chief Michael\nD'Orazi for His Contributions to the City Of Alameda.' Adopted.\nVice Mayor Matarrese moved adoption of the resolution.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n3\nJanuary 20, 2015", "path": "CityCouncil/2015-01-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2015-01-20", "page": 5, "text": "Councilmember Oddie seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote -\n5.\nMayor Spencer read the resolution and presented it to Chief D'Orazi.\nChief D'Orazi made brief comments.\n(15-045) Resolution No. 15002, \"Commending Alameda Division Chief Daren Olson for\nHis Contributions to the City of Alameda.' Adopted.\nVice Mayor Matarrese moved adoption of the resolution.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice\nvote - 5.\nMayor Spencer read the resolution and presented it to Division Chief Olson.\nDivision Chief Olson made brief comments.\n(15-046) Resolution No. 15003, \"Commending Alameda Fire Department Division Chief\nMatthew Tunney for His Contributions to the City of Alameda.\" Adopted.\nCouncilmember Oddie moved adoption of the resolution.\nVice Mayor Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote -\n5.\nMayor Spencer read the resolution and presented it to Division Chief Tunney.\nDivision Chief Tunney made brief comments.\n(15-047) Presentation on Status Report of Environmental Conditions and Clean-up at\nAlameda Point.\nPeter Russell, Russell Resources, gave a Power Point presentation.\nOutlined his activity on the Restoration Advisory Board (RAB); expressed concern for\nhidden clean-up costs; urged the City Attorney to be careful to prevent lawsuits against\nthe City: Kurt Peterson, RAB.\nIntroduced RAB members; stated it is important for the City to understand future\nliabilities; informed the public of an annual Navy tour of the clean-up sites: Susan\nGalleymore, RAB.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired the date of the next tour, to which Ms.\nGalleymore responded the RAB is setting the date for June or July.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n4\nJanuary 20, 2015", "path": "CityCouncil/2015-01-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2015-01-20", "page": 6, "text": "Mayor Spencer announced the next RAB meeting and encouraged anyone interested to\nattend.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated the City Council should stay in the loop on clean-up plans;\nthe Site 2 Investigation Report and Feasibility Study comment period will be released\nin\nFebruary; one of the criteria is community acceptance; that he recommends a\ndiscussion with staff and Dr. Russell about alternatives in February.\nCouncilmember Daysog stated the Bayport community also went through clean-up\napprovals by federal agencies and the Department of Toxic Substances Control\n(DTSC); the lesson from Bayport is that Council has to be vigilant and step in when\nnecessary.\nVice Mayor Matarrese stated that he was the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment\nAuthority (ARRA) Board liaison to the RAB from 2006 to 2010 and was able to provide\ncomments and questions on Records of Decisions (ROD); that he recommends the\nCouncil assign a RAB liaison to report back to the successor organization for Council\nquestions, directions, and comments on the Navy's clean-up activity.\nMayor Spencer announced a City Council meeting is scheduled for tomorrow to discuss\nthe process for Council Referrals; inquired who should be contacted if someone has a\nspecific concern regarding clean-up safety at Alameda Point.\nThe Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point responded the point person on\nenvironmental issues at Alameda Point is Derek Robinson of the Navy; folks could also\ncontact her; provided contact information.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the public would have access to areas\nthat are not cleaned up to a level that is considered safe.\nThe Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point responded in the negative; stated the\nNavy is very careful about liability; if an area is not fenced off, it is considered safe; if an\narea is actively being cleaned up, the Navy would restrict the area.\nDr. Russell added that imminent threats are cleaned up immediately; stated some areas\nof active clean up may be fenced off for construction hazards rather than contamination\nhazards.\n(15-048) Presentation on Site A Development at Alameda Point, Including Initial\nDevelopment Concept.\nThe Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point gave a Power Point presentation.\nJoe Ernst, Alameda Point Partners (APP), made brief comments and David Israel, BAR\nArchitects, gave a Power Point presentation.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n5\nJanuary 20, 2015", "path": "CityCouncil/2015-01-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2015-01-20", "page": 7, "text": "Councilmember Daysog inquired about the design in terms of honoring the military town\nhistory emulating medieval fortress cities with curving winding roads; stated that he is\ninterested in preserving the built environment and the residential design is linear;\nsuggested incorporating curving feature.\nMr. Israel responded the design is not completely homogenous; the designs are\nconceptual to test block sizes and potential densities and are not intended to be\nresolved designs at this point; the design respects the precise plan direction to continue\nthe urban grid that exists throughout greater Alameda; keeping the reminder of the Navy\norigin is important; pathways are meandering.\nMayor Spencer stated questions should be clarifying; inquired whether one of the two\ncircles would not be preserved, to which Mr. Israel responded in the affirmative; stated\nremoving half of the circle is proposed at this time.\nCouncilmember Daysog clarified his question is to what extent can the narrow\npedestrian paths be included in the design.\nCouncilmember Oddie requested an outline of what the Chief Operating Officer\n-\nAlameda Point would be reporting back to Council in coming months and what other\nopportunities the public would have to provide input.\nThe Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point responded tonight's meeting is to kick off\nthe initial concept; staff will take comments from tonight's meeting and present a more\nformal development plan application to the Planning Board on January 26th; staff will\ncome back to the Council in February to provide an update on the development plan\napplication; in March, Council will provide high level policy feedback; April will be the\nlast chance for the Council to weigh in before the Planning Board hears the\nrecommendations; then the matter would return back to the Council in May; a schedule\nis attached to the staff report and a website has been created to inform the public of\nworkshops and other opportunities to provide input; social media and email distributions\nare additional forms of outreach; three open houses are planned, one of which would\ninclude a walking tour.\nCouncilmember Daysog inquired the division between owner-occupied and renter-\noccupied units.\nMr. Ernst responded approximately 75% of the project, including the affordable housing,\nare rental units, and 25% owned.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether the 25% affordable housing units are apartments, to\nwhich Mr. Ernst responded the affordable housing would be a combination of\napartments and townhome units.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether the percentage of affordable housing units could be\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n6\nJanuary 20, 2015", "path": "CityCouncil/2015-01-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2015-01-20", "page": 8, "text": "higher.\nMr. Ernst responded there are very precise funding mechanisms for the affordable\nhousing; stated other funding opportunities would have to be evaluated; that he could\nreport back on the matter later.\nMayor Spencer inquired the purchase and rental prices for the affordable housing units,\nto which Mr. Ernst responded that he cannot present price information at this point.\nIn response to Mayor Spencer's inquiry, Mr. Ernst stated the pricing is market-based\nand information would be shared with the Council as it is developed.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether the plan contemplates housing for new employees\ncoming to Alameda Point, rather than existing employees and residents.\nMr. Ernst responded the project is a true mixed-used project that presents opportunities\nfor people who already work and live in Alameda, as well as providing opportunities for\nnew companies wanting to locate at Alameda Point.\nMayor Spencer inquired the total anticipated cost for the Sports Complex, to which the\nChief Operating Officer - Alameda Point responded $20 million.\nCouncilmember Daysog stated data indicates there are a lot more rental units in the\nWest End with a desire for more ownership.\nMayor Spencer stated Councilmember Daysog's comments can be discussed later and\nasked for only clarifying questions.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired how the Council gives direction to the Planning\nBoard regarding the Development Plan.\nThe Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point responded because of the tight timeline\nand desire to keep the process moving, staff will present tonight's comments to the\nPlanning Board orally, or incorporate the comments in the staff report if time permits;\nhopefully the Planning Board will approve the Development Plan in April to allow the\nCouncil to approve the Disposition and Development Agreement (DDA) in May.\nVice Mayor Matarrese inquired whether there is a density bonus application relevant to\nthe project, to which the Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point responded the project\nis 800 homes; stated the land is the City's and the Council can create a cap on the 800\nunits.\nVice Mayor Matarrese stated it is critical to resolve the ordinance issues of what bonus\ncan be granted.\nThe Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point concurred; stated staff is aware of the\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n7\nJanuary 20, 2015", "path": "CityCouncil/2015-01-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2015-01-20", "page": 9, "text": "situation.\nStated housing is needed to fund the project; discussed the need for rental housing:\nKari Thompson, Chamber of Commerce.\nOutlined the need for rental housing: Angela Hockabout, Alameda Renters Coalition.\nDiscussed development being done without relying on money from housing, energy\ncreation and storage to supplement the project, and desalination plant: Ken Peterson,\nAlameda.\nStated infrastructure issues prevented other developers from being interested;\nexpressed concern over attracting new businesses and retaining existing businesses;\nstated the Chamber supports the project and the developer: Michael McDonough,\nChamber of Commerce.\nRead a letter submitted by Brian Shook: Bryan Graves, Bladium.\nExpressed support for APP; stated a transit oriented community would be an\nimprovement; the project plans for the future; Casey Sparks, Alameda.\nDiscussed the history of Alameda Point and the Community Reuse Plan; expressed\nsupport for Alameda Point being broken into more manageable parts; outlined desired\nelements included in the first development; urged support: Helen Sause, Alameda\nHome Team.\nExpressed support for the Site A development and excitement for Alameda being on the\nfront page of the San Francisco Business Times; stated APP is a dream team: Karen\nBey, Alameda.\nExpressed support for the development; discussed affordable housing and transit\nplanning: William Smith, Renewed Hope.\nExpressed concern over APP and its past project in Emeryville, specifically the traffic\ncongestion; urged renderings be accurate; expressed concerned over the Sea Plane\nLagoon dredging and cleanup costs: Kurt Peterson, Alameda.\nInquired where children in the 800 housing units would go to school: Barbara\nRasmussen, Alameda.\nStated that he is pleased with APP's proposal; transportation is key at Alameda Point\nand can work; he supports the project moving forward: Jon Spangler, Alameda.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft requested information on the Seaplane Lagoon dredging\nissue.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n8\nJanuary 20, 2015", "path": "CityCouncil/2015-01-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2015-01-20", "page": 10, "text": "The Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point responded the Navy has performed\ndredging and removed significant cubic yards of sediment from the two corners of the\nSeaplane Lagoon; the sediment was scanned for radioactive material and disposed\nappropriately; the areas have been cleaned up to the expected standards; light switches\nhave residual luminescent paint; the institutional control for the site requires dredging to\nhave a sediment management plan which would apply to the light switches.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired where children would go to school at the project\nsite.\nThe Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point responded staff has been and will\ncontinue to have dialogue with the School District; stated the developer is required to\npay capital fees to the State to fund construction of new schools; a 20-acre site is\nowned by the School District, which could be the site of a new school; the EIR\naddresses the availability of nearby schools.\nIn response to Councilmember Oddie's inquiry regarding the completed Transportation\nDemand Management (TDM) plan, the Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point stated\nstaff is not putting the cart before the horse; staff did not want a developer to propose\ntheir own TDM plan, but wants a plan that considers the entire Base; the project's TDM\nplan provides incentives for people to get out of their cars and use other modes of\ntransportation; the TDM plan is very detailed and includes a budget related to all the\ndifferent programs; every developer would be required to provide a TDM Strategy which\ncomplies with the City's overarching TDM plan; creating day-one strategies and\nattracting the right type of people to the development is a key approach; requiring\ndevelopers to pay for transportation services is very cutting-edge.\nVice Mayor Matarrese stated that he would like to retain the ellipse at the gateway\nwhere the plane sits; stated the City should insure or anticipate costs of remediation at\nAlameda Point to prevent the City from being held liable; dredging will be needed at the\nSea Plane Lagoon for a ferry; that he would like to give direction to the Planning Board\nand Transportation Commission to review the transportation load of the project as a\nwhole with development already in the General Plan.\nCouncilmember Daysog stated it is important to look at the housing tenure arrangement\nand understand the fiscal impacts of the way in which the tenure is established;\nAlameda has a serious housing situation; the Site A housing should be looked at as a\nflow of services that deals with evolving needs of residents; APP is the right choice as\nthe developer; with the history of social instability and school closures, the project would\nbe a stabilizing force for the West End; fiscal impacts dealing with long term obligations\nand ongoing municipal services, as well as transportation, are all important issues.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated that he is excited to move forward with the project; to\nprotect, save, and attract new business, it is critical to resolve infrastructure issues at\nAlameda Point; encouraged the public to talk to developer; stated in the end, Alameda\nwill have a project the community will be proud of; he is concerned with the owner-\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n9\nJanuary 20, 2015", "path": "CityCouncil/2015-01-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2015-01-20", "page": 11, "text": "tenant ratio and interested to hear more and sees reuse as positive.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated the community wants connectivity and continuity;\nthe plan and design is well thought out with an eclectic mix of job creation; that she\nloves the three types of park space; the project is a great opportunity and infrastructure\nissues will be addressed; the project has an ambitious schedule; encouraged public to\nget involved; stated the right development partners were chosen; Council still has to\ngive the developer guidance but should not micromanage.\nMayor Spencer thanked the community, City staff and the developer; stated she\nsupports historical protection and would like to keep the ellipse, the jet and the road\nnames; having accurate drawings in presentations is important; that she prefers green\ndevelopments and reuse of materials as much as possible to meet goals in reducing\ngreenhouse gas emissions; she is concerned about cumulative impacts on\ntransportation; she would like to see more information on how to address a natural\ndisaster and more fiscal analysis; she is interested in knowing the budget for the entire\nproject and the impact on City services long term; she would also like to see a\nbreakdown of the housing ratio and price range of the rents.\nVice Mayor Matarrese inquired whether the property is a City transfer of public property\nto a private development entity to develop using the standards laid out by the Specific\nPlan, to which the Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point responded in the affirmative;\nstated the developer will transfer the public right-of-ways back to the City.\nIn response to Vice Mayor Matarrese's inquiry, the Chief Operating Officer - Alameda\nPoint stated the developer would be required to develop the property subject to the\nterms of the DDA.\nVice Mayor Matarrese inquired whether Council will receive a briefing on the finances\nincluded in the Development Agreement, to which the Chief Operating Officer -\nAlameda Point responded in the affirmative; stated staff did a fiscal impact analysis as\npart of previous entitlement efforts and is in the process of updating the fiscal model for\nthe project; some financial issues may come before the Council in Closed Session to\nprotect the City's interests.\nMayor Spencer requested a cumulative fiscal impact report which addresses Alameda\nin its entirety.\nIn response to Councilmember Daysog's inquiry, the Chief Operating Officer - Alameda\nPoint stated staff will talk to the developer about the sensitivity and impacts of the\nhousing tenure mix and will report back to the Council.\nMayor Spencer stated that she would like to see the type of housing Alameda currently\nhas and the new types being proposed for the project; the ownership ratio should be\nhigher; she would like more information on how the City will address rising rents; she is\ninterested in a higher percentage of affordable housing.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n10\nJanuary 20, 2015", "path": "CityCouncil/2015-01-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2015-01-20", "page": 12, "text": "(15-049) Public Hearing to Identify Housing and Community Development Needs for the\nCommunity Development Block Grant (CDBG) Annual and Five-Year Plans and\nApprove the Community Needs Statement as Recommended by the Social Service\nHuman Relations Board.\nThe Housing Authority Program Manager provided a revised Exhibit 3; gave a Power\nPoint presentation.\n***\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft left the dais at 10:22 p.m. and returned at 10:24 p.m.\n***\n***\n(15-050) Councilmember Daysog moved approval of considering the remaining agenda\nitems.\nVice Mayor Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote -\n5.\n***\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether any of the proposals capture the young\nadults who have aged out of the foster care system.\nThe Housing Authority Program Manager responded in the affirmative; stated the young\nadults are captured in both the Affordable Housing and Public Services categories; staff\nkept the categories and priorities vague in order to have flexibility; priorities are revisited\nannually.\nIn response to Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft's inquiry regarding homeless veterans,\nthe Housing Authority Program Manager stated the Veterans Administration works with\none of the Housing Authority's service providers; stated addressing chronic\nhomelessness is one of the goals for the County as a whole.\nVice Mayor Matarrese requested the Alameda Police Department (APD) services be\nintegrated into the implementation of services funded by the grants.\nThe Housing Authority Program Manager responded many of the service providers work\nwith APD, including the Family Violence Law Center and Building Futures for Women\nand Children.\nMayor Spencer opened the Public Hearing.\nStated that she came from Building Opportunities and might end up returning in order to\nnot become homeless again; outlined the need for senior and veteran housing; noted\nher income prevents her from being eligible for Section 8, but she cannot afford market\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n11\nJanuary 20, 2015", "path": "CityCouncil/2015-01-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2015-01-20", "page": 13, "text": "rate rent; urged continued funding for Midway Shelter: Jennifer Bowlin, Alameda.\nThere being no further speakers, Mayor Spencer closed the Public Hearing.\nCouncilmember Daysog inquired whether it is possible to continue with the transition\nfrom 120% to 80% area median income (AMI), but have a dispensation with regard to\nage.\nThe Housing Authority Program Manager responded the first point actually includes\n30% AMI and 50% AMI for rentals; stated any of the points can be made more specific\nto prioritize seniors.\nIn response to Mayor Spencer's inquiry, the Housing Authority Program Manager stated\nthe update is for the 5-year plan; staff comes to Council every year with the Needs\nStatement to address issues that need refining.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether staff can keep track of whose needs are being met, to\nwhich the Housing Authority Program Manager responded in the affirmative.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft moved approval of the staff recommendation with the\nstaff revisions.\nCouncilmember Daysog seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote -\n5.\n(15-051) Report from the Alameda Rental Housing Community Discussion Group and\nRequest for Council Direction Concerning Various Proposals.\nThe Community Development director made brief comments.\nJeff Cambra, Angela Hockabout, Alameda Renters Coalition (ARC), and Don Lindsey,\nrepresenting landlords, gave a presentation.\n(15-052) Vice Mayor Matarrese moved approval of continuing the meeting past 11:00\np.m.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice\nvote - 5.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired how the group would deal with the issue of\ntenants choosing to remain anonymous due to fear of retaliation.\nMs. Hockabout responded renters do not have enough support to be empowered and\nuse the services available; stated the organization was created to provide emotional\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n12\nJanuary 20, 2015", "path": "CityCouncil/2015-01-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2015-01-20", "page": 14, "text": "and practical support to renters to help them become more educated consumers; it\nwould be helpful if City staff comes back with recommendations to make a stronger\nRent Review Advisory Committee (RRAC); it is important to work together cooperatively\nto decrease the exorbitant rent increases.\nIn response to Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft's inquiry, Mr. Lindsey stated retaliation is\nnot legal and renters should not keep a rent increase a secret; renters should go to the\nRRAC, the owner, ECHO Housing, or City Council to have a rent issue resolved;\nencouraged owners to stay involved; stated peer pressure also works.\nIn response to Councilmember Oddie's inquiry, the Community Development Director\nexplained the RRAC process; stated a rent increase complaint form is available on the\nHousing Authority website; the RRAC meets once a month and meetings are scheduled\nas cases arise; the tenant and property owner are invited to the meeting to present their\nside of the story; the RRAC makes suggestions; often times, the recommendations are\naccepted; the RRAC does not deal with maintenance or fair housing issues, only rent\nincreases.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired what happens if the issue is not resolved by the RRAC.\nThe Community Development Director responded there is an opportunity for either party\nto come before the Council; the Council is asked to write a letter to the owner to uphold\nthe RRAC recommendation; letters are not typically complied with; the tenant can resort\nto other remedies.\nIn response to Councilmember Oddie's inquiry, Mr. Cambra stated approximately 12 to\n14 tenants came forward with rent increases; that he does not have the statistical data\non the percent of increase.\nStated the RRAC supports the request; reviewed the RRAC membership: David Perry\nand Royal Roberts, RRAC.\nStated that he is a landlord of 366 units; reviewed increasing costs to maintain\nbuildings: Erik Johnson.\nStated the issue arises whenever there is a market surge; urged the measures be\nimplemented: Garfield Kincross, ARC.\nDiscussed reasons for rental increases: Doyle Saylor, ARC.\nStated 10% is too great an increase for most renters; the RRAC should have increased\nenforcement: Jason Buckley, Alameda.\nSubmitted information; discussed rental increases: John Sullivan, San Leandro.\nDiscussed construction costs; expressed concern over rent control: Ken Gutleben,\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n13\nJanuary 20, 2015", "path": "CityCouncil/2015-01-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2015-01-20", "page": 15, "text": "Alameda.\nStated peer pressure would work best: Bruce Carnes, Alameda.\nExpressed support for the recommendation: Barbara Rasmussen, Alameda.\nSubmitted rental survey results; expressed support for the renters' coalition: Laura\nThomas, Renewed Hope.\nDiscussed ECHO Housing; stated rent increases are effective before going to the\nRRAC; discussed retaliation; provided ECHO's contact information: Marjorie Rocha,\nECHO Housing.\nStated rent control has tried and failed in every case; provided an example; stated\nrenovations would not occur under rent control: David Howard, Alameda.\nExpressed support for the recommendations: Anne DeBardeleben, Alameda\nAssociation of Realtors.\nExpressed support for creating a Task Force to study data: Rasheed Shabazz,\nAlameda.\nStated people should not be faced with a 30% rent increase without any living condition\nchanges; expressed support for the recommendation: Jon Spangler, Alameda.\nStated the Council has a larger responsibility than making decisions on a case by case\nbasis; ARC has started a process, but the Council needs to represent tenants; urged\ncreation of some rent control measures: Brian McGuire, Alameda.\nExpressed concern over repeated rent increases; urged the City Council to study the\nmatter; suggested setting a 2% rent increase: Amy Hui, Alameda.\nThe City Manager clarified that staff is requesting direction from the Council on the type\nof data that needs to be collected and how to proceed with the proposals; staff will\nreturn to the Council to report how long action and deliverables will take.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she is impressed the community group found\nmiddle ground; she does not think the community group had the needed resources to\nanswer the questions posed in the September staff report; the impacts of rent control\nare premature; there are no term limits on the RRAC; she would like to explore the\nproposals and wait to adopt them until more is known; she is still troubled that tenants\nare hesitant to speak up; more data is needed.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated that he is glad tenants and owners are collaborating; the\ncommunity group has a path forward to form the foundation for a model mediation\nprocess; encouraged the group to keep moving forward with Mr. Lindsey as enforcer;\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n14\nJanuary 20, 2015", "path": "CityCouncil/2015-01-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2015-01-20", "page": 16, "text": "state there is a connection between the housing stock shortage and rent control; that he\ndoes not want Alameda to turn into downtown San Francisco full of tech people; one\nshort term objective is collection of data; he would like staff to recommend a quantitative\nanalysis of rent control as a tool to maintain stable rents and affordable housing; some\ntype of just cause eviction needs to be evaluated; the hearing process should include\nonly the parties, not attorneys; a mechanism should be built in for a continuance;\npercentage should be re-evaluated ensuring not to prohibit anything under the\npercentage from being reviewed; notices should include language regarding tenant\nrights and that retaliation is illegal.\nCouncilmember Daysog stated that he reviewed a range of data; discussed ways to\nstrengthen the six points raised; gave a Power Point presentation regarding rental\nhouseholds.\nVice Mayor Matarrese moved approval of having staff bring back an implementation\nplan for applying the five principles to the RRAC.\nMayor Spencer seconded the motion.\nVice Mayor Matarrese amended his motion to include having staff gather the necessary\ndata to answer the questions posed in September staff report and use the Alameda\nRental Housing Community Discussion Group as a resource.\nMayor Spencer retracted her second.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft seconded the motion.\nMayor Spencer stated that she has been a renter in Alameda for 15 years and has\na\ngood relationship with her landlord; she strongly supports the first part of the motion; the\nAlameda Rental Housing Community Discussion Group completed their task and now it\nis the Council's turn to take action; she feels the 10% increase is too high, but would\nentertain 5%.\nVice Mayor Matarrese amended the motion to move approval of the five consensus\npoints, with direction for staff to come back with an implementation plan in parallel with\ntaking input from the working group, and recommendations to come back to Council on\nthe sixth point.\nCouncilmember Oddie seconded the motion.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether the motion would allow the five points to move forward\nwithout the sixth, to which Vice Mayor Matarrese responded in the affirmative; stated\nthat he does not want to delay moving forward.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated a tenant should not be subsequently barred from\nchallenging an increase if they fail to appear at an RRAC hearing.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n15\nJanuary 20, 2015", "path": "CityCouncil/2015-01-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2015-01-20", "page": 17, "text": "Councilmember Oddie stated that he read the point to mean the bar only applies to the\ncurrent rent increase, not future increases.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft requested the City Attorney make language in the Notice\nuser friendly; suggested staff talk with other cities that have similar provisions in place;\nsuggested the matter come back in after a specific period of time.\nCouncilmember Daysog stated that he would like to see Council spell out a range of\npossible implementations; if the capacity of the RRAC to deal with rent increases is not\nimproved, the situation will be worse because expectations are raised, yet operations\nhave not improved; suggested business license fees be part of the motion.\nMayor Spencer stated Councilmember Daysog's request would be an amendment to\nthe motion.\nVice Mayor Matarrese stated if Council gives direction to staff to come back with an\nimplementation plan, he assumes staff will refine the points as part of the plan; he\nspecifically did not indicate a due date and would like to wait for the city Manager to\nindicate when the tasks can be accomplished.\nMayor Spencer stated that she hopes Council can come to an agreement that will not\nrequire a lengthy process; concerned about license fee increases; stated that she would\nrather have more volunteers on the RRAC.\nCouncilmember Daysog inquired whether Council wants to send the plan to the RRAC.\nMayor Spencer responded Council would direct staff to communicate with the RRAC\ndirectly.\nThe City Manager stated staff's response could be published in 90 days; the data issue\nand cost to collect data would be reviewed; staff could move forward with the five\npoints.\nMayor Spencer inquired how much time is needed to address the five points, to which\nthe City Manager responded 90 days; stated staff will work with the community group to\ncontinue the work.\nIn response to Mayor Spencer's inquiry, the City Manager stated staff will come back to\nCouncil with a short report on the consultant and costs to collect data before 90 days.\nMayor Spencer stated the data collection is a separate issue; that she would like to\nfocus on the five points.\nThe City Manager stated addressing the five points would take 90 days; staff will come\nback to the Council with options on data collection before 90 days.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n16\nJanuary 20, 2015", "path": "CityCouncil/2015-01-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2015-01-20", "page": 18, "text": "Mayor Spencer stated staff could collect data once the five points are implemented;\nrequested the motion be restated.\nThe City Clerk stated the motion is to approve the five consensus points, which would\ncome back with an implementation plan in parallel with taking input from the working\ngroup, and recommendations would come back to Council on the sixth point.\nVice Mayor Matarrese concurred with the City Clerk's restatement of the motion.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated staff will determine the percentage on point six.\nThe City Manager stated staff will come with a proposal on point six, but ultimately,\npoint six will be a policy determination by the Council.\nOn the call for the question, the motion carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether the data issue should be revisited at this point, to\nwhich Vice Mayor Matarrese responded in the affirmative; stated the next motion would\nbe to ask staff to prepare a report that answers the questions posed in the September\nstaff report, gathering the necessary data to support the answers.\nMayor Spencer stated the response from staff is that a consultant would be needed to\ngather the data.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft added staff would also contact other jurisdictions with\nsimilar ordinances in place.\nVice Mayor Matarrese stated the amount of data needed could rapidly inflate; rather\nthan a report, staff could come back with an estimate of what it might cost to answer\neach question; Council can revisit and refine so that the questions can be prioritized and\nstay within a budget.\nMayor Spencer stated Councilmember Daysog's presentation already provides some\ninformation; other sources provide information, including a survey; comments can be\nsubmitted to Council and staff to support the work.\nThe City Manager clarified that the data selected will determine the policy decision;\nstated that he does not want staff to step into a policy choice; what Council chooses to\ncollect is a policy decision.\nVice Mayor Matarrese stated it may be helpful to get an analysis of what Council should\ndiscuss; Council could make an informed decision about what data is needed if a public\neducation of what the landscape would look like is provided.\nThe City Manager concurred; stated that is exactly what staff would like to do.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n17\nJanuary 20, 2015", "path": "CityCouncil/2015-01-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2015-01-20", "page": 19, "text": "The Assistant City Manager stated the Vavrinek contract [paragraph no. 15-056 and\nthe Audit [paragraph no. 15-068 CC/15-002 SACIC on the joint meeting need to be\nheard tonight; requested the audit be heard next as an outside consultant is present.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n18\nJanuary 20, 2015", "path": "CityCouncil/2015-01-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2015-01-20", "page": 20, "text": "Mayor Spencer inquired whether there needs to be a formal procedure to hear and\ncontinue items.\nThe City Clerk responded the Mayor call the next item.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated Council can move through the items quickly.\nCouncilmember Oddie expressed concern that the referral items have already been\ncontinued from the last meeting; stated that he hesitates continuing the referrals a\nsecond time.\nMayor Spencer stated that she prefers to get to the agenda items that need to be heard\ntonight.\nCouncilmember Daysog inquired whether items can be continued to the Special City\nCouncil meeting already scheduled for tomorrow.\nThe City Attorney responded the technical language of the Brown Act and the Sunshine\nOrdinance allow Council to continue items to the Special meeting.\nIn response to Mayor Spencer's inquiry, the Assistant City Manager stated staff prefers\nif the Vavrinek contract and audit be heard tonight, and the remaining items be\ncontinued to tomorrow's Special Meeting.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft moved approval of hearing the Audit Report on the joint\nmeeting agenda [paragraph no. 15-068 CC/15-002 SACIC next.\nMayor Spencer seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.\nMayor Spencer called a recess to convene the joint meeting at 1:06 a.m. and\nreconvened the meeting at 1:23 a.m.\n(15-054) Recommendation to Accept the Quarterly Sales Tax Report for the Period\nEnding September 30, 2014 Collected During the Period April 1, 2014 to June 30, 2014.\n(Continued to February 3, 2015)\n(15-055) Recommendation to Accept the Treasury Report for the Quarter Ending\nSeptember 30, 2014. (Continued to February 3, 2015)\n(15-056) Recommendation to Authorize the City Manager to Execute a Professional\nServices Agreement between the City and Vavrinek, Trine, Day and Co., LLP (VTD) for\nTwo Years with Three - One Year Extensions for a Total Amount Not to Exceed\n$703,460 for Independent Auditing Services.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated the City has had the same independent auditor for\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n19\nJanuary 20, 2015", "path": "CityCouncil/2015-01-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2015-01-20", "page": 21, "text": "24 years and getting new blood in is good; approving the contract also saves the City\napproximately $32,000 over five years.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft moved approval of the staff recommendation.\nVice Mayor Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote -\n5.\n***\n(15-057) Mayor Spencer inquired what Council thinks about addressing the balance of\nthe agenda.\nCouncilmember Daysog suggested continuing the referrals to tomorrow; stated Council\nwill be fresher and the public will be better served.\nThe City Attorney inquired whether staff and Council agree to continue all remaining\nreferrals to the Special Meeting on January 21st.\nMayor Spencer responded the referrals should go first; other items that cannot wait\ncould also be discussed tomorrow.\nIn response to Councilmember Daysog's inquiry, the City Attorney stated there should\nbe a motion to continue items to a specified date.\nThe City Manager stated the quarterly reports [paragraph nos. 15-054, and 15-067\nCC/15-001 SACIC and the bond report [paragraph no. 15-058 could be continued to\nFebruary 3, 2015.\nCouncilmember Daysog moved approval of continuing the remaining items [the Council\nReferrals and Council Communications Item] to the Special Meeting on January 21st ,\nexcept for the quarterly reports and the bond report.\nMayor Spencer clarified Council Referrals and Council Communications are being\ncontinued to January 21st.\nCouncilmember Oddie seconded the motion, which carried by the following voice vote:\nAyes: Councilmembers Daysog, Ezzy Ashcraft, Oddie and Mayor Spencer - 4. Noes:\nVice Mayor Matarrese - 1.\nMayor Spencer stated the January 21st meeting would convene at 6:30 p.m. in the\nCouncil Chambers.\n(15-058) Recommendation to Accept Report on Sale of Successor Agency to the\nCommunity Improvement Commission of the City of Alameda 2014 Bonds. (Continued\nto February 3, 2015)\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n20\nJanuary 20, 2015", "path": "CityCouncil/2015-01-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2015-01-20", "page": 22, "text": "CITY MANAGER COMMUNICATIONS\nNone.\nORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA\nNone.\nCOUNCIL REFERRALS\n(15-059) Consider Directing Staff to Conduct a Study to Review Suggestions to Provide\nRelief for Traffic on Island Drive. (Councilmember Oddie) (Continued to January 21,\n2015)\n(15-060) Consider Directing Staff to Conduct a Consultant Study to Determine the\nFeasibility for a Wetland Mitigation Bank at Alameda Point. (Councilmember Oddie)\n(Continued to January 21, 2015)\n(15-061) Consider Directing Staff to Install Flashing Pedestrian Crosswalk Signs at Two\nLocations: 1) Maitland Drive and Mecartney Road, and 2) Mecartney Road and Belmont\nPlace. (Councilmember Oddie) (Continued to January 21, 2015)\n(15-062) Consider Directing Staff to Collaborate with East Bay Regional Park District on\nAcquisition and Expansion of Crab Cove. (Councilmember Matarrese) (Continued to\nJanuary 21, 2015)\n(15-063) Consider Directing Staff to Create a Comprehensive Transit/Traffic Strategic\nPlan and Implementation Tool. (Councilmember Daysog) (Continued to January 21,\n2015)\n(15-064) Consider Directing Staff to Initiate Steps in Preparing a Structurally\nSustainable General Fund Budget. (Councilmember Matarrese) (Continued to January\n21, ,2015)\n(15-065) Consider Directing Staff to Re-establish the Economic Development\nCommission. (Councilmember Matarrese) (Continued to January 21, 2015)\nCOUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS\n(15-066) Designation of a Voting Delegate and Alternate for the League of California\nCities. (Continued to January 21, 2015)\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n21\nJanuary 20, 2015", "path": "CityCouncil/2015-01-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2015-01-20", "page": 23, "text": "ADJOURNMENT\nThere being no further business, Mayor Spencer adjourned the meeting at 1:28 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\n22\nJanuary 20, 2015", "path": "CityCouncil/2015-01-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2015-01-20", "page": 24, "text": "MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL JOINT CITY COUNCIL\nAND SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE COMMUNITY\nIMPROVEMENT COMMISSION (SACIC) MEETING\nTUESDAY--JANUARY 20, 2015- 7:01 P.M.\nMayor/Chair Spencer convened the meeting at 1:06 a.m.\nRoll Call -\nPresent:\nCouncilmembers/Agency Members Daysog, Ezzy\nAshcraft, Matarrese, Oddie and Mayor/Chair Spencer\n-5. -\nAbsent:\nNone.\nOral Communications\nNone.\nAgenda Items\n(15-067 CC/15-001 SACIC) Recommendation to Accept the First Quarter Financial\nReport for the Period Ending September 30, 2014. (Continued to February 3, 2015)\n(15-068 CC/15-002 SACIC) Recommendation to Accept the Fiscal Year 2013-14\nAudited Financial Statements and Compliance Reports.\nThe Interim Finance Director gave a Power Point presentation.\nCouncilmember/Agency Member Daysog inquired whether the way in which the report\nwas prepared is substantially different than past reports.\nGrace Zhang, Maze and Associates, responded in the negative; stated reporting has\nbeen consistent.\nMayor/Chair Spencer stated the presentation was not online.\nThe Assistant City Manager stated the presentation is a summary and was not posted\nonline.\nMayor/Chair Spencer stated that she prefers presentations be included in the packet so\nCouncil may see them in advance.\nVice Mayor/Agency member Matarrese stated there is revenue and expense\ninformation included in the presentation that was not in the staff report.\nThe Interim Finance Director explained staff became aware of the information as the\nJoint Meeting\nAlameda City Council and Successor Agency to\nthe Community Improvement Commission\nJanuary 20, 2015", "path": "CityCouncil/2015-01-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2015-01-20", "page": 25, "text": "presentation was being prepared.\nIn response to Vice Mayor/Agency Member Matarrese's inquiry, the Interim Finance\nDirector stated the disparity in the reserves is because revenues increased and\nexpenses did not; in prior years, the percentage was already 30 to 35; the gain from this\nfiscal year brought the percent up to 40.\nThe City Manager stated staff predicted a growth of under 3%; 3.6% went into the\nreserves one year; this year at 8.1% after having projected 2.9%; at the same time,\nemployee cost sharing for healthcare and pensions began; there were cuts in costs at\nthe same time as an unexpected growth in revenue.\nIn response to Vice Mayor/Agency Member Matarrese's inquiry, the Interim Finance\nDirector stated part of the amount is unrestricted, but part is restricted by previous\nCouncil actions.\nThe City Manager stated staff manages a lot of other funds; pension and Other Post\nEmployment Benefits (OPEB) must be characterized.\nVice Mayor Matarrese stated clarification is important for the public and Council to\nunderstand the mid-year budget.\nThe City Manager stated a systematic approach to the next budget will begin in March\nto reach a two-year budget resolution in early June; the issues will be decanted in\nsignificantly greater detail.\nCouncilmember/Agency Member Daysog stated a key component driving the $29\nmillion reserve is a one-time sale of property.\nVice Mayor/Agency Member Matarrese stated one-time events cannot be relied upon\nfor operating expenses.\nMayor/Chair Spencer stated a recent presentation at a conference showed Alameda\nCounty Cities unfunded OPEB liabilities as a percentage of their General fund; the\nrange was 7% to 140% and Alameda was at 140%.\nCouncilmember/Agency Member Ezzy Ashcraft moved approval of the staff\nrecommendation.\nVice Mayor/Agency Member Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by\nunanimous voice vote - 5.\nThe City Attorney noted that the First Quarter Financial Report [paragraph no. 15-067\nCC/15-001 SACIC] could not be continued to tomorrow's meeting as it was not noticed\nas a joint meeting; the matter could be continued to the next Joint meeting.\nJoint Meeting\nAlameda City Council and Successor Agency to\nthe Community Improvement Commission\nJanuary 20, 2015", "path": "CityCouncil/2015-01-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2015-01-20", "page": 26, "text": "Adjournment\nThere being no further business, Mayor/Chair Spencer adjourned the meeting at 1:23\na.m.\nRespectfully submitted,\nLara Weisiger, City Clerk\nSecretary, SACIC\nThe agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Sunshine Ordinance.\nJoint Meeting\nAlameda City Council and Successor Agency to\nthe Community Improvement Commission\nJanuary 20, 2015", "path": "CityCouncil/2015-01-20.pdf"}