{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2015-04-29", "page": 1, "text": "MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING\nTUESDAY- -APRIL 29, 2015- -7:00 P.M.\nMayor Spencer convened the meeting at 5:00 p.m. and led the Pledge of Allegiance.\nROLL CALL -\nPresent:\nCouncilmembers Daysog, Ezzy Ashcraft, Matarrese,\nOddie and Mayor Spencer - 5.\nAbsent:\nNone.\nREGULAR AGENDA ITEMS\n(15-276) Presentations from Avery and Associates and Bob Murray and Associates to\nDiscuss Their Qualifications and Process for the Recruitment of a City Manager for the\nCity of Alameda.\nDiscussed recruitment and compensation; suggested considering the Assistant City\nManager Liz Warmerdam: Ken Peterson, Alameda.\nORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA\n(15-277) Kurt Peterson, Alameda, discussed transparency and suggested going above\nthe requirements of the Sunshine Ordinance.\nREGULAR AGENDA ITEMS (continued)\nPresentations from Avery and Associates and Bob Murray and Associates to Discuss\nTheir Qualifications and Process for the Recruitment of a City Manager for the City of\nAlameda.\nPaul Kimura, Avery and Associations, gave a brief presentation and responded to\nCouncil questions.\nBob Murray, Bob Murray and Associates, gave a brief presentation and responded to\nCouncil questions.\nMayor Spencer called a recess at 5:57 p.m. and reconvened at 6:11 p.m.\n***\n(15-278) Resolution No. 15027, \"Approving a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU)\nbetween the Alameda Police Officers Association (APOA) and the City of Alameda for\nthe Period Beginning November 1, 2015 through December 18, 2021.\" Adopted.\nMayor Spencer noted the four MOUs [paragraph nos. 15-281 through 15-283) would be\naddressed together.\nSpecial Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nApril 29, 2015", "path": "CityCouncil/2015-04-29.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2015-04-29", "page": 2, "text": "The City Manager gave a Power Point presentation.\nIn response to Mayor Spencer's inquiry, the City Manager stated the trust would be\nexhausted in 2034.\nMayor Spencer inquired what would happen after the trust is exhausted, to which the\nCity Manager responded it would be the same as what is done today; stated the City's\nresources would be used to make the payments.\nCouncilmember Daysog stated pay go would start again in 2035; the proposal would be\na pushing out and would buy time; inquired whether the unstated piece is that the City\nwould have to have the same number of employees.\nThe City Manager responded in the affirmative; stated the figures are premised on the\ncurrent work force; the figures would change if the workforce is expanded; that he would\nnot suggest expanding staff.\nCouncilmember Daysog stated $47 million is not an actual dollar savings; inquired\nwhether the amount the City would not be paying in pay go would be a reduction in\nexpense.\nThe City Manager responded the City is obligated to provide the benefit; stated if the\nCity does not act, a payment still has to be made; the payment would be smaller under\nthe trust; that he considers a reduction in expenditure a savings.\nVice Mayor Matarrese requested the City Attorney statement be read into the record\nand requested an explanation of running the contributions outside of payroll.\nThe City Attorney read the statement.\nThe Assistant City Manager stated running the contributions outside of payroll is not\nwhat the City bargained for and she is not sure how it would be done; that she is not\nsure how a raise could not be run through payroll and it might not be legal; the answer\nis the City would not be able to run the contributions outside of payroll.\nIn response to Mayor Spencer's inquiry about the budget percentages for the\nRecreation and Parks Department and public safety over the years, the Assistant City\nManager stated the Recreation and Parks Department budget would be presented on\nMay 12th and the information would be provided then.\nThe City Manager stated over the years, cities have started charging fees for services in\nsome departments, such as Development Services and Public Works; public safety\nremains under and takes the loin share of the General Fund for cities in California.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated cities are going to have to look to the State for\nSpecial Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nApril 29, 2015", "path": "CityCouncil/2015-04-29.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2015-04-29", "page": 3, "text": "some assistance that cities alone cannot solve; noted the City's State Assembly\nrepresentative is present and hearing the comments.\nCouncilmember Daysog stated the Council will discuss the possibility of raising the\nUtility Users Tax (UUT); inquired whether the increase would count toward the Balanced\nRevenue Index (BRI).\nThe City Manager responded in the affirmative; stated if the Council proceeds with the\nUUT, the Council could authorize the City Manager to engage in a discussion with labor\nabout the matter.\nStated the matter needs to be dealt with; that he does not believe the City can fund its\nway out of $91 million; the liability needs to be negotiated; that he disagrees with\nproceeding with the proposal; the BRI should not include the property transfer tax;\nsuggested putting the money directly into a trust in lieu of raises; questioned the legality\nand discussed the confidential memorandum: Kevin Kennedy, City Treasurer.\nThe City Attorney provided clarification.\nThe City Treasurer inquired whether the legal opinion has only been shared with the\nCouncil, City Manager and staff, to which the City Attorney responded in the affirmative.\nThe City Manager clarified that the City Treasurer does not normally receive confidential\nlegal memorandums.\nThe City Treasurer stated that he is offering financial guidance on the largest issue\nfacing the City.\nSuggested the City Attorney have expert outside counsel review whether the funds can\nbe put into the trust fund without being run through payroll; urged spending funds on the\nlegal matter; stated a decision should not be made tonight; discussed the transfer tax;\nsuggested that he and the City Treasurer be engaged during the negotiation process;\ninquired whether only the City Manager conducted the negotiations: Kevin Kearney, City\nAuditor.\nThe City Manager responded that he conducted the negotiations, which is his role under\nthe Charter; stated that he was instructed to engage in the issue by unanimous vote of\nthe City Council; the Assistant City Manager and Finance Director participated in the\nmeetings with him; a tentative agreement was reached with labor on a Friday; he\nprovided the information to the City Auditor and Treasurer Monday morning when he\nmet with him, which was as soon as possible.\nUrged the Council to approve the contracts; outlined the first steps taken to begin to\naddress the issue when he was on the City Council; discussed his role in resolving the\nState pension for teachers; stated the contracts are a step in the right direction:\nAssemblymember Rob Bonta.\nSpecial Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nApril 29, 2015", "path": "CityCouncil/2015-04-29.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2015-04-29", "page": 4, "text": "Read Supervisor Chan's statement urging Council to approve the MOUs: Steven Jones,\nrepresenting Supervisor Wilma Chan.\nVice Mayor Matarrese requested staff to clarify whether the $91 million liability is being\nreduced by $47 million; stated his understanding is that the liability remains the same\nbut the $47 million is a savings against payments, which total much more; that he does\nnot want the public to be confused.\nThe City Manager responded there is an impact on the $91 million, but it is minimal.\nThe Assistant City Manager stated the amount is about $5 million; further stated PERS\ndoes not contribute to the OPEB liability.\nStated the Council should be pleased to be considering this matter; outlined how public\nsafety contributes to the City's economy; urged approval of the MOUs and continuing\nthe discussion to reach a complete solution: Former Assemblymember Sandre\nSwanson, Alameda.\nCommended the work of the Fiscal Sustainable Committee; stated that she applauds\nthe effort; urged approval: Former Supervisor Alice Lai-Bitker, Alameda.\nStated that he is concerned about the rush to judgment; questions have been raised;\nurged Council to listen to the City Treasurer; stated the matter should be postponed; the\nMOUs do not have to do with the budget: Kurt Peterson, Alameda.\nStated that he supports the contracts; a tentative agreement has been reached, which\nhas been ratified by the employees; the movement to delay the matter is wrong;\noutlined his experience with unions; requested the City Council keep its word: Marty\nFraetes, Alameda.\nStated the members of the association have agreed to the contract which is a first step\nin the right direction: Alan Kuboyama, Alameda Police Officers Association.\nStated contracts should be approved when both sides have negotiated in good faith;\nurged a yes vote: Honora Murphy, Alameda.\nProvided examples of pay increases being given to teachers and school districts not\ngoing bankrupt; stated tax dollars should be spent for services; the employees have\nstepped up and given concessions to reach a collaborative solution; urged Council to\nvote yes: Gray Harris and Patty Osbourne, Alameda.\nMayor Spencer requested clarification on the fund balance amount, to which the\nAssistant City Manager responded $31 million, which is 38%.\nUrged approval of the MOUs; stated the deal was negotiated in good faith; the Fire\nSpecial Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nApril 29, 2015", "path": "CityCouncil/2015-04-29.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2015-04-29", "page": 5, "text": "Fighters are partners; negotiations have been done the right way; urged acting tonight:\nJeff Del Bono, International Association of Fire Fighters.\nProvided examples Fire and Police responses to his family's emergencies; urged\napproval of the contracts, which is an opportunity for Alameda to become a role model\nin the area: Zac Goldstein, Alameda.\nStated Police and Fire Department efforts make the City safe; urged approval of the\ncontracts: Zhaldee Sadie, Alameda.\nStated the City's negotiators have reached a ground breaking agreement; urged\napproval: Andy Slivka, Alameda resident and Carpenters Union.\nUrged approval of the contracts; stated the contracts are the first step to control the\nunfunded liability: Mike Williams, Alameda.\nExpressed support for public safety; applauded the efforts of the City and union to work\nout a compromise; stated an agreement has been made and should be honored; urged\napproval of the MOUs: Doug Bloch, Alameda.\nExpressed her support for Alameda's public safety employees; stated the deal is\namazing; the liability will not be solved tomorrow; gradual steps need to be taken to\nsolve the problem: Lauren Zimmerman Cook, Alameda.\nCommended public safety's respectful responses to calls; stated the employees are\npartners and are giving back; urged approval of the MOUs: Kathy Moehring, Alameda.\nAcknowledged Police and Fire employees' efforts to build trust and a spirit of\ncollaboration, which has allowed negotiating a solution; urged approval of the MOUs\ntonight: Bruce Knopf, Alameda.\nSubmitted his comments outlining budget concerns and comparing other cities Fire\nDepartment expenses; urged not adopting the contracts; stated time is needed to study\nthe problem and find a solution: Paul Foreman, Alameda.\nStated as a financial advisor he addresses employee benefits; discussed cities\ndeclaring bankruptcy; urged approval, which is a first step: Michael McDonough,\nAlameda Chamber of Commerce.\nQuestioned why additional time cannot be given: Ken Peterson, Alameda.\nStated the contracts are the most strategic and sound he has seen and are worthy of\napproval: Bill Delaney, Alameda.\nStated the Police and Fire budgets are higher than others and are unsustainable;\nquestioned whether the MOUs need to be approved tonight: Brian Schumacher,\nSpecial Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nApril 29, 2015", "path": "CityCouncil/2015-04-29.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2015-04-29", "page": 6, "text": "budget, which is $160 million.\nMayor Spencer stated a slide showed 78%.\nThe Assistant City Manager stated said amount is the percentage of the General Fund.\nThanked the City Attorney for addressing the legal issue; suggested more notice be\nprovided; urged holding off on the decision: Robin Gilbert, Alameda.\nStated the MOUs are a step and are not the total solution; approving the contact will\nmake the employees the first to start helping fund OPEB; urged approval: Kari\nThompson, Alameda.\nStated the effort has been collaborative; Council is being asked to follow through with a\ngood faith effort; the first contract was the first step and this is the next step; Council can\ngive direction to the new City Manager to open negotiations: John Knox White,\nAlameda.\nStated the OPEB issue has been around for a long time; the employees are working\nwith the City to solve it; Council directed staff to bargain in good faith; not approving the\nagreements would be regressive bargaining: Malia Vella, Alameda.\nStated the newspaper article title: \"Trust proposed to reduce liability\" explains\neverything; urged unanimous approval: Don Sherratt, Alameda.\nStated interest based negotiations began in 1998 to work together to reach a common\ngoal; the MOUs are a step being taken to minimize the pain down the road; urged\napproval: Dom Weaver, Alameda.\nStated the details need to be reviewed; the budget is a little off; compared salaries: Ken\nGutleben, Alameda.\nThe Assistant City Manager noted the Public Works Department budget is larger than\neither of the public safety budgets.\nMayor Spencer requested information on salaries, to which the Assistant City Manager\nresponded that she does not have the information.\nThe City Attorney clarified the Charter roles of the City Auditor and Treasurer.\nUrged delay to allow City Auditor and Treasurer review; stated the matter can return in a\nmonth: Bruce Carnes, Alameda.\nSpecial Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nApril 29, 2015", "path": "CityCouncil/2015-04-29.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2015-04-29", "page": 7, "text": "Stated the contracts are a product of collective bargaining; that he was on the Fiscal\nSustainability Committee which urged prefunding the OPEB liability; the Council should\nproceed with the contracts: Mike Henneberry, Alameda and United Food and\nCommercial Workers Local 5.\nStated Alameda is going in the right direction, which the MOUs continue; the terms of\nthe MOUs are fair; discussed Police and Fire programs and calls: Doug Biggs, Alameda\nPoint Collaborative.\nStated the question is whether the City can afford the contract; that she is not saying to\nvote against the contact, rather Council should wait to allow the issues to be vetted;\noutlined financial details; expressed concern over the drought impacting the economy;\nquestioned where the City will get funding; questioned the legal opinion: Jane Sullwold,\nAlameda.\nThe City Manager explained the funding; stated the arbitration he was addressing was\nthe City's attempt to unilaterally impact retiree benefits, which failed.\nStated the Council started in 2012, but the step was not a correction; discussed the\nCity's telecommunication business; stated paying off $91 million from a loan or bond\ntoday would cost $5 million a year for the next 30 years; the City is still paying $1.9\nmillion annually for a contract from the 1970s: Former Councilmember Doug deHaan,\nAlameda.\nStated the City Treasurer and City Auditor have raised questions which should be\naddressed; suggested anyone paid over $200,000 take a pay cut: Irene Dieter,\nAlameda.\nStated an agreement should not be made until Alamedans understand the budget; that\nshe would like a better understanding before going forward; urged following the advice\nof the City Auditor and Treasurer: Theresa Hall, Alameda.\nStated the cart is being put before the horse; the City is entering into contracts before\nthe budget: Margaret Hall, Alameda.\nDiscussed community stabilization; stated the issue is Statewide; urged approval of the\nMOUs and making progress one step at a time: Jon Spangler, Alameda.\nExpressed support for the City Auditor and City Treasurer; stated that she would favor a\nlower return estimate; health insurance costs increase every year; no one will have\nhealth insurance canceled if a decision is not made tonight: Carol Gottstein, Alameda.\n***\nMayor Spencer called a recess at 9:38 p.m. and reconvened the meeting at 9:47 p.m.\n***\nSpecial Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nApril 29, 2015", "path": "CityCouncil/2015-04-29.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2015-04-29", "page": 8, "text": "Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft requested an explanation of pay go, to which the\nAssistant City Manager responded pay go has nothing to do with salaries; stated it is\nthe amount the City pays on an annual basis for retirees.\nCouncilmember Daysog stated pay go does not help buy down the unfunded liability;\nthe unfunded liability is the difference between the pay go amount and what the City\nreally should be paying for the liability.\nMayor Spencer stated there were two votes by the City Council in closed session; the\nfirst unanimous vote was to continue with negotiations; at a subsequent meeting, there\nwas another vote on a tentative agreement; Councilmembers Ezzy Ashcraft, Matarrese\nand Oddie voted to proceed, Councilmember Daysog abstained and she voted no.\nVice Mayor Matarrese stated the second vote was Council direction to negotiate on the\nterms.\nThe City Manager concurred with what was said; stated the unanimous voice was to\nbegin formal negotiations; the 3-1-1 vote was on the general terms.\nMayor Spencer stated Council saw the actual red line proposal for the first time when it\nwas made public.\nThe Assistant City Manager stated the term sheet outlined everything included in the\nred line.\nThe City Manager noted 15 day notice is 5 times longer than what is required under\nState law.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated getting complete unanimity is difficult; the question\nis what course of action is best for the City; there is not a magic solution; public safety\nunderstands this is the beginning of the road; questioned whether the debt should be\nallowed to continue to grow when the City has a solution now; stated people have\nargued the MOUs could have gone further; public safety came to the table even though\nthe current MOUs do not expire for two years; waiting for the contracts to expire would\nbe rolling the dice and the City would lose the agreed upon contributions; more changes\nwill be explored going forward; creating a hostile environment would be a loss; that she\nwould like a task force, similar to the fiscal sustainability and OPEB, convened; letting\nthe opportunity pass would be a shame; that she supports going forward with the\nMOUs.\nCouncilmember Daysog stated the topic is very important; that he does not see\nanything magical about making a decision tonight; the City could hold off for four weeks\nto vet issues raised by the City Auditor and Treasurer; that he would like time to look at\na suggestion he has; he did not support the matter in the closed session because he\nwanted more information; that he has been seeking a comprehensive plan on the\nunfunded liability; spectacular detailed information has been provided, including the 30\nSpecial Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nApril 29, 2015", "path": "CityCouncil/2015-04-29.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2015-04-29", "page": 9, "text": "year projection, which compares OPEB pay go and the trust fund; the trust fund would\nwork starting in 2019, but would go to $0 by 2034; the idea he has relates to the 1079\nretirement account, on which the City currently spends almost $2 million annually; the\ntrust fund is undercapitalized and needs an additional source of revenue; the 1079 fund\nshould be reviewed as a supplement; figures staff provided on the salary increases\nhave calmed him down; the trust fund needs to be comprehensive, improved more and\nsupplemented.\nVice Mayor Matarrese inquired whether staff could comment on the scenario proposed\nto take funds from the 1079 plan as premiums go down.\nThe Assistant City Manager stated the amount is not going down very much.\nIn response to Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft's request, the Assistant City Manager\nexplained the 1079 plan; stated the annual change could be researched.\nVice Mayor Matarrese stated the line item could be extended at the same amount and\nany difference could go into the trust; inquired whether doing so would be separate or\nprecluded from the action tonight.\nThe City Manager responded the issue is separate; stated the 1079 plan is funded by\nthe General Fund; as the figure goes down, the money becomes available and Council\ncould decide to use it to fund the City's $250,000 annual contribution or additional pre-\nfunding; labor could be re-engaged about the City adding the funding and ask what they\nare willing to give.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the matter should be discussed as part\nof the budget.\nThe City Manager responded the amount is not a big ticket item and is not going down\nenough to have an impact; stated as the amount decreases, it should not be used on\nadditional programs, but should be used to address long term obligations.\nCouncilmember Daysog the amount was $4 million in 2003 and is down to $1.8 million\nnow; the amount should be locked in and the difference should be used.\nThe City Manager noted the Council might want to use the funds for PERS smoothing.\nCouncilmember Daysog stated figuring it out takes time.\nIn response to Councilmember Oddie's inquiry, the City Manager stated nothing needs\nto be negotiated as long as the City is meeting its obligations to the retirees; that he is\nsuggesting labor should be engaged if Council wants to use the funds to supplement\nthe OPEB trust.\nCouncilmember Daysog stated that he does not want the idea used to open bargaining\nSpecial Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nApril 29, 2015", "path": "CityCouncil/2015-04-29.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2015-04-29", "page": 10, "text": "again and ask for something else; everything is set in place; that his concern is the\nproposal is not comprehensive enough.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated on the campaign trail, there was a mandate to fix the\nOPEB problem; the issue is important; staff was given direction to negotiate a partial\nsolution by a unanimous vote; staff returned with a term sheet which was approved by a\n3-1-1 vote; the public safety employees ratified the tentative agreement, which is before\nCouncil for a vote; doing anything but approving the agreement is bad faith, regressive\nbargaining and sets a bad tone; provided an analogy of building a house; outlined past\nactions, employee contributions, the current proposal, and BART contract negotiations;\nstated the employee contributions have to be collectively bargained and cannot be\nimposed; that he is afraid not voting tonight would deteriorate the hard work to build a\ncollaborative relationship; the City obtained an actuarial and legal analysis; the Council\nwill continue to make progress and should form a labor management committee to\ncontinue talking and working on ways to solve the problem; discussed employees or the\nCity contributing more to the trust and the buyout alternative; stated the contract needs\nto be passed first to set up the trust and the framework; discussed where the City would\nbe in 2017 without the contract extension.\n***\n(15-279) Mayor Spencer stated a vote is needed to consider the budget presentations\n[paragraph no. 15-284\nCouncilmember Oddie moved approval of proceeding with the remaining item.\nThe City Attorney clarified the four MOUs have already been called.\nVice Mayor Matarrese stated that he would support not proceeding with the budget\npresentations; inquired how to proceed administratively with not hearing the item.\nMayor Spencer stated four votes are needed to hear the item.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated hearing the presentations so late would not be\ngiving the departments their due; the City Clerk has been trying to figure out dates.\nThe City Clerk stated in order to continue the meeting to next Wednesday, May 6th, the\nmatter would have to be continued to the specific date because there is not time to meet\nthe 7 day notice requirement.\nThe dates were discussed.\nCouncilmember Oddie moved approval of continuing the budget presentations to May\n7th\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft seconded the motion, which carried by the following\nvoice vote: Ayes: Councilmembers Daysog, Ezzy Ashcraft and Oddie - 3. Noes: Vice\nSpecial Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nApril 29, 2015", "path": "CityCouncil/2015-04-29.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2015-04-29", "page": 11, "text": "Mayor Matarrese and Mayor Spencer - 2.\nCouncilmember Oddie moved approval of reconsidering the motion and continuing the\nmatter to May 6th\nMayor Spencer seconded the motion, which carried by the following voice vote: Ayes:\nCouncilmembers Daysog, Matarrese, Oddie and Mayor Spencer - 4. Noes:\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft - 1.\n(15-280) Councilmember Oddie moved approval of continuing the meeting past 11:00\np.m.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice\nvote - 5. [Note: The meeting did not go past 11:00 p.m.]\nCouncilmember Oddie expressed concern over what would happen if the economy\ntanks; stated the window of opportunity is now; read a South Lake Tahoe City Manager\nquote from a Western City article.\nVice Mayor Matarrese stated that he agrees with the terms, otherwise, he would not\nhave voted to have the City Manager take the terms to the bargaining table; the\nproposal does not solve the problem or reduce the liability more than $5 million; the\nmost important part of the deal is getting a 4% contribution from the employees; the\nconcession is valuable; his biggest concern is not everyone understands the\nmechanism, which helps correct a structural budget defect; the liability currently exists\nwith no mechanism to pay for it; a union representative left the door open to continue\ndiscussions, which should be included in the motion as Council direction; discussed\nconcerns about additional time and comparison to other cities; stated the offer will\nexpire; the City has to deal with PERS smoothing; discussed a 2007 Bartel report;\nstated having a permanent working group should be a required condition.\nMayor Spencer stated that she does not believe it is appropriate to enter into a long\nterm agreement going through 2022 prior to the budget process; the budget has a\nstructural problem; expenditures are greater than revenue; the loss increases after the\nproposed contracts; the community should have an opportunity to help figure out how to\nsolve the problem long term; with or without the contracts, the five year forecast goes\ndown to an 18% reserve; the problem is serious and has to be addressed.\nCouncilmember Oddie moved adoption of the resolution approving the MOU between\nAPOA and the City of Alameda for the period beginning November 1, 2015 through\nDecember 18, 2021.\nCouncilmember Daysog requested an amendment to the motion; stated the City\nManager's yeomen effort falls short; the trust fund is woefully undercapitalized; that he\nwould support the motion with language transitioning the 1079 balance as a\nSpecial Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nApril 29, 2015", "path": "CityCouncil/2015-04-29.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2015-04-29", "page": 12, "text": "supplement.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated that he would not accept the amendment; but he would\naccept an amendment to direct staff to create a standing committee as recommended\nby the Vice Mayor.\nVice Mayor Matarrese stated the committee would be a standing labor management\ncommittee.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated the committee would be established to investigate other\npossible solutions.\nThe Assistant City Manager stated the 1079 suggestion is one of the solutions which\ncould be investigated.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she does not see the harm in considering the\nmatter; everything should be on the table.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated the committee should review the matter.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she would support the amendment.\nVice Mayor Matarrese seconded the motion with the amendment [to establish a\nstanding labor management committee], which carried by the following voice vote:\nAyes: Councilmembers Ezzy Ashcraft, Matarrese and Oddie - 3.\nNoes:\nCouncilmember Daysog and Mayor Spencer - 2.\n(15-281) Resolution No. 15028, \"Approving a Memorandum of Understanding between\nthe Alameda Police Managers Association (APMA) and the City of Alameda for the\nPeriod Beginning November 1, 2015 through December 18, 2021.' Adopted.\nSee paragraph no. 15-278 for the discussion.\nCouncilmember Oddie moved adoption of the resolution approving the MOU between\nthe APMA and the City for the period beginning November 1, 2015 through December\n18, 2021 with giving direction to staff to form the standing labor management committee\nto consider other alternatives to reduce the OPEB liability.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft seconded the motion, which carried by the following\nvoice vote: Ayes: Councilmembers Ezzy Ashcraft, Matarrese and Oddie - 3. Noes:\nCouncilmember Daysog and Mayor Spencer - 2.\n(15-282) Resolution No. 15029, \"Approving a Memorandum of Understanding Between\nthe International Association of Firefighters (IAFF) and the City of Alameda for the\nPeriod of November 1, 2015 Through December 18, 2021. Adopted.\nSpecial Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nApril 29, 2015", "path": "CityCouncil/2015-04-29.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2015-04-29", "page": 13, "text": "See paragraph no. 15-278 for the discussion.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft moved adoption of the resolution approving the MOUs\nbetween the IAFF and the City for the period of November 1, 2015 through December\n18, 2021 with the same amendment previously offered: to direct staff to convene a\nstanding labor movement committee.\nCouncilmember Oddie seconded the motion, which carried by the following voice vote:\nAyes: Councilmembers Ezzy Ashcraft, Matarrese and Oddie - 3.\nNoes:\nCouncilmember Daysog and Mayor Spencer - 2.\n(15-283) Resolution No. 15030, \"Approving a Memorandum of Understanding between\nthe Alameda Fire Chiefs Association (AFCA) and the City of Alameda for the period of\nNovember 1, 2015 through December 18, 2021.' Adopted.\nSee paragraph no. 15-278 for the discussion.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft moved adoption of the resolution approving a MOU\nbetween the AFCA and City for the period of November 1, 2015 through December 18,\n2021 with amendment to include direction to staff to convene a standing labor\nmanagement committee to continue searching for solutions to the OPEB liability.\nVice Mayor Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by the following voice vote:\nAyes: Councilmembers Ezzy Ashcraft, Matarrese and Oddie - 3.\nNoes:\nCouncilmember Daysog and Mayor Spencer - 2.\n(15-284) Presentations by General Fund Departments on Proposed Budget for Fiscal\nYears 2015-16 and 2016-17.\nContinued to May 6, 2015.\nCITY MANAGER COMMUNICATIONS\n(15-285) The City Manager thanked Alameda for the opportunity.\nCOUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS\n(15-286) Councilmember Oddie announced that he will be holding a town hall meeting\nto discuss police and public works issues on Bay Farm Island.\nSpecial Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nApril 29, 2015", "path": "CityCouncil/2015-04-29.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2015-04-29", "page": 14, "text": "ADJOURNMENT\nThere being no further business, Mayor Spencer adjourned the meeting at 10:55 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\nApril 29, 2015", "path": "CityCouncil/2015-04-29.pdf"}