{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2015-05-05", "page": 1, "text": "MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING\nTUESDAY- - MAY 5, 2015- 7:00 - P.M.\nMayor Spencer convened the meeting at 7:05 p.m. and led the Pledge of Allegiance.\nROLL CALL -\nPresent:\nCouncilmembers Daysog, Ezzy Ashcraft, Matarrese,\nOddie and Mayor Spencer - 5.\nAbsent:\nNone.\nAGENDA CHANGES\n(15-288) The City Clerk announced that the Resolution amending the Alameda\nMunicipal Power Unrepresented Management Employees salary schedule [paragraph\nno. 15-301 would be heard at a later date.\nPROCLAMATIONS, SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY AND ANNOUNCEMENTS\n(15-289) Proclamation Declaring May as Older Americans Month.\nMayor Spencer read the proclamation and presented it to Rom Limogs, Mastick Senior\nCenter Advisory Board.\n(15-290) Proclamation Declaring May 7 to May 18, 2015 as the 19th Annual East Bay\nAffordable Housing Week \"Here to Stay: Building Inclusive Communities.\"\nMayor Spencer read the proclamation and presented it to Laura Thomas, Renewed\nHope and Easy Bay Housing Organization (EBHO), Helen Sause and Dian Lichtenstein,\nAlameda Home Team, and Neil Saxby, EBHO.\nMs. Thomas, Ms. Sause and Mr. Saxby made brief comments and submitted\ninformation.\nFollowing the other proclamations, a video was shown on Jack Capon Villa and\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft made brief comments on an award the City received for\nthe project.\nMayor Spencer made brief comments on Jack Capon.\n(15-291) Proclamation Declaring May 11 through May 16, 2015 as Salvation Army\nWeek.\nMayor Spencer read the proclamation and presented it to Captain Dan Williams,\nSalvation Army.\n(15-292) Proclamation Declaring May 14, 2015 as Bike-to-Work Day.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n1\nMay 5, 2015", "path": "CityCouncil/2015-05-05.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2015-05-05", "page": 2, "text": "Mayor Spencer read the proclamation and presented it to Lucy Gigli and Donna and\nEmma Eyestone.\nORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA\n(15-293) Robb Ratto, Park Street Business Association, submitted copies of a Chronicle\ninsert on Alameda, discussed the endeavor and thanked the sponsors.\n(15-294) Ken Peterson, Alameda, expressed concern about ongoing operational and\nfinancial burdens of the City; other cities are doing well and Alameda is having difficulty.\n(15-295) Anne DeBardeleben, Alameda Realtors Association, showed a video and\nsubmitted information regarding a bone marrow registry drive for Joey LoParo.\n(15-296) Michael John Torrey, Alameda, stated the College of Alameda One Stop\nCareer Center is holding a job fair tomorrow at 10 a.m.\nCONSENT CALENDAR\nMayor Spencer announced that the ordinance pertaining to retention of grocery workers\n[paragraph no 15-302 was removed from the Consent Calendar for discussion; and the\nAlameda Municipal Power Unrepresented Management Employees salary schedule\n[paragraph no. 15-301 would not be heard.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft moved approval of remainder the Consent Calendar.\nVice Mayor Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote -\n5. [Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk preceding the paragraph\nnumber.]\n(*15-297) Minutes of the Special City Council Meeting Held on April 1, 2015; and the\nSpecial City Council Meetings, the Special Joint City Council and Successor Agency to\nthe Community Improvement Commission Meeting and the Regular City Council\nMeeting Held on April 7, 2015. Approved.\n(*15-298) Ratified bills in the amount of $3,986,874.15.\n(*15-299) Recommendation to Approve the Execution of a Reciprocal Tax Information\nSharing Agreement between the City of Alameda and the Franchise Tax Board of the\nState of California. Accepted.\n(*15-300) Recommendation to Authorize Call for Bids for Legal Advertising for the Fiscal\nYear Ending June 30, 2016. Accepted.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n2\nMay 5, 2015", "path": "CityCouncil/2015-05-05.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2015-05-05", "page": 3, "text": "(15-301) Adoption of Resolution Amending the Alameda Municipal Power\nUnrepresented Management Employees (AMPU) Salary Schedule Revising the Salary\nRanges for the Classifications of Assistant General Manager - Administration, Assistant\nGeneral Manager - Energy Resources Planning, Assistant General Manager\n-\nCustomer Resources, and Assistant General Manager - Engineering & Operations. Not\nheard.\n(15-302) Ordinance No. 3124, \"Amending the Alameda Municipal Code by Adding\nChapter VI, Article XIII, Section 6-56 to Impose Requirements Relating to the Retention\nof Grocery Workers in Certain Circumstances involving the Transfer of Ownership of\nLarge Grocery Establishments.\" Finally passed.\nStated that he is opposed to the ordinance; expressed concern over the message being\nsent to the business community, which might result in fewer jobs: Rion Cassidy,\nAlameda.\nCouncilmember Oddie moved adoption of the ordinance.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft seconded the motion.\nUnder discussion, Mayor Spencer stated the State court case to provide safe food\nsupply only applies to stores over 15,000 square feet.\nOn the call for the question, the motion carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.\n(15-303) Ordinance No. 3125, \"Amending and Restating Ordinance Levying Special\nTaxes within the City of Alameda Community Facilities District No. 13-1.' Finally\npassed.\nREGULAR AGENDA ITEMS\n(15-304) Receive Report on the Mastick Senior Center 2014 Annual Report.\nThe Mastick Senior Center Director and Board President gave a Power Point\npresentation.\nVice Mayor Matarrese moved approval [of accepting the report].\nCouncilmember Daysog seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote -\n5.\n(15-305) Resolution No. 15031, \"Adding Additional 2015 Regular City Council Meeting\nDates.\" Adopted.\nThe City Clerk gave a brief presentation.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n3\nMay 5, 2015", "path": "CityCouncil/2015-05-05.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2015-05-05", "page": 4, "text": "Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated adding more meetings is hard on staff and\nmembers of the public; additional meetings do not have to be the entire year, Council\ncould vote to revert back to the original schedule; that she supports the resolution.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated that he will not support the resolution; the Council could\nbe more efficient in how meetings are done; the Mayor gives courtesy to go over the\nthree-minute speaker limit; the public should respect that time adds up; the City of\nOakland has a four-minute cap on Councilmember comments; suggested being more\nefficient and respectful; stated the issue could be revisited in three months.\nCouncilmember Daysog stated the public is well served when staff is fresh and on their\ntoes; he is open to adding more meetings; would like to hear input from the Open\nGovernment Commission.\nVice Mayor Matarrese stated the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment (ARRA) held\nregular meetings to discuss Alameda Point redevelopment; the meeting went away, but\nthe development did not; that he supports the resolution; until Alameda Point is\nsubstantially under the rest of the City, it is appropriate to set aside meetings for timely\ndiscussion which allows the public to participate at a reasonable hour.\nMayor Spencer stated she is concerned Council would be meeting past 11:00 p.m.\nthree times a week.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated Council could follow Oakland's four-minute rule.\nMayor Spencer stated she would like feedback and will not support the resolution if\nmeetings go past 11:00 p.m.\nCouncilmember Oddie moved approval of tabling the item for 60 days and having the\nmatter go before the Open Government Commission first.\nMayor Spencer seconded the motion.\nVice Mayor Matarrese stated waiting 60 days could potentially take away any value\ngained from the extra meetings; additional meetings provide Council the ability to hear\ninitiatives, referrals and follow-up.\nThe City Attorney stated the additional meetings would be Regular Meetings which\nwould allow ordinances to be introduced.\nVice Mayor Matarrese stated Council could choose not to introduce ordinances in the\nadditional meetings.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n4\nMay 5, 2015", "path": "CityCouncil/2015-05-05.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2015-05-05", "page": 5, "text": "Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she does not want to tie staff's hands; the\nadditional meetings would not start until June; additional regular meetings are a good\nidea.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated that he would support a compromise to have meetings\nadded in June or July and withdrew his motion.\nCouncilmember Daysog concurred with Councilmember Oddie on a compromise; stated\nthat he would like input from the Open Government Commission.\nVice Mayor Matarrese moved approval of adding regular meetings on the second\nWednesday of June and July, and evaluating scheduling more meetings at the end of\nthe July.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice\nvote - 5.\nThe Interim City Manager requested clarification about whether ordinances could be\nintroduced at the additional meetings.\nVice Mayor Matarrese moved approval of not having ordinances introduced at the\nWednesday meetings and saving them for Tuesday nights unless there are legal\nramifications.\nCouncilmember Daysog seconded the motion, which carried by the following voice vote:\nAyes: Councilmembers Daysog, Matarrese, Oddie and Mayor Spencer - 4. Noes:\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft - 1.\n(15-306) Resolution No. 15032, \"Establishing Integrated Waste Collection Ceiling Rates\nand Service Fees for Alameda County Industries, Inc. (ACI) for Rate Period 14 (July\n2015 to June 2016). Adopted.\nThe Deputy Public Works Director and Assistant City Attorney gave a Power Point\npresentation.\nThe Assistant City Attorney explained the 10% franchise fee included in Option 3 has to\nbe done by ordinance to amend the franchise fee agreement.\nIn response to Mayor Spencer's inquiry about the franchise fee, the Deputy Public\nWorks Director stated the amount is a little over $90,000.\nIn response to Councilmember Oddie's inquiry, the Deputy Public Works Director stated\nACI is paying the franchise fee on the incremental cost; the City is receiving the\nadditional cost for the franchise fee.\nThe Deputy Public Works Director continued the presentation.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n5\nMay 5, 2015", "path": "CityCouncil/2015-05-05.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2015-05-05", "page": 6, "text": "Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired the vote outcome in other cities.\nThe Deputy Public Works Director responded the City of Livermore approved a similar\nproposal; the City of San Leandro vote will take place later this month.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired at what point will the City know if the rate\nincreases would be sufficient to support the agreement.\nKent Kenny, ACI, stated the MOU sets a structure to go forward in the next five years;\nthe bigger issue is ACI's credit facilities with banks is up in June; it is imminent to show\nthe banks that ACI has cooperation with the cities and the union; the intent is to move\nforward July 1st\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether ACI's position is that small incremental\nincreases would be sufficient, to which Mr. Kenny responded in the affirmative.\nFred Pecker, International Longshore and Warehouse Union (ILWU), stated the ILWU\nand ACI are close to an agreement similar to what has been done in other cities.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether it is ILWU's position that the proposed\nrate increases are sufficient, to which Mr. Pecker responded in the affirmative; stated\nthe process being contemplated creates a standard in labor value; having medical\nbenefits is big.\nCouncilmember Daysog inquired whether the medical portion of the agreement is\ndriving the uncertainty, to which Mr. Kenny responded in the negative; stated all three\ncities have to participate; ACI would like the agreements to be fair across the board.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether annual reviews will still take place, to which the Deputy\nPublic Works Director responded in the affirmative; stated Alameda's franchise requires\nannual adjustments; reviews happen two years with indexed rate review; the third year\nis a more detailed rate review; staff would come back to Council with a recommendation\nfor adjustments next year.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether there could be a difference in the numbers, to which\nthe Deputy Public Works Director responded in the affirmative; stated rate impacts are\nmeasured as projections.\nIn response to Councilmember Oddie's inquiry regarding the impact of the wage\ncomponent, the Deputy Public Works Director stated the adjustment would be in effect\nJuly 1, 2015.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired which portion of the rate increase attributes to the wage,\nto which Councilmember Daysog responded $1.76.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n6\nMay 5, 2015", "path": "CityCouncil/2015-05-05.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2015-05-05", "page": 7, "text": "Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the multi-family pick up pilot program\nwill start on July 1st or staff will report back to Council.\nThe Deputy Public Works Director responded if the program is approved, staff will\nevaluate the requirements and structure of the pilot program and return to Council.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she is more interested in how the public will\nbe informed; she wants to make sure there is an effective means of getting information\nto the community.\nStated ACI workers help the City's goal toward zero waste; urged Council to support\nOption 3: Pedro Sanchez, ACI.\nStated there is huge support for recycling as public policy; he appreciates the liberations\nallowed by staff and the Council; Alameda is part of historical change in making\nrecycling truly sustainable: Fred Pecker, ILWU.\nExpressed excitement and appreciation that Alameda is joining the Countywide\nstandard for wages and benefits; that she supports the staff recommendation: Ruth\nAbbe, Sierra Club.\nStated ACI workers deserve a living wage; urged Council to pass the item: Robb Ratto,\nPSBA.\nStated low wage workers are not free; the government provides subsidies; urged\nCouncil to pass the item: Bill Smith, Alameda.\nVice Mayor Matarrese moved adoption of the resolution to establish integrated waste\ncollection ceiling rates and service fees for ACI as described in Option 3.\nCouncilmember Oddie seconded the motion.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she would like to see workers treated fairly;\nthere should also be reasonable and just cost for ACI; she supports Option 3.\nCouncilmember Oddie concurred with the Council and speakers; stated it is a testament\nto everyone working together; ACI complied with the living wage ordinance and\nbargained with ILWU to bring workers out of poverty and provide benefits.\nCouncilmember Daysog inquired whether the 7.7% adjustment would continue the next\nyear or if there would be a more typical index adjustment.\nMarva Sheehan, HF&H, responded the 7.7% adjustment is attributable to the sorter\nwage increase; the next year would be a cost based year where everything is reviewed\nin total; there are also health benefit impacts; adjustments would be dealt with in the\nusual way.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n7\nMay 5, 2015", "path": "CityCouncil/2015-05-05.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2015-05-05", "page": 8, "text": "Councilmember Daysog stated that he appreciates the charts and additional information\nprovided regarding San Leandro and Livermore; he is ready to support the resolution.\nMayor Spencer stated staff did a great job on negotiating a compromise; thanked the\nACI workers.\nOn the call for the question, the motion carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.\n(15-307) Public Hearing to Consider Adoption of the Community Development Block\nGrant (CDBG) Fiscal Year (FY) 2015-20 Five-Year Strategic Plan and the FY 2015-16\nAction Plan, and Authorize the City Manager to Negotiate and Execute Related\nDocuments, Agreements, and Modifications.\nThe Housing and Community Development Program Manager gave a Power Point\npresentation.\n***\nCouncilmember Daysog left the dais at 9:13 p.m. and returned at 9:14 p.m.\n***\nIn response to Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft's inquiry, the Housing and Community\nDevelopment Program Manager stated all public service application would receive their\nfull requested amount this year; the remaining $6,753 was set aside for a rent\nconciliation program and would be reprogrammed back into public services if a rent\nconciliation program is not needed.\nMayor Spencer requested the chart summary be shared on the screen for the public.\nThanked Council for funding; discussed programs provided by his organization: James\nTreggiari, Legal Assistance for Seniors.\nThanked Council for their support; stated many families have been helped by the\nservices funded by the grants: Patricia Bidar, Building Futures with Women and\nChildren (BFWC).\nThanked the Social Service Human Relations Board (SSHRB), Council and staff for\nsupport; stated the grant keeps them anchored in the City: Erin Scott, Family Violence\nLaw Center.\nIn response to Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft's inquiry, Doug Biggs, Alameda Point\nCollaborative (APC)/SSHRB, stated the Community Based Development Organization\n(CBDO) funding is a specific CDBG designation for organizations that comply with very\nstrict guidelines for community development; CBDO's ultimate goal is to train and\nprepare low income residents for employment; the public service allocation has a cap;\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n8\nMay 5, 2015", "path": "CityCouncil/2015-05-05.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2015-05-05", "page": 9, "text": "CBDO is not included in the cap which allows more services without negatively\nimpacting BFWC and the Food Bank; the SSHRB does not use CBDO funding.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft moved adoption of the CDBG Five-Year Strategic Plan.\nVice Mayor Matarrese seconded the motion.\nUnder discussion, Councilmember Daysog stated that he supports the resolution; the\nspeakers representing 15% of the dollars being deliberated is key; the remaining 85%\nunderscores the abiding partnership with the Housing Authority; there is crying need for\naffordable housing.\nOn the call for the question, the motion carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.\n(15-308) Introduction of Ordinance Amending the Alameda Municipal Code by Adding\nArticle XII to Chapter VI Concerning the Review of Rent Increases, and Adding Section\n2-23 to Article II Concerning the Creation of a Rent Review Advisory Committee\n(RRAC); and Recommendation to Provide Direction to the City Manager Regarding a\nStudy to Analyze the Impacts of Rising Rents on Alameda Residents. Not introduced.\nThe Community Development Director gave a brief presentation.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated the draft ordinance language: \"attempts to evict a tenant\nwithin six months after a requested hearing is deemed retaliatory\" is an incorrect blanket\nstatement; retaliatory action is a presumption and the landlord should be allowed to\npresent evidence to rebut the presumption.\nThe City Attorney stated the ordinance's intention is to provide a process to amicably\nwork out rent issues, not to have City enforcement; the ordinance allows the City to fall\nback on State law.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated the language is too precise; there may be valid reasons\nfor a tenant eviction within six months after a hearing; there would be no defense for the\nlandlord; the law is retaliatory actions are a presumption that could be overcome.\nThe Community Development Director inquired whether substituting \"deemed\" with\n\"presumed\" would suffice.\nThe City Attorney stated the intention is to rely on the Civil Code; she would look up if\nit\nis misstated.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she is troubled by the practice of issuing a 60-\nday notice to vacate in lieu of a rent increase notice; inquired whether the City can do\nanything to prevent the practice and how many times it has occurred.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n9\nMay 5, 2015", "path": "CityCouncil/2015-05-05.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2015-05-05", "page": 10, "text": "The Community Development Director stated the City cannot do anything without a just\ncause eviction ordinance; the occurrence of the 60-day notices is a relatively new\nphenomenon with the discussion of putting more teeth in the rent review process, which\ncould be a strategy for those less interested in the RRAC process.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft suggested the propositions do not have to be mutually\nexclusive.\nThe Community Development Director stated staff has only heard about a few instances\nof the 60-day notices.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she would like some attempt to quantify the\nnumber of Alameda tenants having a problem.\nCouncilmember Daysog stated the RRAC makes a determination in the current process\nwhether or not the property owner is involved; the new process would provide the tenant\nthe ability to cite the ordinance and void the rent increase; the property owner could\nchoose to disagree with the RRAC determination; the process is just a mechanism to\nget the property owner to attend the meeting.\nThe Community Development Director concurred with Councilmember Daysog; stated\nthe proposed ordinance mandates participation; any outcome or mediated solution is\nvoluntary.\nThe City Attorney stated that she found Civil Code citation; the law says \"in an action\nbrought by or against the lessee, the lessee should bear the burden of producing\nevidence that the lessor's conduct was in fact retaliatory of retaliatory;\" suggested\nchanging the language in the notice to reflect that efforts to evict a tenant within six\nmonths of requesting a hearing: \"may be used as evidence in a retaliatory eviction\".\nCouncilmember Oddie concurred with the City Attorney; stated changing the language\nwould work.\nStated that she is excited about the RRAC's added strength; encouraged renters to use\nthe ordinance as a tool to deal with rent increase issues; urged Council to find ways to\naddress 60-day notices: Angela Hockabout, Alameda Renters Coalition (ARC)\nRead a letter from Tony Berg in support of the proposed ordinance Option A: Anne\nDeBardeleben, Alameda Association of Realtors.\nUrged Council to do something about rent increases: Ute, Alameda.\nPresented a rental increase notice she received; stated her landlord increased her rent\nby $170: Barbara Duncan, Alameda.\nStated that he applied to the RRAC with 30 other tenants last year and was able to\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n10\nMay 5, 2015", "path": "CityCouncil/2015-05-05.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2015-05-05", "page": 11, "text": "lower a 25% rent increase to 10%; he received another rent increase this year; he\nsupports ARC and Ordinance A: Garfield Kincross, Alameda.\nStated ARC is not opposed to all rent increases, just egregious ones; that he supports\nOrdinance A: Jon Spangler, ARC\nStated that he supports Ordinance B; suggested giving tenants longer notice: John\nSullivan, Alameda.\nStated that she supports Ordinance B; the small group of landlords being asked to carry\nthe full burden of the issue is unfair; the core issue is lack of housing stock: Karen Bey,\nAlameda.\nStated the value of properties have increased; property owners do not need to penalize\ntenants to make a profit; the RRAC is doing good work, but all the power is with the\nproperty owners: Catherine Pauling, Alameda.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated disturbing words such as \"punishment\" and \"penalize\"\nwere used in twitter and on the blogs; Council is not being punitive; the process is\nmediation and all parties should work together; that he is concerned that adding a\nthreshold would deprive certain tenants; he would like to see data to evaluate the extent\nof the issue; he would rather make a decision based on a study rather than what is on\ntwitter.\nCouncilmember Daysog stated that he has always wanted to have official bodies deal\nwith housing related issues; comments have been heard from property owners and\ntenants regarding a threshold; the RRAC advises no threshold; that he supports\nOrdinance A.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated there is no threshold now and the process is\nworking well; the biggest issue is lack of awareness; adding the availability of RRAC\nservices to all leases in Alameda is the next step; understanding that a resolution may\nnot happen is important, but meeting face-to-face increases the likelihood of resolution;\nthere is no one magic solution and housing stock cannot be added overnight; ways to\nincrease the number of affordable units with existing housing stock could be explored;\nthe City could consider waiving transfer tax in exchange for an agreement to hold rent\nincreases at a certain level and criteria.\n(15-309) Mayor Spencer stated a vote is required to consider the remaining agenda\nitems: Webster Street BIA [paragraph no. 15-311], Park Street BIA [paragraph no. 15-\n312], subcommittee selection [paragraph no. 15-313], the referral [paragraph no. 15-\n315 and the nominations [paragraph no. 15-316].\nThe City Clerk noted in order to be included in the business license mailing, the BIA\nitems need to be addressed tonight.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n11\nMay 5, 2015", "path": "CityCouncil/2015-05-05.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2015-05-05", "page": 12, "text": "Councilmember Oddie moved approval of considering the remaining items.\nVice Mayor Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote -\n5.\nVice Mayor Matarrese stated both ordinances provide a fair and reliable process; that\nhe would not like a threshold; tenants will have same rights they currently have; creation\nof the RRAC is important; that he supports Ordinance A.\nIn response to Mayor Spencer's inquiry regarding whether a tenant has to prove\nfinancial hardship as specified in the ordinance, the City Attorney stated the intent of the\nlanguage is so the tenant can pursue the process if they have a problem meeting the\nfinancial burden of the rent increase.\nMayor Spencer requested modifying the language of the ordinance to that effect.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated Section 2-23.4 includes initial language that is\nconsistent; that she would like to hear any modifications before she approves them.\nMayor Spencer stated the financial hardship issue should be included on a list of issues.\nThe City Attorney stated that she will come back with alternative language.\nMayor Spencer stated commission members should be Alameda residents.\nThe City Clerk stated the Transportation Commission allows for members that have\nbusinesses in Alameda and work for the School District.\nMayor Spencer stated it is her position that commission members should always be\nresidents because important decisions will be made which impact the community.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft suggested reviewing the data with a consultant; stated\nthe City of San Leandro has one landlord member who is a resident and one who is not.\nMayor Spencer stated that she would like to add language: \"and housing provider to\nrespond\" after \"tenant can voice concern about a rent increase\"; excluding certain\nlandlords from rent control is a major concern; she would a like a legal opinion on\nwhether or not a landlord who rents a room in a private home would be excluded under\nCosta Hawkins; the landlords should be required to provide the notice.\nCouncilmember Daysog stated that he concurs with the RRAC recommendation\nrequiring commission members be residents; business license fees for landlords renting\nrooms in private residences could be considered a revenue source; regarding Costa\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n12\nMay 5, 2015", "path": "CityCouncil/2015-05-05.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2015-05-05", "page": 13, "text": "Hawkins issues, language regarding a separability clause should be contemplated in\nthe ordinance.\nMayor Spencer stated a consultant report would cost $35,000; she would be interested\nin knowing the percent of rentals excluded under Costa Hawkins; she strongly supports\naddressing the highest percentage, if not all, rentals in the community; her focus is the\neffectiveness once the changes move forward.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft requested clarification on the Mayor's comments\nregarding rent control.\nMayor Spencer stated she is not suggesting rent control; the profile of rental market\nconditions includes rent increases across the board which may suggest Council could\nmake changes to address all concerns; recognizing Costa Hawkins excludes a\nsignificant amount of rentals is important; strengthening the RRAC is important;\nemphasized RRAC is voluntary; stated that she would like quantitative data.\nThe City Attorney clarified that Costa Hawkins applies to duplexes and apartments built\nbefore 1995 and does not apply to single family homes.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired whether Mayor Spencer wanted to quantify the number\nof units that would be subject to rent control and which units would be exempt, to which\nMayor Spencer responded in the affirmative.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated that he is concerned Council may run afoul of Costa\nHawkins with the rent ordinance because of the threats of litigation.\nIn response to Mayor Spencer's inquiry, the City Attorney stated she could come back\nwith more information on legal questions.\nVice Mayor Matarrese stated the ordinance provides tenants with a tool to use as\nevidence in their case; questioned how wording could be reconciled, but still provide the\ntenant with protection\nThe Community Development Director clarified a rent increase can be imposed if\nproperly noticed under the ordinance; failure to participate in the hearing bars the\nlandlord from increasing rent for 12 months; however, the landlord has the ability to\nprevent being barred by participating in the process; other jurisdictions have the same\nrequirements.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether the requirements have been challenged legally by a\nlandlord, to which the Community Development Director responded in the negative.\nCouncilmember Oddie concurred with the Mayor on the composition of the commission\nmembers as Alamedans only; inquired whether Council is able to move the item\nforward.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n13\nMay 5, 2015", "path": "CityCouncil/2015-05-05.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2015-05-05", "page": 14, "text": "***\n(15-310) Mayor Spencer stated a vote is required to continue the meeting past 11:00\np.m.\nVice Mayor Matarrese moved approval [of continuing the meeting.]\nCouncilmember Oddie seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote -\n5.\n***\nThe City Attorney explained the Costa Hawkins Rental Housing Act, California Civil\nCode 1954.50 et. sec., is a law passed by State legislature which authorizes limited rent\ncontrol provisions.\nCouncilmember Oddie moved approval of doing a study to analyze the impacts of rising\nrents on Alameda residents and the data points raised by the Mayor.\nMayor Spencer stated other Councilmembers also had data points.\nThe City Attorney stated staff has noted the requested data points; the points do not to\nbe re-stated unless Council wants to vote on them.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether a vote is needed or direction should be given, to which\nthe City Attorney responded giving direction to staff is fine.\nThe City Attorney inquired whether Council would like the study to come back at the\nsame time as the re-drafted ordinance.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n14\nMay 5, 2015", "path": "CityCouncil/2015-05-05.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2015-05-05", "page": 15, "text": "Vice Mayor Matarrese stated it would not be possible for the study and ordinance to\ncome back at the same time.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated amending the ordinance does not require having\nthe data; the study would take about six months.\nMayor Spencer stated that she would like data on how successful RRAC is moving\nforward.\nIn response to Councilmember Oddie's inquiry, the Assistant City Manager stated\ncompiling the RRAC data would be done in-house.\nVice Mayor Matarrese inquired when the ordinance would come back.\n***\nMayor Spencer called a recess at 11:02 p.m. and reconvened the meeting at 11:07 p.m.\n***\nThe City Attorney responded the ordinance will be brought back to Council in July.\n(15-311) Public Hearing to Consider Resolution No. 15033, \"Confirming the Webster\nStreet Business Improvement Area (BIA) Report for Fiscal Year 2015-16 and Levying\nan Annual Assessment on the Webster Street BIA.\" Adopted.\nCouncilmember Daysog stated that he would recuse himself and left the dais.\nThe Economic Development Manager gave a brief presentation and provided a\nhandout.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether new businesses at Alameda Landing\nwould be included in the boundary map, to which the Economic Development Manager\nresponded in the affirmative.\nIn response to Mayor Spencer's inquiry, the Economic Development Manager stated\nTarget is located in Area A, is 136,302 square feet and is charged 40 cents per gross\nrevenue.\nMayor Spencer inquired what is Target's gross revenue, to which the Economic\nDevelopment Manager responded he does not know.\nMayor Spencer inquired Target's fee amount without the maximum cap on gross\nrevenue.\nThe Economic Development Manager responded he would have to research the gross\nrevenue reported by Target.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n15\nMay 5, 2015", "path": "CityCouncil/2015-05-05.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2015-05-05", "page": 16, "text": "Sandip Jarwahal, Webster Street Business Association (WABA) President, stated BIA\ndues are calculated and paid on the business license tax; Target's revenue was\nestimated because it was their first year.\nExpressed concern about WABA activities and lack of effort to promote businesses;\nstated that he feels WABA is not being transparent on the use of BIA fees and does not\ncontribute financially to events: Michael Cooper, Alameda.\nAddressed Mr. Cooper's concerns; stated WABA is transparent and all meetings are\nopen to members; copies of financial reports are distributed at all meetings; WABA is a\nnon-profit organization and does not contribute to event promoters: Sandip Jariwala,\nWABA.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether Safeway and Target would exceed 50% of the\nassessment.\nThe Economic Development Manager responded WABA's 2014 BIA was approximately\n$50,000; Safeway and Target would be approximately $12,000.\nMayor Spencer inquired what the amount would be without the cap; to which the\nEconomic Development Manager responded he does not have the information readily\navailable.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated one effect of removing the cap would place Target\nand Safeway ahead of other business members and make it a less even playing field;\nthe Webster Street BIA should get as much assessment as possible, but voting rights\nhinge on percent of assessment.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether adding up the Webster Street businesses would make\nthe 50% mark.\nThe Economic Development Manager stated he would have to calculate the gross\nreceipts for each of the new businesses at Alameda Landing; amounts are hard to\nestimate since the businesses are not at full buildout.\nMr. Jarwahal stated BIAs for new businesses are estimated; if the cap is removed,\nAlameda Landing businesses would be contributing more to the BIA than the\nbusinesses on Webster Street; the cap makes it a level playing field.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether a protest was received on the\nassessment.\nThe Economic Development Manager responded in the negative; stated one phone call\nwas received and tonight's speaker is only 2.8%.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n16\nMay 5, 2015", "path": "CityCouncil/2015-05-05.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2015-05-05", "page": 17, "text": "In response to Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft's inquiry, the Economic Development\nManager stated all noticing was done properly.\nMayor Spencer inquired how member concerns would be addressed.\nThe Economic Development Manager stated members of the BIA are encouraged to\nattend meetings and be involved; the health of WABA depends on a very active\nmembership.\nIn response to Mayor Spencer's inquiry, the Economic Development Manager stated\nCouncil has oversight through public hearings and an agreement with WABA regarding\nreporting and meeting requirements.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether the agreement can be viewed by staff to ensure\nrequirements are being met, to which the Economic Development Manager responded\nin the affirmative; stated staff reviews financial reports annually.\nIn response to Mayor Spencer's inquiry, the Economic Development Manager stated\nstaff follows up on WABA work plans and marketing activities; WABA submits an annual\nbusiness report to Council.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether it is staff's position that WABA performed satisfactorily,\nto which the Economic Development Manager responded in the affirmative.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated the Webster Street business district was greatly\nimpacted by the base closure; improvements have happened over the years; that she\napplauds the work of WABA; the BIA assessment is a very important part of Webster\nStreet's economic viability; she would like the momentum to continue; she is prepared\nto move adoption of the resolution.\nVice Mayor Matarrese stated the surcharge and cap is a good way to manage the effect\nof Alameda Landing; the effectiveness of the board will always be a challenge; the\nchallenge is to get involved and serve; that he is ready to vote on the item.\nMayor Spencer stated she would like consideration and focus on the historic\nsignificance of Webster Street.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft moved adoption of the resolution confirming the Webster\nStreet BIA Report for Fiscal Year 2015-16 and levying an annual assessment on the\nWebster Street BIA.\nVice Mayor Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote -\n4. [Absent: Councilmember Daysog - 1.]\n(15-312) Public Hearing to Consider Resolution No. 15034, \"Confirming the Park Street\nBusiness Improvement Area (BIA) Report for Fiscal Year 2015-16 and Levying an\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n17\nMay 5, 2015", "path": "CityCouncil/2015-05-05.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2015-05-05", "page": 18, "text": "Annual Assessment on the Park Street BIA.\" Adopted.\nThe Economic Development Manager gave a brief presentation and provided a\nhandout.\nStated there were no Park Street businesses that did not want to be part of the BIA:\nRobb Ratto, PSBA.\nVice Mayor Matarrese moved adoption of the resolution confirming the Park Street BIA\nReport for Fiscal Year 2015-16 and levying an annual assessment on the Park Street\nBIA.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice\nvote - 5.\n(15-313) Recommendation to Select Two City Councilmembers to Serve on the Joint\nSubcommittee with East Bay Regional Park District (EBRPD).\nThe City Clerk gave a brief presentation.\nVice Mayor Matarrese stated that he would like to serve on the liaison committee.\nMayor Spencer stated that she would also like to serve on liaison committee.\nCouncilmember Daysog moved approval of selecting Vice Mayor Matarrese and Mayor\nSpencer to serve on the Joint Subcommittee with EBRPD.\nCouncilmember Oddie seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote -\n5.\nCouncilmember Daysog moved approval of selecting Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft to\nserve as an alternate on the Joint Subcommittee with EBRPD.\nVice Mayor Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote -\n5.\nExpressed appreciation of the subcommittee; stated communication and cooperation is\nhelpful to plan for the future; that he is looking forward to the new relationship: Doug\nSiden, EBRPD.\nCITY MANAGER COMMUNICATIONS\n(15-314) The Interim City Manager announced a budget meeting would be held\ntomorrow night at 6:00 p.m.\nORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n18\nMay 5, 2015", "path": "CityCouncil/2015-05-05.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2015-05-05", "page": 19, "text": "None.\nCOUNCIL REFERRALS\n(15-315) Recommendation that City Council Establish a Procedure for Appointments to\nRegional Boards and Commissions, and Guidelines for How Appointees Reflect City\nPolicy and City Council Directives. (Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft)\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft made brief comments about her referral.\nCouncilmember Daysog stated he concurs with Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft.\nVice Mayor Matarrese stated it is the prerogative of the Mayor to represent the City on\nthe boards; expectations include staff making the City representative aware of agenda\nitems which are of interest to the City and reporting back during Council\nCommunications; the current practice has seemed to serve the City well.\nCouncilmember Oddie concurred with Vice Mayor Matarrese; stated appointees should\nrepresent policies already adopted by the City; that he would like to see written policy of\nhow appointees should represent the City with proper authority and positions.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated regional bodies are significant to the City,\nespecially regarding funding streams; the entire Council as a body would is held\naccountable for decisions; all appointments should be treated equally; the implications\nof service on regional bodies could be even greater than another body such as the\nHistorical Advisory Board, which comes before the Council; concurred with\nCouncilmember Oddie regarding policy; stated the appointed representative should\ncarry out the will of the Council and the City.\nMayor Spencer stated that she would not support asking Council to do more work at this\ntime; she supports the prior practice.\nVice Mayor Matarrese stated that he would like assurances that when regional bodies\nproduce an agenda, the primary or alternate representative has to attend; a briefing\nshould be done prior to the meetings; he would like the practice to continue.\nIn response to Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft's inquiry, Mayor Spencer stated staff is\nsometimes sent to the meetings with the representative.\nThe Interim City Manager stated there are thresholds on when staff should attend the\nmeetings, primarily when money is involved; waste management rate increases is an\nexample.\nIn response to Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft's inquiry, Vice Mayor Matarrese stated the\nrepresentative could report to the Council in closed session.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n19\nMay 5, 2015", "path": "CityCouncil/2015-05-05.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2015-05-05", "page": 20, "text": "Vice Mayor Matarrese stated a committee does not need to be set up now; assignees\nare set; that he would like to make sure briefings are done and representatives are\nreporting out after.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated appointments can be done the same as public\nbodies.\nMayor Spencer stated she does not support any change to the existing practice.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated Mayor Gilmore polled members of the Council\nasking their interest on serving on a particular body; regional bodies are just as\nimportant to the public; she is not asking for a major change.\nCouncilmember Oddie concurred with Vice Mayor Matarrese's direction; stated Council\nshould be made aware of whether or not there is any City policy.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft moved approval of using the same appointment\nprocedure as done for internal boards and commissions and having clarification of a\nCity policy on how appointees represent the City.\nCouncilmember Oddie requested bifurcating the motion.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft moved approval of establishing a procedure for\nappointments to regional boards and commissions.\nCouncilmember Daysog seconded the motion which FAILED by the following voice\nvotes: Ayes: Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft and Daysog - 2; Noes: Vice Mayor\nMatarrese and Mayor Spencer - 2; Abstentions: Councilmember Oddie - 1\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft moved approval of the City Attorney come back with\nguidelines on City policies that might be considered when representing the City on\nregional boards and commissions.\nCouncilmember Oddie seconded the motion which passed by the following voice votes:\nAyes: Councilmembers Ezzy Ashcraft, Oddie and Vice Mayor Matarrese - 3; Noes:\nMayor Spencer - 1; Abstentions: Councilmember Daysog - 1.\nCOUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS\n(15-316) Consideration of Mayor's Nominations for Appointment to the Golf\nCommission, Housing Authority Board of Commissioners (HABOC), and Public Art\nCommission (PAC).\nMayor Spencer nominated Stephanie Shipe to the HABOC and Brandy Graham and\nSommer Carter to the PAC.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n20\nMay 5, 2015", "path": "CityCouncil/2015-05-05.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2015-05-05", "page": 21, "text": "ADJOURNMENT\nThere being no further business, Mayor Spencer adjourned the meeting at 12:08 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\n21\nMay 5, 2015", "path": "CityCouncil/2015-05-05.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2015-05-05", "page": 22, "text": "MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING\nTUESDAY- - MAY 5, 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.\n[Note: Councilmember Daysog arrived at 6:11 p.m.]\nAbsent:\nNone.\nThe meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider:\n(15-287) Conference with Legal Counsel - Existing Litigation (54956.9); Case Name:\nNavarro V. City of Alameda, et al.; United States District Court, Northern District, San\nFrancisco; Case No. 3:14-cv-01954 JD\nFollowing the Closed Session the meeting was reconvened and Mayor Spencer\nannounced that direction was given to staff.\nAdjournment\nThere being no further business, Mayor Spencer adjourned the meeting at 6:37 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\nMay 5, 2015", "path": "CityCouncil/2015-05-05.pdf"}