{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2016-06-21", "page": 1, "text": "MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING\nTUESDAY-JUNE 21,2016--6:00 P.M.\nMayor Spencer convened the meeting at 6:01 p.m.\nRoll Call - Present:\nCouncilmembers Daysog, Ezzy Ashcraft, Matarrese, Oddie\nand Mayor Spencer - 5.\nAbsent:\nNone.\nThe meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider:\n(16-286) Conference with Legal Counsel - Anticipated Litigation Significant exposure to\nlitigation pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 54956.9 of the Government Code\nNumber of Cases: One (As Defendant - City Exposure to Legal Action).\n(16-287) Conference with Legal Counsel - Anticipated Litigation Imitation of litigation\npursuant to subdivision (c) of Section 54956.9 of the Government Code Number of\ncases: Two (As Plaintiff - City Initiated Legal Action).\nFollowing the Closed Session, the meeting was reconvened and Mayor Spencer\nannounced direction was given to staff on both items.\nAdjournment\nThere being no further business, Mayor Spencer adjourned the meeting at 7:14 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\nJune 21, 2016", "path": "CityCouncil/2016-06-21.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2016-06-21", "page": 2, "text": "MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING\nTUESDAY--JUNE - 21,2016- -7:00 P.M.\nMayor Spencer convened the meeting at 6:23 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(16-288) The City Clerk requested the Fire grant [paragraph no. 16-309 be moved\nabove the Rent Fee [paragraph no. 16-310]. .\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft moved approval of moving the item.\nVice Mayor Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote\n-\n5.\nPROCLAMATIONS, SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY AND ANNOUNCEMENTS\nThe Director of Rent and Community Programs, announced the Section 8 wait lists are\nopening; applications would be accepted from June 22nd, at 10:00 a.m. to June 27th at\n9:59 a.m.; selected applicants must reside in Alameda.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether the applications are available online or hardcopy, to\nwhich the Director of Rent and Community Programs responded online only.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the chance of getting housing\nassistance is determined by when an application is submitted.\nThe Director of Rent and Community Programs responded applications are accepted at\nthe open times, then a lottery is conducted.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether applicants have to be Alameda\nresidents.\nThe Director of Rent and Community Programs responded applicants do not have to be\na current resident of Alameda, but they need to be willing to reside in Alameda; stated\nthe openings are project specific.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether the announcement is on the City Website, to which the\nDirector of Rent and Community Programs responded in the affirmative.\nORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nJune 21, 2016", "path": "CityCouncil/2016-06-21.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2016-06-21", "page": 3, "text": "(16-289) Ed Wong, Rachel Guan and Ricky Yan, raised issues regarding fair housing;\nstated they submitted an application for below market rate housing and were\ndisqualified; requested a meeting with the City Manager and the City Attorney; stated\nthe issue is with the Marina Shore development; they would like to discuss insufficient\nfinancial documents with the City Manager and City Attorney.\nCONSENT CALENDAR\nMayor Spencer announced that the Legal Advertising Contract [paragraph no. 16-294];\nthe CalPERS resolution [paragraph no. 16-299]; and the IBEW MOU resolution\n[paragraph no. 16-300 were withdrawn from the Consent Calendar and the Enterprise\nDistrict report [paragraph no. 16-295 would not be heard.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft moved approval of the remainder of the Consent\nCalendar.\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(*16-290) Minutes of the Special and Regular City Council Meetings Held on May 17,\n2016. Approved.\n(*16-291) Ratified bills in the amount of $2,912,424.61.\n(*16-292) Recommendation to Authorize the City Manager to Execute a Fourth\nAmendment to an Agreement with Michael Baker International, Inc. for Graphic Art and\nMarketing Support for the Community Development Department, Extending the Term\nfor 12 Months, to June 30, 2017. Accepted.\n(*16-293) Recommendation to Award Contract in the Amount of $364,090 with an\nAdditional Amount of $35,910 in Contingencies, to Innovative Interfaces, Inc. for the\nIntegrated Library System, Polaris. Accepted.\n(16-294) Recommendation to Award Contract for Legal Advertising for Fiscal Year\n2016-17. Accepted.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired whether the bidding process could be reopened; stated\nCouncil authorized the opening of bids on May 3rd which were due May 16th, which is a\nshort window; he is hopeful the Council can reopen the bidding process to allow the\nAlameda Sun to apply and Council can compare the bids.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated the City Clerk informed the publisher of the\nAlameda Sun what the requirements were for the bid process; the publisher plans on\nbidding next year.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nJune 21, 2016", "path": "CityCouncil/2016-06-21.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2016-06-21", "page": 4, "text": "Mayor Spencer inquired whether there is a possibility for Council to vote to reopen the\nbid.\nThe City Manager responded the Council could reject the bid and republish the bid.\nThe City Clerk noted there is a deadline; stated the Charter requires that Council award\nthe bid before the next fiscal year and the City would not meet the deadline if the bid is\nreopened.\nCouncilmember Daysog inquired whether there are exposure issues.\nThe City Attorney responded that there is the ability to qualify to have put in a bid.\nThe City Clerk stated the Charter requires that the newspaper be an adjudicated\nnewspaper of general circulation within the City of Alameda; the Sun has had the status\nas of 2013; the City Clerk will provide the Sun with notice next year and they will have\nthe opportunity to bid.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether there is legal exposure for the City to reopen the bids.\nThe City Attorney responded that the Alameda Sun did not put a bid in, which was\nadvertised; there is no legal exposure.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft clarified Mayor Spencer's question; is there legal\nexposure if the City were to withdraw its acceptance of the bid of the Alameda Journal.\nThe City Attorney responded the bid has not been accepted so the City could reject and\nreopen the bid; the Charter requirement have a legal newspaper would be missed.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated the noticing requirements were met and legally\npublished.\nCouncilmember Oddie moved approval of rejecting the Alameda Journal bid and\nrebidding the contract.\nMayor Spencer seconded the motion.\nUnder discussion Vice Mayor Matarrese inquired whether the City would not be able to\nmeet the Charter requirement if action is not taken.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated the bid from the Alameda Journal has been\npublished, which gives an advantage to the Alameda Sun; she is also mindful of the\ndeadline.\nOn the call for the question, the motion failed by the following voice vote: Ayes:\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nJune 21, 2016", "path": "CityCouncil/2016-06-21.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2016-06-21", "page": 5, "text": "Councilmember Oddie and Mayor Spencer - 2. Noes: Councilmembers Daysog, Ezzy\nAshcraft and Matarrese - 3.\nVice Mayor Matarrese moved approval of awarding the contact.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice\nvote - 5.\n(*16-295) Recommendation to Accept the Alameda Point Enterprise District Marketing\nStrategy Document and a Six-Month Status Update. Withdrawn.\n(*16-296) Recommendation to Award a Two-Year Contract in the Amount of $177,740,\nWhich Includes a 10% Contingency to PCI Parking Concepts, Inc. for the Management\nand Operations of the Civic Center Parking Structure. Accepted.\n(*16-297) Recommendation to Amend Contract in the Amount of $5,000,000 for MCK\nServices, Inc. for Repair and Resurfacing of Certain Streets, Phase 35, No. P.W. 03-16-\n03. Accepted.\n(*16-298) Resolution No. 15158, \"Approving the Final Map and Accepting the\nDedications and Easements for Tract 8315 (West Tower Avenue Subdivision). \"\nAdopted; and\n(*16-298A) Resolution No. 15159, \"Approving the Final Map and Accepting the\nDedications and Easements for Tract 8316 (Hangar Row Subdivision). Adopted.\n(16-299) Resolution No. 15160, \"Intention to Approve an Amendment to the Contract\nBetween the Board of Administration of the California Public Employees' Retirement\nSystem (CalPERS) and the City Council of the City of Alameda to Include Provisions\nPursuant to Government Code 20516 \"Cost Sharing\" for Local Police Members and for\nLocal Fire Members in Accordance with the Previously Approved Memorandum of\nUnderstanding.\" Adopted.\nStated that he is concerned with CalPERS relationship regarding broader issues; the\nCity Charter requires the City to provide benefits to employees; there is a stipulation\nstating that the benefit program must be consistent with standard actuarial principals,\nwhich he believes is not being done: Ken Peterson, Alameda.\nMayor Spencer inquired what is the purpose of the item.\nThe Human Resources Director responded the issue was negotiated in 2012; stated the\ncontract provides the members of the public safety unit to contribute additional money\ntowards the employers retirement costs; an additional 6% would go towards the\nemployers share, reducing what the City would pay; in order for the additional\ncontribution to reflect that the employee made the contribution, CalPERS requires the\ncontract amendment and additional steps.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nJune 21, 2016", "path": "CityCouncil/2016-06-21.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2016-06-21", "page": 6, "text": "Vice Mayor Matarrese moved adoption of the resolution.\nCouncilmember Oddie seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote -\n5.\n(16-300) Resolution No. 15161, \"Approving a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU)\nbetween the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW) and the City of\nAlameda for a Three Year Term Commencing on December 27, 2015 and Ending\nDecember 26, 2018.' Adopted.\nMayor Spencer stated the MOU includes an annual 3% increases as well as equity\nadjustments up to 10%; over time taxpayers will be asked to pay for the adjustments;\nshe is concerned about the taxpayers having to pay for the increases.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft requested clarification.\nThe Human Resources Director responded the increases are equity adjustments; stated\nthe 3% is consistent with other bargaining units; the City also did equity adjustments\nbased on salary survey comparisons with other jurisdictions; some classifications are\ngetting 10% to make the City competitive.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether the 10% is on top of the 3% each year, to which the\nHuman Resources Director responded in the affirmative.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated the reason it is important to conduct a salary study\nis because the City needs to retain good help for technical positions; in comparison to\nother agencies, the City needs do a one-time catch up; the employees will receive the\nsame percentage as other city employees.\nBurke Dunfee, Chief Negotiator, stated the group that is receiving a 10% adjustment are\nthe System Operators, a group of four employees plus the Chief Operator; compared to\nother jurisdictions, they were significantly lower.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired whether the people that pay for the costs are the rate\npayers, not taxpayers, to which the Human Resources Director responded in the\naffirmative.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated anyone not purchasing electricity is not paying for the\ncosts; inquired whether rates will be impacted.\nThe Human Resources Director responded in the negative; stated the costs are already\nbudgeted under the current rates.\nVice Mayor Matarrese moved adoption of the resolution approving the Memorandum of\nUnderstanding (MOU) between the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nJune 21, 2016", "path": "CityCouncil/2016-06-21.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2016-06-21", "page": 7, "text": "(IBEW) and the City of Alameda.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft seconded the motion.\nUnder discussion, Councilmember Daysog stated that he appreciates the set 3%.\nOn the call for the question, the motion carried by the following voice vote: Ayes:\nCouncilmember Daysog, Matarrese, Oddie and Ezzy Ashcraft - 4. Noes: Mayor\nSpencer - 1.\n(*16-301) Ordinance No. 3155, \"Amending Alameda Municipal Code Section 5-7.1\nPenalty for Nonpayment of Annual, Quarterly or Semi-Annual Business License.' Finally\npassed.\nREGULAR AGENDA ITEMS\n(16-302) Resolution No. 15162, \"Reappointing Cheryl Saxton as a Member of the Golf\nCommission. Adopted;\n(16-302A) Resolution No. 15163, \"Appointing Lynn Jones as a Member of the Historical\nAdvisory Board.\" Adopted;\n(16-302B) Resolution No. 15164, \"Appointing Thomas Saxby (Registered Architect) as\na Member of the Historical Advisory Board.' Adopted;\n(16-302C) Resolution No. 15165, \"Reappointing Stephanie Shipe as a Member of the\nHousing Authority Board of Commissioners.\" Adopted;\n(16-302D) Resolution No. 15166, \"Appointing Kenji Tamaoki as a Member of the\nHousing Authority Board of Commissioners.\" Adopted;\n(16-302E) Resolution No. 15167, \"Appointing Fayleen Allen (Tenant) as a Member of\nthe Housing Authority Board of Commissioners.\" Adopted;\n(16-302F) Resolution No. 15168, \"Appointing Sandra Kay (Senior Tenant) as a Member\nof the Housing Authority Board of Commissioners.\" Adopted;\n(16-302G) Resolution No. 15169, \"Appointing Ronald Curtis as a Member of the\nPlanning Board.' Adopted;\n(16-302H) Resolution No. 15170, \"Appointing Adam Gillitt as a Member of the Public Art\nCommission.\" Adopted;\n(16-3021) Resolution No. 15171, \"Reappointing Sherman Lewis as a Member of the\nPublic Art Commission.\" Adopted;\n(16-302J) Resolution No. 15172, \"Reappointing Mary Sutter as a Member of the Public\nUtilities Board.\" Adopted;\n(16-302K) Resolution No. 15173, \"Appointing Milton Friedman as a Member of the Rent\nReview Advisory Committee.\" Adopted;\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nJune 21, 2016", "path": "CityCouncil/2016-06-21.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2016-06-21", "page": 8, "text": "(16-302L) Resolution No. 15174, \"Appointing Christine Chilcott as a Member of the\nSocial Service Human Relations Board.\" Adopted;\n(16-302M) Resolution No. 15175, \"Appointing Jennifer Hastings as a Member of the\nSocial Service Human Relations Board.' Adopted; and\n(16-302N) Resolution No. 15176, \"Appointing Samantha Soules as a Member of the\nTransportation Commission.\" Adopted.\nVice Mayor Matarrese moved adoption of the resolutions.\nCouncilmember Oddie seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote -\n5.\nThe City Clerk administered the Oath of Office and presented certificates of\nappointment to the board and commission members.\n(16-303) Resolution No. 15177, \"Approving the Engineer's Report, Confirming Diagram\nand Assessment, and Ordering the Levy of Assessments, Island City Landscaping and\nLighting District 84-2, All Zones.\" Adopted.\nCouncilmember Daysog and Vice Mayor Matarrese reused themselves and left the dais.\nThe Public Works Management Analyst gave a brief presentation.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired whether, in the future, it is possible to split the areas or\nif they have to be all on one resolution.\nThe Public Works Management Analyst responded in the affirmative.\nAcknowledged the good work of the City Engineer and the Public Works staff on\ndeveloping the current Engineers Report: Dan Ready, Harbor Bay Business Park\nAssociation.\nCouncilmember Oddie moved adoption of the resolution with direction that staff\nseparate the districts for the Councilmembers with conflicts next time.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice\nvote - 3. [Absent: Councilmember Daysog and Vice Mayor Matarrese - 2.]\n(16-304) Resolution No. 15178, \"Resolution Approving the Engineer's Report,\nConfirming Diagram and Assessment, and Ordering the Levy of Assessments,\nMaintenance Assessment District (MAD) 01-01 (Marina Cove).'\nThe Public Works Management Analyst gave a brief presentation.\nCouncilmember Daysog moved adoption of the resolution.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nJune 21, 2016", "path": "CityCouncil/2016-06-21.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2016-06-21", "page": 9, "text": "Vice Mayor Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote -\n5.\n(16-305) Resolution No. 15179, \"Establishing Integrated Waste Collection Ceiling Rates\nand Service Fees for Alameda County Industries, Inc. (ACI) for Rate Period 15 (July\n2016 to June 2017). Adopted.\nThe Assistant Public Works Director, Chris Valbusa, Alameda County Industries (ACI),\nand Marva Shehan, HF&F, gave a Power Point presentation.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether the rates listed in the presentation are the rates for\ntrash, to which Ms. Shehan responded the rates are for all services.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether the fee is monthly, to which Ms. Shehan responded in\nthe affirmative.\nMay Spencer suggested residents with a 64-gallon trash bin can reduce costs by getting\na larger recycling bin and reducing the trash bin size, which will save residents money.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she attended an ACI facilities lunch and\nheard stories from the workers who have turned their lives around with the help of ACI;\nACI has piloted an annual bulky item pickup for multi-family properties; inquired how\npeople set up a bulky item pickup.\nThe Assistant Public Works Director responded people can call ACI's customer service\nline at (510) 483-1400; continued the presentation.\nCouncilmember Oddie thanked ACI and City staff for working together on employing\nresidents of Alameda.\nMayor Spencer thanked staff for working on the multi-year project with ACI and the\nunion.\nVice Mayor Matarrese moved adoption of the resolution establishing integrated waste\ncollection ceiling rates and service fees for ACI.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice\nvote - 5.\n(16-306) Public Hearing to Establish the Proposition 4 (Appropriations) Limit for Fiscal\nYear (FY) 2016-17 and Resolution No. 15180, \"Establishing the Appropriations Limit for\nFY 2016-17.' Approved.\nThe Finance Director gave a brief presentation.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nJune 21, 2016", "path": "CityCouncil/2016-06-21.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2016-06-21", "page": 10, "text": "Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft moved adoption of the resolution establishing the\nAppropriations Limit for FY 2016-17.\nVice Mayor Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote\n-\n5.\n(16-307) Resolution No. 15181, \"Resolution Amending Master Fee Resolution No.\n12191 to Add and Revise Fees.\" Adopted.\nThe Finance Director gave a brief presentation.\nMayor Spencer inquired how the passport processing will work.\nThe City Clerk responded that the City is in the early stages of the application process;\nthe City Clerk's office needs to be approved and trained on the process before\npassports can be processed.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether people will be able to go to the City Clerk's Office for\npassports, instead of having to go to the post office, to which the City Clerk responded\nin the affirmative.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the affordable housing unit fees and\nAlameda Point Development Impact Fees apply to developers that are already in the\npipeline and approved.\nThe Community Development Director responded if the developer has not filed an\napplication, the new fees would apply; if the application to the Community Development\nDepartment is already in, the developer would pay the old fees.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired if the application is in process, the new fees do\nnot apply.\nThe Community Development Director responded the fee increase is effective July 1st, if\nan application is submitted prior to July 1st the old fees apply; stated she will double\ncheck that this is correct and inform the City Council.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired whether the fee schedule will be adjusted to reflect the\nlate business license fee penalty.\nThe Finance Director responded the second reading of the ordinance occurred tonight\nand takes 30 days to go into effect; once the ordinance is in effect, the master fee\nschedule will be updated to reflect the new fees.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft moved to approve the resolution.\nVice Mayor Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote -\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nJune 21, 2016", "path": "CityCouncil/2016-06-21.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2016-06-21", "page": 11, "text": "5.\n(16-308) Public Hearing to Consider Collection of Delinquent Business License Taxes\nand Fees and Delinquent Integrated Waste Management Accounts Via the Property Tax\nBills.\nThe Finance Director gave a brief presentation.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired about the two requests that were received asking for the\npenalties to be waived and an installment agreement; further inquired whether the\nCouncil has authority to grant the requests.\nThe Finance Director responded in the affirmative; stated granting the requests is the\nCouncil's discretion.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she supports letting staff make the decisions;\nstaff can apply appropriate discretion; inquired what is the implication to other\nbusinesses who pay fees.\nThe Finance Director responded that the current ordinance does not give the Finance\nDirector the ability to grant the requests.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether there are five separate requests asking for relief, to\nwhich the Finance Director responded in the affirmative.\nVice Mayor Matarrese moved approval of the staff recommendation authorizing the\ncollection of delinquent business license, taxes and fees and to waive the penalties on\nthe five that were submitted.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether the City is asking for the 60% penalty as part of the\nmotion, or 100%.\nVice Mayor Matarrese clarified 60%.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether the Council can waive all late fees of the five that\nsubmitted the requests.\nCouncilmember Oddie clarified the one request was a payment plan as opposed to a\nwaiver.\nVice Mayor Matarrese clarified the motion to follow the request of the applicant.\nCouncilmember Oddie seconded the motion.\nUnder discussion, Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft requested clarification whether\nCouncil is including the discretion to the Finance Director as well as the Council to make\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nJune 21, 2016", "path": "CityCouncil/2016-06-21.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2016-06-21", "page": 12, "text": "the decisions.\nVice Mayor Matarrese responded that is already in the ordinance.\nMayor Spencer stated that she would like to amend the motion to waive the request\nasking for a payment plan.\nVice Mayor Matarrese and Councilmember Oddie accepted the amendment.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired if Mayor Spencer is making a new motion.\nMayor Spencer stated she is making a friendly amendment.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she did not hear the response as an\namendment.\nVice Mayor Matarrese stated he followed the staff report and then addressed the\nrequests.\nOn the call for the question, the motion carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.\nVice Mayor inquired whether the requestors will be contacted with the updates, and\nwhether once the ordinance is in place it will be at the rate that is in the ordinance with\nthe Finance Director acting as the collection officer, to which the Finance Director\nresponded on the affirmative.\n(16-309) Recommendation to Accept a $457,839 Grant from the Assistance to\nFirefighters Grant (AFG) Program for the Purchase of Self-Contained Breathing\nApparatus (SCBA) Equipment, Amend the Fire Grants Fund Budget by $503,622,\nIncluding Required Matching Funds, for Fiscal Year 2015-16, and Authorize the City\nManager or Her Designee to Purchase the Equipment.\nThe Fire Chief gave a brief presentation.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she is in support and is glad that the City\nreceived the grant.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft moved approval of accepting a $457,839 grant from the\nAssistance to Firefighters Grant (AFG) Program for the purchase of Self-Contained\nBreathing Apparatus (SCBA) equipment, amend the Fire Grants Fund budget by\n$503,622, including required matching funds, for Fiscal Year 2015-16, and authorizing\nthe City Manager or her designee to purchase the equipment.\nVice Mayor Matarrese seconded the motion.\nUnder discussion, Vice Mayor Matarrese stated the gear is essential; inquired if staff\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nJune 21, 2016", "path": "CityCouncil/2016-06-21.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2016-06-21", "page": 13, "text": "can look at future budgets to see whether there is a savings from the grant, how it affect\nthe budget; and if the City is deferring something else essential.\nThe City Manager stated staff will bring the information back to Council.\nOn the call for the question, the motion carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.\n(16-310) Recommendation to Receive the Rent Program Regulatory Fee Study; and\nAdoption of Resolution Adopting a Fee Program for the City's Rent Review, Rent\nStabilization and Limitations on Evictions Ordinance and Implementing Policies. Not\nadopted.\nThe Community Development Director gave a Power Point presentation.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether staff's recommendations is that the tenants portion be\npaid by the landlord to the City.\nThe Community Development Director responded in the affirmative; stated the City\nwould bill the landlord for the fee; the landlord will be responsible for collecting the fee\nfrom the tenant; when there is a lease, the landlord can still pass the cost of the fee to\nthe tenant; if the tenant does not pay, the landlord can take the tenant to small claims\ncourt or include a provision about the fee in the lease and enforce the lease; continued\nthe presentation.\nCouncilmember Daysog inquired if the comparison to other cities is fair because the\nstyle of rent control is different than Alameda; and how does Alameda compare with Los\nGatos or another small town.\nThe Community Development Director responded Alameda relies more on a mediation\nmodel, which is the only difference; stated a mandatory hearing is required if the rent is\nincreased more than 5%.\nCouncilmember Daysog inquired how does Alameda compare with other rent\nstabilization programs.\nThe Community Development Director responded the table provided in the exhibit\nshows the comparison among jurisdictions.\nMayor Spencer inquired if there is a fee for Los Gatos, to which the Community\nDevelopment Director responded in the negative.\nCouncilmember Daysog inquired whether the comparison should be against other cities\nthat employ the rent stabilization mediation model; stated comparing against Berkeley,\nSanta Monica or West Hollywood is a comparison against a completely different model.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated some of the other cities have a lot more jurisdiction than\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nJune 21, 2016", "path": "CityCouncil/2016-06-21.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2016-06-21", "page": 14, "text": "Alameda; the City is not really comparing apples to apples.\nThe Community Development Director responded there are no apples to apples to\ncompare.\nCouncilmember Daysog inquired whether staff has a list of other cities respective costs.\nThe Community Development Director responded the current list was put together from\nthe fee study; staff does have a list of other cities that can be put into a table; continued\nthe presentation.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired what does \"apportioned the following year\" mean, if a\nportion of the $4,705 will not be paid.\nThe Community Development Director responded the portion would not be paid in the\ncurrent year; stated in the following year, the City would know how many appeals were\nheard and the amount could be factored into the fee for non-exempt units.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired whether the proposal is only for year 1, to which the\nCommunity Development Director responded in the affirmative.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether landlords and tenants would pay the\nfee for the arbitration hearing even if they never avail themselves of that process, to\nwhich the Community Development Director responded in the affirmative.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether it was the following year and every year\nthereafter, to which the Community Development Director responded in the affirmative;\ncontinued the presentation.\nVice Mayor Matarrese inquired what the costs of the program are to date.\nThe Community Development Director responded $90,000.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated said cost is just the Housing Authority; inquired\nwhether there are additional costs to the City Attorney's Office and the Community\nDevelopment Department.\nThe City Attorney stated that she does not have the amount readily available; there has\nbeen significant time and outside counsel costs.\nVice Mayor Matarrese stated that he is looking to compare the real costs to what is\nprojected.\nThe Community Development Director responded that she is unaware of the costs.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nJune 21, 2016", "path": "CityCouncil/2016-06-21.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2016-06-21", "page": 15, "text": "Vice Mayor Matarrese stated Council needs the information in order to determine\nwhether the fee is a real number.\nThe Community Development Director responded the contracted amount with the\nHousing Authority is a real amount.\nStated the fee is unfair and the only people who benefit are the renters; landlords are\nthe ones doing the significant paperwork; renters have no idea about building\nmaintenance; urged Council to reconsider: Melinda Samuelson, Alameda.\nStated that she is a renter and cannot afford to buy in Alameda; there is a housing crisis\nin Alameda; she does not know if her family can afford to stay in Alameda for her\nchildren can attend school; urged Council not to pass the fee onto tenants; requests a\njust cause ordinance and no fault evictions, a rent cap, and creation of a rent board with\nmore jurisdiction and services; urged Council to remember the renters and tenants in\nthe City: Kari Rosenbaum, Alameda.\nStated the rent stabilization ordinance is not protection for the renters; renters do not\nfeel safe and secure and fear retaliation; the program is failing at the price of $2 million\nper year; there is a $20 a month annual business fee per unit; less than 2,000 of the\n17,400 units paid the fee; the fee should go up $50 if the landlords are late; questioned\nhow the City will bill and collect on landlords when the landlords cannot even pay the\n$20 fee; stated rent control and eviction protections are needed; every week Alameda is\nlosing more residents and adding insult to injury by asking tenants to pay an additional\n$5.46 per month; even if only 10% of landlords are bad, that is 1,500 families and\nAlamedans: Catherine Pauling, Alameda Renters Coalition (ARC).\nUrged Council to revise comparable cities costs; inquired if there is a way to base the\nregulatory fee on rent or square footage, which would be more fair: Eric Strimling, ARC.\nSuggested the Housing Authority come up with a new plan and some real answers;\nquestioned whether the $40 per rental unit landlords pay goes into the General Fund;\nstated there needs to be a quarterly review of what the Rent Review Advisory\nCommittee is actually doing and make adjustments accordingly; urged coming up with\nan alternative to small claims court if the landlords cannot collect the fee: Lester Cabral,\nAlameda.\nStated the landlords in Alameda will have to pay for new jobs created from the program;\nthe fee should be paid by the ones who benefit; the people who are benefiting are the\nrenters; urged Council to reconsider approval of the program: Wayne Leong, Alameda.\nStated that she did not mind the 5% increase cap; she does not have time to do the\ncurrent paperwork, and the program will add more paperwork; urged the City to look into\nother cities and the costs: Nancy Gordon, Alameda.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nJune 21, 2016", "path": "CityCouncil/2016-06-21.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2016-06-21", "page": 16, "text": "Mayor Spencer called a recess at 9:26 p.m. and reconvened the meeting at 9:36 p.m.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated emails allege that if the fee is imposed it is a violation of\nthe Charter.\nThe City Attorney responded the language does not apply to what the City is doing;\nstated the language addresses an amount of money pursuant to binding arbitration; if\nthere is binding arbitration that requires an increase in salary, the City could not just\nraise taxes, the City would have to go to a vote of the people to increase the salary; the\nfee is allowed under the California Constitution, Proposition 218 and Proposition 206,\nwhich specify what has to be done to assess a fee; as long as the fee is limited to the\nservice costs, the City is authorized to levy a fee.\nCouncilmember Daysog inquired what method is being used to obtain the cost ratios;\nquestioned what if the figures are wrong.\nJohn Bliss, SCI Consulting, stated all of the rental units had to be identified to figure out\nthe fees; he worked with City and Housing Authority staff on an independent high level\nbudget.\nCouncilmember Daysog stated it sounds like the fee is an estimate divided by the total\nnumber of units; the number of rental units shifts from one year to the next; inquired\nhow the City would deal with the fact that the denominator is always changing.\nMr. Bliss responded the number of units will increase; stated the fee is driven from the\nCounty Assessor; the number will have to be updated each year; hopefully, the\nnumerator will shrink; he is confident the costs and fee will go down.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the program being in operation over the\nnext few months will give staff more information to allow for better estimates.\nMr. Bliss responded in the affirmative; stated a lot of thought and detail went into the\ncurrent estimate, but he is aware that the estimate will change over time.\nCouncilmember Daysog stated the report comes down to $131 per unit; inquired if there\nare alternative scenarios to have low, high and mid points.\nMr. Bliss responded there is a 5% contingency and the three Full Time Employees\n(FTEs) are real; the genesis of the 5% is the issue of start-up; the Housing Authority will\nhave some growth costs for managing the program.\nCouncilmember Daysog inquired whether a contract position was considered.\nMr. Bliss responded the City of Berkeley uses internal staff and the City of Santa\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nJune 21, 2016", "path": "CityCouncil/2016-06-21.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2016-06-21", "page": 17, "text": "Monica contracts the position; stated that he does not know what would be right for the\nCity of Alameda, but the study did not rigorously consider a contract position.\nVice Mayor Matarrese - stated he does not intend to vote for the item because more\ndata is needed; would like to have additional comparisons of the costs of other cities\nand the implications of contracting the position out.\nIn response to Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft's inquiry, Mr. Bliss stated the term \"start-\nup\" broadly means the costs of infrastructure and inefficiencies associated with staff,\nrenters and landlords learning about the program.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired how long the start-up period would be, to which\nMr. Bliss responded a 6 to 12 month time frame; stated the clock would start when a bill\nis sent.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether landlords are paying a business fee, to which the\nCommunity Development Director responded the business license tax only applies to\nmulti-family rental units; stated single family homes are exempt from paying the\nbusiness license tax; she does not know the exact number of units currently paying the\nbusiness license tax; data will be shared with the Finance Department for cross-\nchecking purposes.\nMayor Spencer inquired what would happen to the revenue collected, to which the\nCommunity Development Director responded the revenue would go into the General\nFund.\nMayor Spencer inquired the amount currently received from the tax, to which the\nCommunity Development Director responded that she did not know; stated the amount\nis probably not a lot since the tax is only $20 per unit.\nMayor Spencer stated that she received an email inquiring why fees include $245,000\nfor the Community Development Director.\nThe Community Development Director responded the fee study includes the figure of\nhow much time is attributable to all the positions; only 10% of the Community\nDevelopment Director time is attributable to the fee, not 100%.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the 10% is backed out of the General\nFund since it is being covered by the program.\nThe Community Development Director responded in the affirmative; stated her position\nis part of the enterprise fund, not one penny has been billed to the General Fund.\nIn response to Mayor Spencer's inquiry regarding whether a tax could be imposed on all\nresidents to fund the program, the Community Development Director stated fees are\nlevied on the beneficiaries of the program.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nJune 21, 2016", "path": "CityCouncil/2016-06-21.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2016-06-21", "page": 18, "text": "In response to Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft's inquiry, the Community Development\nDirector stated the benefits derived from the program accrue on a per unit basis, not on\nthe size of the unit or the amount of rent.\nCouncilmember Daysog stated that he is satisfied with the analysis; he would have\npreferred more comparable nearby cities; inquired how the City would pay for the\nprogram if a new fee is not created, would the $1.9 million costs have to be absorbed.\nThe City Manager responded the budget Council approved included $700,000 until the\nend of December 2016; if the program continues until the end of the fiscal year, it would\nbe another $700,000; the revenue for the rest of the year would have a structural deficit;\nfunds could come from the fund balance.\nCouncilmember Daysog stated everyone has to tighten belts to deal with a rental crisis,\nthe City should absorb the cost.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated that he is not ready to support the program; Council\nshould consider putting it off for six months; there will be more information and real\nnumbers, the start-up kinks would be worked out; there is uncertainty and many options\nto evaluate.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft concurred with Councilmember Oddie; stated more time\nbuys more accuracy; Council would know how the program is being used; there is still a\nlot of speculation; she has grave reservations about the fee for arbitration; the program\ncould be more refined and staff could provide better options in six months; Council\ncould apply the information more wisely in the second half of the fiscal year.\nVice Mayor Matarrese stated that he would like six months of real data, the cost of\ncontracting versus hiring staff, and additional comparisons.\nIn response to Vice Mayor Matarrese's inquiry, the Community Development Director\nstated the Housing Authority billed the City just under $40,000 for the program in the\nfirst two months, and they are not fully staffed; staff agreed to bid the program\nadministration and plans to release a Request for Proposals (RFP) in September; the\nordinance is only funded through December.\nCouncilmember Daysog stated rents are outrageous, more studies and methodologies\nrequires action of the Council and residents of Alameda as a whole, to tighten belts to\nget through the crisis, the Council needs to take action and leadership, not wait for more\nstudies.\nMayor Spencer stated that she likes the comparisons; Berkeley's fee is higher; she\nwould like more information and comparisons to other cities to bring down cost; make\nthe program should be complaint driven and increases should be no more than 5%; she\nconcurred with waiting for more information.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nJune 21, 2016", "path": "CityCouncil/2016-06-21.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2016-06-21", "page": 19, "text": "Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated the Housing Authority staff resolves a lot of cases\nbefore going to RRAC and probably need more staffing.\nThe Community Development Director stated that she understood the direction from the\nCouncil to have staff come back with more numbers, put the program administration\nfunction out for RFP to test the market, and come back in December with\nrecommendations and proposal on funding going forward January 1.\nMayor Spencer stated that she would like to include reviewing the ordinance in\ncomparison with other cities.\nThe City Manager stated staff will return with an option for completing and funding the\nrest of the fiscal year.\n***\n(16-311) Mayor Spencer stated a motion is needed to consider the remaining agenda\nitems after 10:30 p.m., which are the Disaster Council Ordinance [paragraph no. 16-\n312], the workers' compensation for disaster workers resolution [paragraph no. 16-314\nand the two referrals [paragraph nos. 16-316 and 16-317] ; noted action is not required\ntonight on the two remaining regular agenda items.\nVice Mayor Matarrese moved approval of considering the remaining items.\nCouncilmember Daysog seconded the motion.\nUnder discussion, Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft requested the motion be amended to\nonly address the remaining regular agenda items.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether the Council has to vote to hear referrals, to which the\nCity Clerk responded in the affirmative; stated Council takes action when giving\ndirection on referrals.\nOn the call for the question, the motion, which requires four affirmative votes, failed by\nthe following voice vote: Ayes: Councilmember Daysog and Matarrese - 2. Noes:\nCouncilmembers Ezzy Ashcraft, Oddie and Mayor Spencer - 3.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the July 5th agenda is full, to which the\nCity Clerk responded in the affirmative.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft moved approval of considering the Disaster Council\nOrdinance [paragraph no. 16-312] and the workers' compensation for disaster workers\nresolution [paragraph no. 16-314].\nVice Mayor Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by the following voice vote:\nAyes: Councilmembers Daysog, Ezzy Ashcraft, Matarrese and Mayor Spencer - 4.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nJune 21, 2016", "path": "CityCouncil/2016-06-21.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2016-06-21", "page": 20, "text": "Noes: Councilmember Oddie - 1.\n(16-312) Introduction of Ordinance Amending the Alameda Municipal Code by Adding\nSection 2.24 to Article II of Chapter Il Related to Emergency Organization and Creating\nthe City of Alameda Disaster Council as Required by State Law to Obtain Legal\nRecognition as an Official Emergency Organization. Introduced.\nThe Fire Captain gave a brief presentation.\nIn response to Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft's inquiry, the Fire Captain stated the\ngroup is comprised of City staff, the four public response groups, including Police, Fire,\nPublic Works and Alameda Municipal Power (AMP), supportive agencies such as the\nRed Cross, East Bay Municipal Utilities District (EBMUD), AC Transit, Alameda\nHospital, and other response partners.\nCouncilmember Daysog stated the Disaster Council is planning body; he sees the role\nof the City Manager as the director in the event of an actual disaster; in that instance, it\nis conceivable that the Disaster Council may not have to be enacted.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated any emergency policy that the Disaster Council\nformulates would ultimately come back to the City Council for approval.\nThe Fire Captain concurred with Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft's comments.\nVice Mayor Matarrese inquired whether policies and disaster preparedness plans are\npresented as work outputs from the Disaster Council, to which the Fire Captain\nresponded in the affirmative.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether the meetings are public, to which the Fire Captain\nresponded in the affirmative.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether the meetings are noticed with an agenda, to which the\nFire Captain responded in the negative; stated the meetings do not follow the same\nnoticing requirements as a board or commission.\nThe City Attorney stated the Disaster Council would be subject to the Sunshine\nOrdinance.\nIn response to Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft's inquiry, the City Attorney stated the City\nCouncil is creating the Disaster Council by ordinance; the Sunshine Ordinance would\nrequire the meetings to be noticed.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether the meetings would be public, to which the City\nAttorney responded in the affirmative.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nJune 21, 2016", "path": "CityCouncil/2016-06-21.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2016-06-21", "page": 21, "text": "The Fire Captain stated the people in the group do not necessarily do all the work; there\nare times when the meetings are held to provide guidance and delegate to other work\ngroups.\nIn response to Mayor Spencer's inquiry on the frequency of the meetings, the Fire\nCaptain stated the ordinance requires meetings twice a year but there is history of\nquarterly meetings.\nMayor Spencer inquired when the last time quarterly meetings took place, to which the\nFire Captain responded 2008.\nMayor Spencer inquired if it is being recommended that the Mayor or Council will not be\npart of the Disaster Council.\nThe Fire Captain responded that is as the ordinance is written.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether the participants will continue to be similar to the past\ncomposition.\nThe Fire Captain responded the persons on the list are counterparts to Alameda's\nemergency managers.\nMayor Spencer stated other cities designate the Mayor as the Chair; she does not\nagree with not continuing to designate the Mayor as Chair for the City of Alameda\nDisaster Council.\nCouncilmember Daysog stated there are four provisions that relate to the role of the City\nCouncil in the event of emergency; the Mayor has a role in the real-time context of an\nemergency, not during planning; the City Charter powers contemplate role of the Mayor\nin operation activities; the fix is to simply insert the language \"subject to Sections 3-12\nand 6-1 of the City Charter\"; the director will work within Charter Section 3-12 which\nidentifies the process by which the City Council can declare a state of emergency.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft moved introduction of the ordinance amending the\nAlameda Municipal Code by adding Section 2.24 to Article II of Chapter II related to\nemergency organization and creating the City of Alameda Disaster Council as required\nby State Law to obtain legal recognition as an official emergency organization.\nCouncilmember Daysog offered an amendment to add the language \"subject to\nSections 3-12 and 6-1 of the City Charter, which request the City Council to proclaim.\"\nCouncilmember Oddie seconded the motion without amendments.\nUnder discussion, Vice Mayor Matarrese stated the Disaster Council is the operations\ngroup; the Mayor or City Council should not be on the Disaster Council; the recognition\nof the role of the Council and the Mayor as the presiding officer of the Council and\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nJune 21, 2016", "path": "CityCouncil/2016-06-21.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2016-06-21", "page": 22, "text": "ceremonial head of the City are missing; the ordinance is the implementing document,\nso the Charter does not have to be interpreted in the event of an emergency.\nThe City Manager stated an Emergency Operation Plan (EOP) and update on the\nEmergency Operations Center (EOC) is coming to Council soon; tonight's issue is a\nmodel developed by the State and has options for public consideration; a lot of different\nissues will be addressed when the EOP is brought back.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated most of the Council agrees that the Disaster\nCouncil is a body that reports through the City Manager back to the Council; she would\nlike to get the ordinance passed first, then address any clarifications about the Charter;\nshe does not understand why the Disaster Council has to have the additional language\nas proposed by Councilmember Daysog.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated he hopes that the plan which comes before the Council\nwill be consistent with the Charter and would encompass everything discussed tonight.\n***\n(16-313) Mayor Spencer stated a motion is needed to continue the meeting past 11:00\np.m.\nVice Mayor Matarrese moved approval.\nCouncilmember Daysog 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.\nThe City Attorney stated the ordinance does not just discuss the role of the Disaster\nCouncil, it also discusses the role of the Director of Emergency Services, which may be\na little confusing; clarified the Disaster Council is made up of the group of people which\nCouncil appoints to make recommendations to the Council to adopt policy; the City\nManager is the Director of Emergency Services and is the actual implementer in the\nevent of an emergency; the Disaster Council has no role in declaring an emergency; the\nCharter states the same regarding the role of the Disaster Council, which is a planning\nand pre-disaster preparedness group.\nCouncilmember Daysog stated that he does not think the ordinance is consistent with\nthe City Charter.\nThe Fire Captain stated the City has an EOP in place, adopted in 2008, which gives the\nsame guidance.\nOn the call for the question, the motion failed by the following voice vote: Ayes:\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft and Oddie - 2. Noes: Vice Mayor Matarrese and Mayor\nSpencer - 2. Abstentions: Councilmember Daysog - 1.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nJune 21, 2016", "path": "CityCouncil/2016-06-21.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2016-06-21", "page": 23, "text": "Vice Mayor Matarrese moved approval of directing staff to modify the draft ordinance to\ninclude in the powers and duties of the Director language that incorporates compliance\nwith the sections of the Charter that cover the declaration of emergency.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether there is a timing issue; stated next item\ndeals with workers compensation for volunteers; inquired whether the City is leaving\nitself exposed to potential liability; the City cannot approve the workers compensation\nresolution without the Disaster Council ordinance; urged Council to pass an ordinance\ntonight that would still suffice as a first reading.\nVice Mayor Matarrese reiterated his motion is to modify the draft ordinance with addition\nof section 22-24.6 to reference the Charter provision 3-12 and 6-1 and 7-2(B).\nCouncilmember Daysog seconded the motion.\nMayor Spencer suggested an amendment to substitute the word \"appoint\" with\n\"nominate\" in section 2-24.e regarding the representatives of the Disaster Council.\nIn response to Councilmember Oddie's inquiry, the City Attorney stated a first reading of\nthe ordinance could be done with the suggested modifications; restated the\nmodifications.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she would like to vote on the language\nseparately.\nVice Mayor Matarrese moved to call the question, which was seconded by Mayor\nSpencer and failed.\nCouncilmember Oddie suggested adding Section 2-24.8 that the development of the\nemergency management plan shall be developed consistent with the Charter.\nVice Mayor Matarrese stated that he is fine with the amendment.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft suggested inserting a sentence that states \"this\nordinance is deemed consistent with all relevant provisions of the Alameda City Charter\"\nso each and every instance of the Charter provisions does not need to be spelled out.\nCouncilmember Daysog stated he prefers the Charter provisions be spelled out.\nVice Mayor Matarrese concurred, stated the Charter provisions need to be outlined.\nOn the call for the question, the motion carried by the following voice votes: Ayes -\nCouncilmembers Daysog, Ezzy Ashcraft, Matarrese, and Oddie - 4, Noes - Mayor\nSpencer - 1.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nJune 21, 2016", "path": "CityCouncil/2016-06-21.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2016-06-21", "page": 24, "text": "(16-314) Resolution No. 15182, \"Relative to Workers' Compensation Benefits for\nRegistered Disaster Service Worker Volunteers.\" Adopted.\nVice Mayor Matarrese moved adoption of the resolution.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft seconded the motion, which carried by a unanimous\nvoice vote: Ayes - 5.\nCITY MANAGER COMMUNICATIONS\n(16-315) The City Manager announced that the Fire Chief had to leave the meeting to\nattend to a fire at the auto upholstery shop on Park and Clement Streets; that she,\nMayor Spencer, and Councilmember Oddie attended a tour of the USS Hornet where\n500 Army Reservists have been training for emergency preparedness.\nORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA\nNone.\nCOUNCIL REFERRALS\n(16-316) Consider Directing the City Manager to Initiate and Begin the Process with the\nPlanning Board to Propose Revisions to the Ordinance and Code Sections Defining\nAlameda's Inclusionary Housing for Residential Development. Not heard. (Vice Mayor\nMatarrese)\n(16-317) Consider Directing the City Manager to Schedule a Priority Setting Work\nSession. Not heard. (Mayor Spencer)\nCOUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS\n(16-318) Consideration of Mayor's Nomination for Appointment to the Golf Commission.\nNot heard.\n(16-319) Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft requested the meeting be adjourned in honor of\nthe victims of the Pulse Nightclub shooting in Orlando, Florida.\n(16-320) Mayor Spencer thanked the Army for collaborating with the City; commended\nthe USS Hornet for housing the Army during training; shared a proclamation for\nJuneteenth regarding freed slaves.\n(16-321) Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft announced the Relay for Life event would be on\nSaturday at Encinal High School.\nADJOURNMENT\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nJune 21, 2016", "path": "CityCouncil/2016-06-21.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2016-06-21", "page": 25, "text": "(16-322) There being no further business, Mayor Spencer adjourned the meeting at\n11:16 p.m. in memory of the Orlando shooting victims.\nRespectfully submitted,\nLara Weisiger\nCity Clerk\nThe agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Sunshine Ordinance.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nJune 21, 2016", "path": "CityCouncil/2016-06-21.pdf"}