{"body": "CivilServiceBoard", "date": "2016-07-06", "page": 1, "text": "City of Alameda Page 1\nCivil Service Board Minutes\nRegular Meeting July 6, 2016\nMINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING\nOF THE\nCIVIL SERVICE BOARD OF THE CITY OF ALAMEDA\nWEDNESDAY, JULY 6, 2016\n1.\nCALL TO ORDER\nThe meeting was called to order at 5:02 p.m. by Board President Dean Batchelor.\n2.\nROLL CALL:\nPRESENT: President Dean Batchelor, Vice President Marguerite Malloy (arrived at\n5:06), Members John Nolan and Jan Brandt\nSTAFF PRESENT: Nancy Bronstein, Human Resources Director and Executive\nSecretary to the Board\nMayor Trish Herrera Spencer\nChris Low, Senior Human Resources Analyst\nRobin Young, Senior Human Resources Analyst\nMonica Selles, Human Resources Analyst II\nSharlene Shikhmuradova, Administrative Technician II\n3.\nMINUTES:\n3-A Approval of Minutes of the Regular meeting of April 6, 2016.\nPresident Batchelor moved that the April 6, 2016 Minutes be approved. Motion was\nseconded by Member Nolan which was passed by a 3-0 vote.\n4.\nCONSENT CALENDAR:\n4-A. SUMMARY REPORT FOR EXAMINATION ELIGIBLE LISTS AND\nCLASSIFICATIONS FOR JULY 6, 2016.\n4-A-i. ELIGIBLE LIST ESTABLISHED\nDATE ESTABLISHED\nEXAM NO.\n(March 1, 2016 - May 31, 2016)", "path": "CivilServiceBoard/2016-07-06.pdf"}
{"body": "CivilServiceBoard", "date": "2016-07-06", "page": 2, "text": "City of Alameda Page 2\nCivil Service Board Minutes\nRegular Meeting July 6, 2016\nAdministrative Technician II\n03/02/2016\n2016-81a\nCity Engineer\n03/03/2016\n2016-02\nCombination Building Inspector\n05/03/2016\n2016-15\nEmergency Medical Services Education\nCoordinator\n04/05/2016\n2016-13\nFacilities Maintenance Worker\n03/24/2016\n2016-11\nFire/Building Code Compliance Officer\n05/31/2016\n2016-16\nLibrarian\n04/05/2016\n2016-09\nManagement Analyst\n03/17/2016\n2016-17\n(Designated from Economic Development Manager)\nMedia Coordinator\n04/13/2016\n2016-14PR\nPark Maintenance Foreperson\n03/28/2016\n2016-07\nPublic Safety IT Systems Coordinator\n05/31/2016\n2016-20\nSystem Operator\n04/13/2016\n2016-12PR\nUtility Construction Compliance Specialist\n04/28/2016\n2016-01\nPolice Officer\nLiu, Ethan\n03/10/2016\n2015-86c\nBang, Roy\n03/10/2016\n2015-86c\nBaird, Christina\n03/10/2016\n2015-84PTc\nPistello, Nicholas\n03/10/2016\n2015-84PTc\nKim, James\n03/10/2016\n2015-84PTc\nShock, Lindsey\n03/10/2016\n2015-84PTc\nAvalos, Anthony\n03/10/2016\n2015-84PTc\nTandel, Sunil\n03/10/2016\n2015-84PTc\nWu, Jerry\n03/28/2016\n2015-86c\nSarmiento, Alexis\n03/28/2016\n2015-86c\nCastillo, Raymond\n03/28/2016\n2015-86c\nSmith, Mark\n03/28/2016\n2015-84PTc\nSmall, Christopher\n03/28/2016\n2015-84PTc\nLeaks, Jennifer\n03/28/2016\n2015-84PTc\nPineda, Ivan\n03/28/2016\n2015-84PTc\nNolasco, Robert\n03/28/2016\n2015-84PTc\nAlvarez, Charlie\n03/28/2016\n2015-86c\nGriffin, Corey\n04/21/2016\n2015-84PTc\nAlejandro, Raymond\n04/21/2016\n2015-84PTc\nStephens, Michael\n04/21/2016\n2015-84PTc\nKing, Michelle\n04/21/2016\n2015-86c\nKnecht, Jeffery\n04/21/2016\n2015-86c\nJohnston, Michael\n04/21/2016\n2015-86c\nCangco, Alvin\n04/21/2016\n2015-86c\nSingh, Malcolm\n04/21/2016\n2015-85c\nKopp, April\n05/12/2016\n2015-84PTc\nLamothe, Alexander\n05/12/2016\n2015-84PTc\nJimenez, Luis\n05/12/2016\n2015-84PTc\nKnopf, Alexander\n05/12/2016\n2015-84PTc\nSayavanh, Nicholas\n05/12/2016\n2015-84PTc\nMoosayar, Mohammad\n05/12/2016\n2015-86c\nHovsepian, Jared\n05/12/2016\n2015-86c\nBlanco, German\n05/12/2016\n2015-86c\n4-A-ii. ELIGIBLE LIST EXTENDED\nDATE ESTABLISHED\nEXAM NO.\nExecutive Assistant - Alam\u00e9da Municipal Power\n12/23/2015\n2015-88\nFirefighter\n12/11/2014\n2014-34", "path": "CivilServiceBoard/2016-07-06.pdf"}
{"body": "CivilServiceBoard", "date": "2016-07-06", "page": 3, "text": "City of Alameda Page 3\nCivil Service Board Minutes\nRegular Meeting July 6, 2016\nHuman Resources Manager\n11/02/2015\n2015-70\nLibrary Technician\n12/08/2014\n2014-39\nPermit Technician I\n11/24/2015\n2015-82\nPublic Information Officer\n11/20/2015\n2015-37\nRedevelopment Project Manager\n10/20/2015\n2015-52\nSenior Clerk\n11/03/2015\n2015-72\nTraffic Signal Maintenance Technician\n10/13/2015\n2015-60\n4-A-iii. ELIGIBLE LIST EXPIRED/\nDATE ESTABLISHED\nEXAM NO.\nCANCELLED/EXHAUSTED\nCompliance Superintendent\n10/13/2015\n2015-58\nCustomer Service Representative\n04/16/2015\n2015-20\nDistribution Engineer\n04/16/2015\n2015-11\nEconomic Development Manager\n10/13/2015\n2015-51\nEmergency Medical Services Coordinator\n04/05/2016\n2016-13\nExecutive Assistant\n12/15/2015\n2015-78\nFacilities Maintenance Worker\n03/24/2016\n2016-11\nFire Captain\n04/03/2014\n2014-11PR\nMedia Coordinator\n04/13/2016\n2016-14PR\nPlanner I\n05/12/2015\n2015-22\nProgram Specialist II\n10/28/2015\n2015-73PR\nPublic Works Supervisor\n10/08/2015\n2015-46\nSenior Fleet Mechanic\n11/10/2015\n2015-83\n(Designated from Public Works Supervisor)\nStock Clerk\n05/05/2015\n2015-18\nSystem Operator\n04/13/2016\n2016-12PR\nUtility Analyst\n11/19/2015\n2015-82\nUtility Project Manager\n12/22/2015\n2015-81\n4-A-iv. LIST OF SPECIFICATIONS\nExisting Classification Specification Revision:\n-\nExecutive Assistant\n-\nPublic Works Maintenance Foreperson\n-\nPublic Works Supervisor\nNew Classification Specifications:\n-\nInformation Technology Systems Coordinator\n-\nPublic Safety Information Technology Systems Analyst\nPresident Batchelor moved to approve Consent Calendar items 4-A-i, 4-A-ii, and 4-\nA-iii. Motion was seconded by Members Nolan and Brandt which was passed by a\n3-0 vote.\nPresident Batchelor requested to pull item 4-A-iv for further discussion. President\nBatchelor asked why there are two job descriptions for the Information Technology\nSystem Coordinator and the Public Safety Information Technology Systems Analyst when\nthere are similar examples of duties listed. Senior Human Resources Analyst Robin\nYoung responded by describing that the City has allocated positions through the budget\nprocess based on operational needs prior to creating the classification. The two in", "path": "CivilServiceBoard/2016-07-06.pdf"}
{"body": "CivilServiceBoard", "date": "2016-07-06", "page": 4, "text": "answered that the number came from the new Information Technology Director based on\nthe needs of the job such as lifting monitors and arranging new systems and assumes\nthat the IT Director discussed this with the subject matter experts to come up with that\nrequirement. Vice President Malloy questions this number based on the weight of\ntechnology changing over the years and becoming lighter. Senior HR Analyst Young\nmentioned she can reach out to the IT Director with these concerns and can perhaps\nhave her complete a physical job analysis form. Vice President Malloy added that the 50lb\nrequirement as an essential job function may not be realistic.\nVice President Malloy had a question on the Public Works Maintenance Foreperson and\nwhere it falls in the organization chart and what is the probationary period. Senior HR\nAnalyst Young answered that this classification is between a Public Works Supervisor\nand a Maintenance Worker II. Vice President Malloy wanted to know the probationary\nperiod because there are cases where it can take six months to get a certificate and so\nthe ability to evaluate the person relates to when that person has everything needed for\ntheir job which may or may not occur if it's a six month probationary period. Human\nResources Director and Executive Secretary to the Board, Bronstein added that the\ndepartment does have the ability to extend probations to meet requirements such as\nobtaining job related certifications and this is explained to the employee during the\nevaluation process. Senior HR Analyst Young confirmed by looking in the MOU that the\nprobationary period is twelve months.\nPresident Batchelor had a question on the Public Works Supervisor requirement and\nwhether the International Municipal Signal Association level 2 certification needs to be\nmore specific. This is because there are three different types of signal certifications: Field\nTechnician, Traffic Signal Bench Technician and Traffic Signal Construction. He\nsuggested to go back to the department to see what they are looking for. Senior HR\nAnalyst Young agreed she will check with the department.\nHuman Resources Director and Executive Secretary to the Board, Bronstein brought up\nthat it may make sense to move away from typing requirement of 65 WPM for the", "path": "CivilServiceBoard/2016-07-06.pdf"}
{"body": "CivilServiceBoard", "date": "2016-07-06", "page": 5, "text": "City of Alameda Page 5\nCivil Service Board Minutes\nRegular Meeting July 6, 2016\nExecutive Assistant classification and to recognize what the positions does. She also\nmentioned that there will be an Executive Assistant for AMP position with the same typing\nrequirement that may need to be adjusted as well.\nPresident Batchelor moved to approve Consent Calendar item 4-A-iv with the\nexception of the Information Technology Systems Coordinator and Public Safety\nInformation Technology Systems Analyst. Motion was seconded by Vice President\nMalloy which was passed by a 3-0 vote.\n5.\nREGULAR AGENDA ITEMS\n5-A. Activity Report - Period of March 1, 2016 through May 31, 2016\nThe Activity Report 5-A on the agenda will be corrected to list the correct item number of\n5-A instead of 5-B.\nFULL-TIME HIRES\nDATE\nDEPARTMENT\nJOB CLASSIFICATION\n03/07/16\nCity Manager's Office\nCity Manager\n03/08/16\nPolice\nPolice Officer (2)\n03/14/16\nCommunity Development\nPermit Technician I\n03/22/16\nAlameda Municipal Power\nSenior Communication Specialist\n04/11/16\nAlameda Municipal Power\nElectrical Distribution Technician\n04/18/16\nPublic Works\nCity Engineer\n05/02/16\nFire\nEmergency Medical Services Education\nCoordinator\n05/15/16\nLibrary\nLibrarian\n05/16/16\nCommunity Development\nManagement Analyst\n05/23/16\nAlameda Municipal Power\nMeter Reader\n05/23/16\nCity Manager's Office\nPublic Information Officer\n05/23/16\nCommunity Development\nCombination Building Inspector\nPROMOTIONS\nDATE\nDEPARTMENT\nJOB CLASSIFICATION\n03/07/16\nCommunity Development\nSenior Combination Building Inspector\n03/20/16\nPolice\nSenior Public Safety Dispatcher\n03/27/16\nPolice\nPolice Sergeant (2)\n05/01/16\nAlameda Municipal Power\nSystem Operator\n05/02/16\nPublic Works\nSenior Fleet Mechanic\n05/29/16\nFinance\nAdministrative Technician II\nLATERAL TRANSFER\nDATE\nDEPARTMENT\nJOB CLASSIFICATION\n04/17/16\nAlameda Municipal Power\nto Media Coordinator\nFrom Customer Programs Coordinator", "path": "CivilServiceBoard/2016-07-06.pdf"}
{"body": "CivilServiceBoard", "date": "2016-07-06", "page": 6, "text": "City of Alameda Page 6\nCivil Service Board Minutes\nRegular Meeting July 6, 2016\n05/02/16\nPublic Works\nto Public Works Project Manager II\nFrom Public Works Superintendent\nRETIREMENTS\nDATE\nDEPARTMENT\nJOB CLASSIFICATION\n03/04/16\nFire\nEmergency Medical Services Education\nCoordinator\n03/04/16\nAlameda Municipal Power\nFacilities Maintenance Worker\n03/31/16\nAlameda Municipal Power\nSystem Operations & Field Service\nSuperintendent\n04/28/16\nPublic Works\nPublic Works Supervisor\n05/02/16\nFinance\nSenior Account Clerk\n05/10/16\nPolice\nIntermediate Clerk\n05/12/16\nPolice\nPolice Officer\nSEPARATIONS\nDATE\nDEPARTMENT\nJOB CLASSIFICATION\n03/30/16\nPolice\nPolice Officer\n04/07/16\nHuman Resources\nHuman Resources Analyst I\n04/14/16\nAlameda Municipal Power\nUtility Database Analyst\n04/28/16\nFire\nFirefighter\n05/17/16\nPolice\nPolice Officer\n05/20/16\nAlameda Municipal Power\nMeter Reader\nThe Civil Service Board accepted the activity report.\n5-B. Informational Report, Regarding Designation of Eligible List - Economic\nDevelopment Manager, 2015-51 for Management Analyst vacancy, DS.1420.001\nThe Civil Service Board accepted the Activity report.\n5-C. Informational Reports\nPresident Batchelor had a question for HR Director Bronstein regarding the Administrative\nAssignment for the Firefighters and whether the City automatically banks the additional\n40 holiday hours and if yes, does the City have to pay out those hours if the employees\nleave the City. HR Director Bronstein confirmed the holiday hours are front loaded and\nAdministrative Technician Shikmuradova added that holiday hours are not paid out.\nMember Malloy asked if Firefighter Baldizan will remain active on the Firefighter list while\nhe is on office assignment. HR Director Bronstein answered he has return rights because\nhe is temporarily vacating the position.\nThe Civil Service Board accepted the Activity report.", "path": "CivilServiceBoard/2016-07-06.pdf"}
{"body": "CivilServiceBoard", "date": "2016-07-06", "page": 7, "text": "City of Alameda Page 7\nCivil Service Board Minutes\nRegular Meeting July 6, 2016\n6.\nORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (PUBLIC COMMENTS)\n(Any person may address the Civil Service Board in regard to any matter over which the\nCivil Service Board has jurisdiction or of which it may take cognizance that is not on the\nagenda).\n7.\nCIVIL SERVICE BOARD COMMUNICATIONS (COMMUNICATIONS FROM BOARD)\nHR Director Bronstein wanted to get the Civil Service Board's thoughts on block\nbudgeting or flexible staffing. She went on to describe how currently if someone is brought\nin at a lower level position, even though the position is budgeted at a higher level, in order\nto move an employee to level two or three, a recruitment needs to be conducted. She\ndescribed how in a merit system, if the position is funded at a higher level but hire at the\nlower level, once the employee meets all necessary requirements, he/she may be able to\nautomatically move up granted the amount of employees at the entry level position does\nnot greatly outnumber the amount of positions available at the higher level in which case\nyou would open a recruitment.\nPresident Batchelor replied that as long as the position is being budgeted at the higher\nlevel, he doesn't see a problem. Member Malloy commented that she is fine with the\nconcept of flexible staffing but would require some formal objective analysis that the\nperson is ready as supposed to what she calls, pure flexing, where after a period of time\na supervisor automatically grants a promotion. She further explains that the employee\nmust clearly demonstrate their ability through perhaps a panel or examination verses just\na performance evaluation from a supervisor.\nHR Director Bronstein mentioned that she would like to come back with the job\ndescriptions with competencies and language for certain classifications for the October\n5, 2016 CSB meeting for the Board's thoughts. She goes on to say that there may be\nrecruitments in the future where using demonstrated measurement will bring more value\nverses opening a recruitment and doing interviews for certain classifications.\nHR Director Bronstein wanted to further discuss limited certification and how currently if\nthere is a documented need for a certain certification for an employee, it will allow the\ndepartment to move down the certified eligible list until you reach that candidate. Member\nNolan asked what is the certification rule for eligible lists. HR Director Bronstein answered\nthat per the Civil Service Rule, ten (10) names are certified for entry level positions and\nother levels are five (5) names. She explained the department can interview the top five\n(5) or move down the list if those candidates do not meet their needs. Member Malloy\nrecommended having multiple eligible lists as oppose to one eligible list to capture\nspecific needs, specialists, or special certifications. HR Director Bronstein acknowledged\nthat perhaps a system can be set up for a process of selective certification and have\nHuman Resources monitor that process.\nMember Brandt mentioned having problems opening the links to the Civil Service Board", "path": "CivilServiceBoard/2016-07-06.pdf"}
{"body": "CivilServiceBoard", "date": "2016-07-06", "page": 8, "text": "City of Alameda Page 8\nCivil Service Board Minutes\nRegular Meeting July 6, 2016\nagenda packet. HR Director Bronstein suggested having a PDF of the entire packet and\na separate attachment for the minutes in the email.\n8.\nCIVIL SERVICE BOARD COMMUNICATIONS (COMMUNICATIONS FROM STAFF)\n9.\nCONFIRMATION OF NEXT CIVIL SERVICE BOARD MEETING\nWednesday, October 5, 2016.\n10. ADJOURNMENT\nMeeting was adjourned at 5:44p.m.\nRespectfully submitted,\nmin\nNancy Bronstein, Human Resources Director\nand\nExecutive Secretary to the Civil Service Board", "path": "CivilServiceBoard/2016-07-06.pdf"}
{"body": "RentReviewAdvisoryCommittee", "date": "2016-07-06", "page": 1, "text": "Minutes of the Special Meeting of the\nRent Review Advisory Committee\nWednesday, July 6, 2016\n1. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL\nThe meeting was called to order at 6:34 p.m.\nPresent were: Acting Chair Sullivan-Sari\u00f1ana; and Members Griffiths, Friedman, and\nSchrader.\nAbsent: Landess\nVacancy: None\nRRAC staff: Jennifer Kauffman\nThe Chair announced that any business not concluded before 9:30 p.m. was subject to being\ncontinued at a Special Meeting.\nThe Committee discussed the order of agenda items. Griffiths made a motion to move\nORAL COMMUNICATIONS to the second item on the agenda. Schrader made a second\nto the motion and all members were in agreement.\nThe Committee allowed for ORAL COMMUNICATIONS at this time. The Chair invited\nAngie Watson-Hajjem of ECHO Housing to speak about ECHO's fair housing and\ntenant/landlord mediation services.\n2. CONSENT CALENDAR\na. Approval of the Minutes of the June 6, 2016 Regular Meeting.\nApproved by unanimous consent.\n3. UNFINISHED BUSINESS (None)\n4. NEW BUSINESS\na. Case 386 - 2220 San Antonio Avenue.\nTenant/public speaker: Susi Ostlund\nLandlord/public speaker: David Petersen\nMs. Ostlund stated that she receives a fixed disability income from the U.S.\ngovernment and also has a serious illness that requires frequent medical\nappointments. She stated that the maximum increase that she believed to be\nreasonable was 1.9% ($31).\nMr. Petersen stated that the reason he had issued the 60.5% ($980) rent increase\nnotice in May 2016 was at the advice of his attorney in order to maximize his\nnegotiating position. The tenant's current rent is $1,620 and Mr. Peterson had\ndetermined that the market value of the unit was $2,600. He stated that he would\naccept a 15.7% ($255) increase. A rent increase had been served in October 2015;\nPage 1 of 4", "path": "RentReviewAdvisoryCommittee/2016-07-06.pdf"}
{"body": "RentReviewAdvisoryCommittee", "date": "2016-07-06", "page": 2, "text": "Special Meeting Minutes of the RRAC\nJuly 6, 2016\nhowever, it was determined to be invalid under the Moratorium then in effect (a\n9.5% increase had already been issued in April 2015).\nMr. Petersen provided documentation of maintenance expenses (sewer, paint, roof,\ngutters, and dry rot) totaling over $50,000 over the past three years. Ms. Ostlund\nstated that there was a difference between capital expenses and cost-of-business\nexpenses.\nParties were unable to reach agreement. The Committee discussed a\nrecommendation for the rent increase. Motion and second (Griffiths and Sullivan-\nSari\u00f1ana) for a 5% ($81) increase. Friedman stated that a lower rent increase would\nbe more reasonable considering the circumstances, however, Mr. Friedman agreed\nto the 5% rent increase and passed the motion. Schrader was in disagreement with\nthe motion due to the high capital improvement costs.\nStaff explained that the parties had 15 days to: 1) submit written acknowledgement\nof an agreement; or 2) request an arbitration hearing. If no action is taken by either\nparty, the Committee's recommendation would be binding.\nb. Case 387 - 2611 Central Avenue\nTenant/public speaker: Allen Nakamura\nLandlord/public speaker: Tommy Wong\nMr. Nakamura stated that he did not believe that the 10% ($140) increase was\njustified, as he has not seen any improvements to his unit during the three-plus years\nhe has been living there. The Wong provided documentation of a new roof\ninstallation in December 2015 that cost $10,700, and he wanted to recoup the cost\nof the roof. It was also explained that this would be the first rent increase since the\ntenant has occupied the unit.\nFollowing discussion, Mr. Nakamura did not want to accept an increase over 5%\nand Mr. Wong did not want to accept an increase less than 8%. The parties could\nnot reach agreement and the Committee made a recommendation for the rent\nincrease. Motion and second (Friedman and Shrader) for a 6.5% ($91) increase.\nMotion passed unanimously. Staff re-stated the options for tenant and landlord and\nthe 15-day deadline.\nc. Case 388 - 2609 Central Avenue\nTenant/public speaker: An-Nisaa Hamza\nLandlord/public speaker: Tommy Wong\nMs. Hamza stated that the cost of improvements, such as the new roof, should not\nbe the total responsibility of the tenants, as the landlord can write off these expenses\non his taxes. Ms. Hamza stated that the maximum increase that she believed to be\nreasonable was 4% ($52). Mr. Wong stated that he would reduce the increase from\n10% ($130) to 6.5% ($84.50) in order to be fair with his other tenant. Following\ndiscussion, Ms. Hamza did not want to accept an increase over 4% and Mr. Wong\ndid not want to accept an increase less than 6.5%.\nPage 2 of 4", "path": "RentReviewAdvisoryCommittee/2016-07-06.pdf"}
{"body": "RentReviewAdvisoryCommittee", "date": "2016-07-06", "page": 3, "text": "Special Meeting Minutes of the RRAC\nJuly 6, 2016\nThe Committee discussed a recommendation for the rent increase. There have been\ntwo rent increases over the six-plus years that Ms. Hamza and her husband have\nbeen living in the unit. Member Friedman stated that in view of the rent increase\nhistory with this unit, an increase of 5.8% ($75) would be appropriate. Motion and\nsecond (Griffiths and Schrader) and unanimous to recommend an increase of 5.8%\n($75). Staff re-stated the options for tenant and landlord and the 15-day deadline.\nd. Case 389 - 2445 Shoreline Drive #126\nThe case was canceled, as the tenant and the landlord reached an agreement prior\nto the meeting for an increase in an amount greater than 10%.\ne. Case 390 - 2445 Shoreline Drive #104\nThe case was canceled, as the tenant decided to move.\nf.\nCase 395 - 2445 Shoreline Drive #323\nThe case was canceled, as the tenant and the landlord reached an agreement prior\nto the meeting for an increase in an amount between 5.1 and 10%.\ng. Case 404 - 1107 Broadway\nThe case was canceled, as the tenant and the landlord reached an agreement prior\nto the meeting for an increase in an amount between 5.1 and 10%.\nh. Case 405 - 3271 Central Avenue\nTenant/public speaker: Frances Hayden\nLandlord/public speaker: Barbara Jolliffe\nMs. Hayden stated that she did not believe the 7.5% ($98) increase was justified for\nmaintenance reasons. The Chair stated that maintenance issues were beyond the\nRRAC's scope and that there were other alternatives for pursuing maintenance\ncomplaints that could be discussed with staff. The tenant stated that the maximum\nincrease that she believed to be reasonable was 4% ($64.50).\nMs. Jolliffe cited costs of $31,000 last year for sewer, sidewalk and roof work plus\nincreased costs for taxes, utilities, insurance, and maintenance labor. She also noted\nincreased administrative costs and time demands as a result of complying with\nOrdinance No. 3148.\n(At approximately 9:30 p.m., the Committee voted to extend the meeting time to\n9:45 p.m.)\nFollowing discussion, Ms. Jolliffe offered a phased rent increase, delaying payment\nof a portion of the rent increase for several months. Ms. Hayden was not agreeable\nto this offer. The parties did not reach agreement and the Committee discussed a\nrecommendation for the rent increase. Motion and Second (Griffiths and Schrader)\nand unanimous for a phased $98 increase ($52 for the first six months plus an\nadditional $46 thereafter). Staff re-stated the 15-day policy.\n5. PUBLIC COMMENT\nNo additional public comment.\nPage 3 of 4", "path": "RentReviewAdvisoryCommittee/2016-07-06.pdf"}
{"body": "RentReviewAdvisoryCommittee", "date": "2016-07-06", "page": 4, "text": "Special Meeting Minutes of the RRAC\nJuly 6, 2016\n6. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS\nAngie Watson-Hajjem of ECHO Housing made an announcement at the beginning of\nthe meeting.\n7. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS (none)\n8. ADJOURNMENT\nThe meeting was unanimously adjourned at 9:42 p.m.\nRespectfully submitted,\nJennifer Kauffman\nRRAC Secretary\nApproved by the Rent Review Advisory Committee on August 1, 2016.\nPage 4 of 4", "path": "RentReviewAdvisoryCommittee/2016-07-06.pdf"}