{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2016-10-04", "page": 1, "text": "MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING\nTUESDAY--OCTOBER - 4, 2016--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(16-484) Mayor Spencer announced that the Community Facilities District ordinance\n[paragraph no. 16-499 would be heard first on the regular agenda.\nVice Mayor Matarrese suggested the Friends of the Alameda Animal Shelter (FAAS)\nCouncil referral [paragraph no. 16-501 be addressed after the FAAS Annual Report\n[paragraph no. 16-500].\nMayor Spencer inquired if that could be done, to which the Acting City Manager\nresponded in the affirmative.\nVice Mayor Matarrese stated the public is present regarding the issue and should not\nhave to come back again.\nThe City Attorney stated the FAAS matter is a presentation; even though there are\npeople to speak on the item, it is not agendized to take any action; the Council referral\ndoes not allow for a robust conversation, only to direct staff to look into doing work with\nFAAS and the FAAS contract.\nCouncilmember Daysog inquired if the referral would follow the FAAS Annual Report, to\nwhich Vice Mayor Matarrese responded in the affirmative.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired if staff is prepared to have the type of discussion that is\nneeded on the referral.\nThe Acting City Manager responded staff can discuss the referral in general, but is not\nprepared to discuss the substance of the referral.\nMayor Spencer stated the discussion would be to decide if the Council wants to proceed\nwith the referral.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired if the discussion would allow the Council to\ndiscuss possible budgetary constraints depending on November ballot measures.\nThe City Attorney responded staff is that not prepared to give any substantive\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nOctober 4, 2016", "path": "CityCouncil/2016-10-04.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2016-10-04", "page": 2, "text": "information; the referral is only to see whether Council would like to direct staff to have\nnegotiations with FAAS or not.\nMayor Spencer repeated the order of the agenda items.\nPROCLAMATIONS, SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY AND ANNOUNCEMENTS\n(16-485) Proclamation Declaring October 5, 2016 as Walk and Roll to School Day.\nMayor Spencer read and presented the proclamation to Bonnie Wehmann, Safe Routes\nto School, and students.\nMs. Wehmann made brief comments.\n(16-486) Proclamation Declaring October 2016 as Domestic Violence Awareness\nMonth.\nMayor Spencer read and presented the proclamation to Liz Varela, Building Futures\nwith Women and Children.\nMs. Varela submitted information and made brief comments.\nCouncilmember Daysog thanked the Domestic Violence Task Force for their work.\nIn response to Mayor Spencer's inquiry regarding volunteers, Ms. Varela stated\nhandouts would be available.\n(16-487) Proclamation Declaring October 2016 as Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual,\nTransgender, and Queer/Questioning (LGBTQ) History Month.\nMayor Spencer read and presented the proclamation to Olivia Higgins, Gene Kahane\nand Henry Villareal, Alameda Unified School District LGBTQ Roundtable.\nMs. Higgins and Mr. Villareal made brief comments.\n(16-488) Presentation by the Port of Oakland regarding Fleet Week.\nDoreen Stockdale, Port of Oakland, gave a Power Point presentation.\nORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA\n(16-489) Ken Peterson, Alameda, discussed Alameda Municipal Power's awards for\nsafety and green projects.\n(16-490) Kari Thompson, Alameda Chamber of Commerce, urged the Council to amend\nthe call for review process.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nOctober 4, 2016", "path": "CityCouncil/2016-10-04.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2016-10-04", "page": 3, "text": "CONSENT CALENDAR\nMayor Spencer announced the Enterprise District report [paragraph no. 16-493 was\nremoved from the Consent Calendar for discussion.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft moved approval of remainder of 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(16-491) Minutes of the Special and Regular City Council Meetings Held on September\n6,2016. Approved.\n(16-492) Ratified bills in the amount of $3,185,898.03.\n(16-493) Recommendation to Accept the Document Outlining the Approach to Attracting\nDevelopment to the Enterprise District at Alameda Point and a Six-Month Status\nUpdate.\nThe Redevelopment Project Manager gave a Power Point presentation.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired if the City could connect with the Alameda Point\ntenants now instead of at the delivery phase; stated the Alameda Point tenants should\nbe treated well; read comments from the July 20th, Economic Development Advisory\nPanel meeting minutes; stated attracting jobs to Alameda Point is a top priority; the City\nshould lease property to businesses that will use the property now and not just\npurchase the property to keep their competition from expanding.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired when Phase 2 would begin.\nThe Redevelopment Project Manager responded after the Site A infrastructure starts.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired when the ground breaking will be.\nThe Redevelopment Project Manager responded October 24, 2016.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired if people making inquiries on the property are genuine\nleads or just casual inquiries.\nTed Anderson, Cushman and Wakefield, responded inquires run the gamut; there will\nbe a lot of success at Alameda Point.\nCouncilmember Oddie encouraged the developer to be aggressive on the timeline;\nstated the development is a priority of the City.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nOctober 4, 2016", "path": "CityCouncil/2016-10-04.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2016-10-04", "page": 4, "text": "Vice Mayor Matarrese stated that he would like to see an actual analysis on the\ninquiries; if there are inquiries from people that do not fit the current approach, there\nadjustments need to be made; the nature of the inquiry needs to be analyzed, put in a\nreport and presented to Council to make necessary adjustments.\nCouncilmember Daysog stated the strategy being used is correct; the City Should\ncontinue working with Cushman Wakefield to identify prospects for the different parts of\nAlameda Point; he concurs with staff's recommendation.\nMayor Spencer stated that she is concerned about considering local businesses in\nAlameda that need larger spaces for the space; businesses should not be turned down\nbecause of the type of business; she would like more feedback shared; meeting the\nneeds of the community is important.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated that he agrees the Council should have more complete\nreporting.\nMr. Anderson responded the request could be accommodated.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated the project is still years away; a company is in\nneed of immediate expansion space they should look elsewhere.\nVice Mayor Matarrese moved approval of the staff recommendation.\nCouncilmember Oddie seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote -\n5.\n(16-494) Recommendation to Authorize the City Manager to Execute an Agreement\nwith CSG Consultants Inc. for Professional Plan Check Services for a 24-Month Term in\nan Amount not to Exceed $600,000 and Appropriate $150,000 for Fiscal Year 2016-17\nto Fund the First Year of the Agreement. Accepted.\n(16-495) Ordinance No. 3162, \"Amending the Alameda Municipal Code by Amending\nSection 30-4.25(D).III.B Related to Setbacks for Side Street Property Lines on Corner\nParcels.\" Finally passed.\n(16-496) Ordinance No. 3163, \"Approving a First Amendment to a Lease and\nAuthorizing the City Manager to Execute Documents Necessary to Implement the\nTerms of a First Amendment to the Lease Agreement with Pacific Automated LLC, a\nCalifornia Limited Liability Company, dba Brix Beverage (Pacific Automated, LLC) to\nInclude a Portion of Building 25 (Unit 100), a Small Outbuilding Known as Building 491,\nand Additional Parking Common Areas as Part of the Original Premises at 1951\nMonarch Street at Alameda Point.' Finally passed.\n(16-497) Ordinance No. 3164, \"Amending the Alameda Municipal Code by Amending\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nOctober 4, 2016", "path": "CityCouncil/2016-10-04.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2016-10-04", "page": 5, "text": "Chapter 30, Section 30-4.21 E, Estuary District.\" Finally passed.\n(16-498) Ordinance No. 3165, \"Authorizing the City Manager to: (1) Execute a\nMemorandum of Understanding, Quitclaim Deed and All Other Necessary Documents\nBetween the City of Alameda and the United States of America Acting By and Through\nthe U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to Acquire 94 Parcels of Semi-Submerged and\nSubmerged Land On the Alameda Side of the Oakland Inner Harbor Tidal Canal (\"Tidal\nCanal\"); (2) Execute Purchase and Sale Agreements, Quitclaim Deeds and All Other\nNecessary Documents Between the City of Alameda and Various Purchasers to Sell\nApproximately 92 Parcels on the Tidal Canal at Fair Market Value.' Finally passed.\nREGULAR AGENDA ITEMS\n(16-499) Introduction of Ordinance Amending the Alameda Municipal Code by\nAmending Subsection 3-70.5 (Establishment of a Community Facilities District (CFD) to\nFinance Certain Services) of Section 3-70 (Special Tax Financing Improvement Code),\nof Division I (General Provisions), of Article IV (Special Tax Financing), of Chapter III\n(Finance and Taxation) to Allow the Financing of Additional Services, including\nTransportation Services and Programs. Introduced.\nThe Base Reuse Director gave a brief presentation.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired if the taxes would be paid by just the property\nowners and businesses of the area, to which the Base Reuse Director responded in the\naffirmative.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired what the Community Facilities District would pay\nfor.\nThe Base Reuse Director responded street resurfacing, bulk head maintenance and\nlevy protection; transportation is the big item, including bus operations, purchasing easy\npasses, hiring transportation coordinators and funding multi-modal services and\nprograms to carry out the transportation strategy for Alameda Point.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the ordinance is a way to ensure, in\naddition to transportation, that flood and storm protection services are also financed, to\nwhich the Base Reuse Director responded in the affirmative.\nVice Mayor Matarrese inquired about the life span of the ordinance and the districts;\nstated there may be advantages to having a Citywide Transportation Demand\nManagement (TDM), rather than a separate plan for part of the City; at some point the\nproject may become obsolete.\nThe Base Reuse Director responded the taxes have to be voted in by property owners;\nstated the City owns Alameda Point so the City can include a condition that the property\nowner has to agree to participate in the CFD.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nOctober 4, 2016", "path": "CityCouncil/2016-10-04.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2016-10-04", "page": 6, "text": "Vice Mayor Matarrese inquired whether the ordinance has a sunset.\nThe Base Reuse Director responded the CFD would continue as it provides financing\nfor services.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired if the Council is not creating a CFD today, to which the\nBase Reuse Director responded in the affirmative; stated staff will come back with the\nformation of the CFD's.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired if the Council would vote to create the CFD's.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired if the process would be the same as what was\ndone for Alameda Landing.\nPaul Thimmig, Outside Counsel, responded under the ordinance there is a lot of\nflexibility; stated the Council as property owner would vote where to convey the property\nto a private party; the City does have the power to vote in the tax.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired how the tax compares to a Mello-Roos.\nMr. Thimming responded a CFD is similar to a Mello-Roos, only it is done under Charter\npowers instead of State law.\nCouncilmember Daysog inquired whether the initial property owner would vote in the\ntax.\nMr. Thimming responded there are less than 12 registered owners in the territory of the\nDistrict; stated the vote is of landowners; there is a required recordation of a lien on the\nproperty; real estate law requires disclosure; the homeowners are aware of the\nadditional tax.\nCouncilmember Daysog stated dedicating money to the transit system is an exciting\nidea.\nMr. Thimming stated the tax is supported by a lien on real property; the revenue flow is\nmore secure.\nMayor Spencer inquired if the tax is relating to Site A\nThe Base Reuse Director responded the tax will apply to all of Alameda Point.\nMayor Spencer inquired how the schools are being financed.\nThe Base Reuse Director responded schools are paid for through property tax; every\nresidential or commercial development has to pay a school impact fee.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nOctober 4, 2016", "path": "CityCouncil/2016-10-04.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2016-10-04", "page": 7, "text": "Mayor Spencer stated some districts or cities are negotiating a higher amount; inquired\nwhen the amount for new schools would be discussed.\nThe Base Reuse Director responded the conversation for Site A already took place;\nstated the amount for special taxes was included in the Disposition and Development\nAgreement (DDA) between the City and the developer.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether there is a way for the City to negotiate for the School\nDistrict as part of the DDA; stated that she would like to do so as part of the DDA.\nThe Base Reuse Director responded the Sterling Act fees are school impact fees which\nare collected throughout the entire City for school facilities.\nCouncilmember Daysog moved introduction of the ordinance.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice\nvote - 5.\n(16-500) Presentation by Friends of the Alameda Animal Shelter (FAAS) - Annual\nProgress Report.\nNancy Baglietto, FAAS, gave a presentation on the Animal Shelter and showed a video.\nMayor Spencer inquired what can and cannot be decided from Council.\nThe City Attorney responded the agenda item is for Council to view the presentation\nand hear the speakers.\nMayor Spencer read the referral; requested the speakers speak on the referral and the\nAnnual Progress Report rather than speak twice.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated he is fine with the request.\nStated the Animal Shelter is for animals and people who love animals; expressed\nsupport for keeping the Shelter close and increasing funding: Dorothy Freeman,\nAlameda.\nStated the animals were not being taken care of properly under the Police Department;\nthe level of care has increased and must be maintained: Nancy Evans, FAAS.\nOutlined the increase in programs since FAAS has taken over the Shelter: John Lipp,\nFAAS Board.\nExpressed support for FAAS programs: Steve Busse, FAAS and Park Centre Animal\nHospital.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nOctober 4, 2016", "path": "CityCouncil/2016-10-04.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2016-10-04", "page": 8, "text": "Stated FASS live release rate is the above 95%, which is above the national standard;\nexpressed support for sustainable funding: Janet Davis, FAAS Board.\nStated an assessment was recently completed; encouraged Council to support\nproviding needed funding: Ken Warner, FAAS Board.\nStated that she supports FAAS; the animal shelter needs support from the City: Maggie\nCaraceiolo, FAAS Volunteer.\nStated public private partnerships are a great model; FAAS is proud of leveraging\nprivate funds; the City has a responsibility to fund the shelter, which has increased\ndemands and costs; FAAS cannot fundraise $1 million; urged Council to support the\nMayor's referral: Deb Knowles, FAAS.\nExpressed support for FAAS; urged the City to fund the important work of FAAS: Merry\nBanks, Kelly Lux - State Farm.\nStated the benefit of FAAS is the animal's lives; he strongly supports FAAS: Tony\nHernandez, Alameda Animal Mobile Care.\nStated FAAS supports animal facilities and programs; urged support from the City: Jim\nGotelli, Volunteer.\nSubmitted information; stated FAAS has brought professionalism to the animal shelter:\nJeff Marks, FAAS.\nStated FAAS is a great opportunity to volunteer; urged City support of FAAS: Matthew\nPearce, Alameda.\nStated FAAS helps people connect with animals: Stephem Lowens, Alameda.\nStated the animal shelter is a welcoming and friendly facility; commended FAAS for the\nlife of her adopted pet: Cheryl Hawkins, Alameda.\nStated that she strongly supports FAAS and appreciates FAAS taking over the animal\nshelter; it is important to have funding for animal services: Colette Lee, Alameda.\nStated FAAS is a great service; urged support for FAAS from the City: Mark Sorensen,\nAlameda.\nStated animals are a large part of the community in Alameda: Kari Thompson, Alameda.\nUrged the full funding of FAAS to allow them to continue their work: Sarah Jo Neubauer,\nFAAS.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nOctober 4, 2016", "path": "CityCouncil/2016-10-04.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2016-10-04", "page": 9, "text": "Urged support of FAAS for the different programs and events they hold: Jessica\nWarren, Alameda.\nStated FAAS is essential and a vital part of Alameda: Wes Warren, Alameda.\nUrged support of FAAS and the animal shelter: Joyce Saad, Volunteer.\nStated FAAS is a great support for grief stricken animal owners: Linda Weinstock,\nAlameda.\nOutlined the negotiation; urged the City to fund FAAS: Rena Rickles, FAAS.\nMayor Spencer inquired if there is a need for an independent consultant.\nThe Acting City Manager responded the discussions with FAAS addressed bringing in\nan outside consultant to see if things could be done differently to save money.\nIn response to Mayor Spencer's inquiry, the Acting City Manager stated the City is\ncurrently considering potential consultants and looking at other municipal shelters.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired what is the request from staff; is the request only for\nsustainable funding.\nThe Acting City Manager responded staff is not prepared to have said conversation;\nstated the City will continue to have conversations with FAAS to determine needs; the\nCity can come back to Council with some progress; the Utility Modernization Act (UMA)\nis on the ballot in November, which will determine a lot of the City's future.\nMayor Spencer stated the referral is not to make a substantive decision.\nVice Mayor Matarrese stated people need to know the cost of running the animal\nshelter; he would like direction to be given to staff to start negotiations so that by the\nJune budget, what the City is facing is known.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated the City stands to take a significant hit if the UMA\ndoes not pass in November and cuts will have to be made; the City is in a position of not\nknowing the budget; she would like staff to continue communicating and negotiating\nwith FAAS.\nCouncilmember Daysog stated the success of FAAS speaks for itself; the City should\nnegotiate with FAAS; it is imperative to start moving forward now to not go back to the\ndog pound model.\nMayor Spencer stated that she does not support the UMA; referred to the July staff\nreport; she believes it is critical to proceed with the referral and direct staff to\nrenegotiate the terms of the lease with FAAS; there has been an increase in the number\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nOctober 4, 2016", "path": "CityCouncil/2016-10-04.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2016-10-04", "page": 10, "text": "of animals going to the shelter; it is important to look at modernizing the animal shelter;\nAlameda needs a sustainable plan for how the animal shelter can meet the expectations\nand needs of the community and the animals.\n[Refer to the Referral below [paragraph no. 16-501 for the motion.\nCOUNCIL REFERRAL\n(16-501) Consider Directing Staff to Renegotiate the Terms of the Friends of the\nAlameda Animal Shelter (FAAS) Lease and Relocate/Modernize the Shelter Facility,\nincluding Addressing Funding. (Mayor Spencer)\nRefer to above FAAS Annual Progress Report [paragraph no. 16-500] for public\ncomments and discussion.\nMayor Spencer moved approval of accepting the referral and having staff come back\nwith a presentation.\nCouncilmember Daysog read the referral; stated he would change the referral to read\n\"\nconsider directing staff to renegotiate the terms of the lease with FAAS\ncommensurate with the business model and values now in place \"\nMayor Spencer accepted the friendly amendment.\nVice Mayor Matarrese stated direction needs to be given to guide what is already\nhappening; negotiations are already on going; he wants a line by line presentation and a\nthird party to inform staff which line item goes directly to the release rate and which are\nperipheral; Council cannot make decisions until the budget is explored.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated that he is not comfortable with the wording of the referral;\nhe would like more information; he would like to look at the budget line items and know\nwhat Council is being asked to do; he would like to know the options for a replacement\nshelter.\nCouncilmember Daysog stated, by necessity, the City needs a prescriptive referral;\nsuggested the following changes to the referral \" consider directing staff to renegotiate\nthe terms of a lease with FAAS commensurate with the business model and values now\nin place, including reporting on relocating/modernizing the shelter facility and\naddressing funding with due diligence review of expenses and revenues.. the City\ncannot begin to negotiate in February if the Shelter might close in March.\nMayor Spencer accepted the friendly amendment.\nCouncilmember Daysog seconded the motion.\nThe Acting City Manager stated if the caveat in the friendly amendment is to negotiate\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nOctober 4, 2016", "path": "CityCouncil/2016-10-04.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2016-10-04", "page": 11, "text": "in the current standard, the question is if the City can afford the standard.\nCouncilmember Daysog stated that the City has to enter into the negotiations with a\ncertain value.\nThe Acting City Manager stated that setting the bar that high ties the City's hands.\nMayor Spencer stated that she does want to set the bar high; she made a motion and\naccepted the friendly amendment.\nOn the call for the question, the motion FAILED by the following voice vote: Ayes:\nCouncilmember Daysog and Mayor Spencer - 2. Noes: Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft,\nCouncilmember Oddie and Vice Mayor Matarrese - 3.\nVice Mayor Matarrese moved approval of directing staff to renegotiate the terms of the\nFAAS lease, including: 1) the City's allocation and support of FAAS, 2) the requirement\nto have a third party expert provide the evaluation as suggested by both FAAS and the\nCity to review the line items and to identify the target to which the City is going to hit, 3)\nan analysis of the relocation and modernization of the animal shelter and option for\nalternative funding sources, including, but not limited to, the items listed on the staff\nreport, the development fee and other user fees.\nCouncilmember Oddie seconded the motion.\nUnder discussion, Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired if the motion includes the idea\nof expanding the animal shelter to bring in more revenue, to which Vice Mayor\nMatarrese responded in the affirmative.\nMayor Spencer inquired about the level of care is.\nVice Mayor Matarrese responded the motion is to have the independent consultant\nidentify the standard which the City is targeting.\nMayor Spencer inquired if that is a lower level standard of care, and if the City is going\nto bring in someone from the outside to determine Alameda's standard.\nVice Mayor Matarrese responded in the negative; stated the consultant would advise\nthe City of the standard.\nMayor Spencer stated the standard varies from shelter to shelter.\nVice Mayor Matarrese stated variation is not a standard, that is an output; a standard is\na target rate for a good shelter; a standard is a target for people to measure\nperformance against and determine which line items goes to keeping the level of\nservice and how the City can stay above the standard; the budget is projected to get\nsmaller and smaller.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nOctober 4, 2016", "path": "CityCouncil/2016-10-04.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2016-10-04", "page": 12, "text": "Mayor Spencer inquired what would be the acceptable standard of care.\nVice Mayor Matarrese responded after the standard and cost are received, then the City\ncan have a discussion; on the Annual Report there is no standard and he does not have\na reference or information about the standard.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she does not want to support anything that\nwould support a lower kill rate; inquired if the target is a financial target; stated she does\nnot want to change the live release rate; cuts could be made in other areas.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated there is a certain service level at the animal shelter; there\ncould be a different service level and cost for that service level.\nVice Mayor Matarrese stated the starting point should be to maintain and improve the\ncurrent level of service, but be ready to deal with costs.\nCouncilmember Daysog stated said idea is the same as the original motion: to aim high\nand make adjustments if there is a contingency plan.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated the motion is giving staff more latitude to address\nrelocation or modernizing the facility.\nCouncilmember Daysog stated as part of the negotiations staff should be prepared to\nask about the follow up steps.\nAt the request of Council, the City Clerk repeated the motion.\nVice Mayor Matarrese stated a standard has not been identified, only the performance;\nCouncil needs to know the cost to maintain the performance if it is above the standard\nor to bring the standard up if it is below the standard.\nMayor Spencer stated the motion is similar to the previous motion.\nVice Mayor Matarrese responded he added having a third party consultant.\nMayor Spencer responded that the addition of the consultant could have been a friendly\namendment.\nCouncilmember Oddie called for the question.\nOn the call for the question, the motion carried by the following voice vote: Ayes:\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft, Councilmember Oddie and Vice Mayor Matarrese - 3.\nNoes: Councilmember Daysog and Mayor Spencer - 2.\nAt the request of Council, the City Clerk repeated the motion.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nOctober 4, 2016", "path": "CityCouncil/2016-10-04.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2016-10-04", "page": 13, "text": "***\nMayor Spencer called a recess at 10:17 p.m. and reconvened the meeting at 10:25 p.m.\n***\n(16-502)! Mayor Spencer stated a motion is needed to consider items past 10:30 p.m.\nVice Mayor Matarrese moved approval of hearing the Introduction of Ordinance first\n[paragraph no. 16-503], then address the Housing Element Annual Report [paragraph\nno. 16-505]. .\nUnder discussion, Mayor Spencer inquired if more items could be added at 11:00 p.m.\nThe City Clerk responded in the negative.\nMayor Spencer stated that she prefers to hear the Public Art Fund item first because\nthere are people in the audience to speak on the issue.\nCouncilmember Oddie seconded the motion.\nOn the call for the question, the motion failed by the following voice vote: Ayes:\nCouncilmembers Matarrese and Oddie - 2. Noes: Mayor Spencer - 1. Abstentions:\nCouncilmember Daysog and Ezzy Ashcraft - 2.\nThere was a brief discussion about the vote.\nMayor Spencer moved approval of hearing the Public Art Fund item. [paragraph no. 16-\n503\nCouncilmember Daysog seconded the motion.\nUnder discussion, Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired about potential November 1st\nagenda items, to which the City Clerk responded potential items include Phase Zero\nand the homeless encampment.\nOn the call for the question, the motion carried by the following voice vote: Ayes:\nCouncilmembers Daysog, Ezzy Ashcraft, Matarrese and Mayor Spencer - 4. Noes:\nCouncilmember Oddie - 1.\nREGULAR ITEMS\n(16-503) Introduction of Ordinance Amending the Alameda Municipal Code by\nAmending Chapter 30 (Zoning Ordinance) to Facilitate the City's Ability to Disperse\nPublic Art Funds, and Amend the Fiscal Year 2016-17 Public Art Fund Budget by\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nOctober 4, 2016", "path": "CityCouncil/2016-10-04.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2016-10-04", "page": 14, "text": "$200,000 and Capital Improvement Projects Fund Budget by $100,000. Introduced.\nThe Community Development Director gave a Power Point presentation.\nVice Mayor Matarrese inquired if the Public Art Commission (PAC) made the\nrecommendations to appropriate $100,000 to Jean Sweeny Public Art and use part of\nthe $100,000 for maintenance.\nThe Community Development Director responded in the negative; stated the Council is\nthe body that appropriates funds; the Public Art Ordinance states that maintenance of\npublic art is an eligible expense of the public art fund.\nCouncilmember Daysog inquired whether the PAC makes recommendations to the\nPlanning Board.\nThe Community Development Director responded the PAC expressed interest in the\nordinance being drafted to create a mandatory requirement that money be paid into the\nart fund; because of the zoning ordinance, the City cannot dictate how a developer\ndecides to use the funds; developers have to be given the choice between paying into\nthe fund or providing art onsite.\nCouncilmember Daysog inquired if the PAC had input, to which the Community\nDevelopment Director responded in the affirmative.\nCouncilmember Daysog inquired whether there discussion on how to capture cultural\nart.\nThe Community Development Director responded cultural art should be free and open\nto the public; the criteria could be added to the Request for Proposal (RFP) process.\nCouncilmember Daysog suggested codes could be implemented for people to look up\nand see cultural event that happened years ago.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired if the Council adopted a Master Plan for Jean Sweeny\nPark, to which the Community Development Director responded in the affirmative.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired if there was a public art component in the Master Plan,\nto which the Community Development Director responded in the affirmative.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired if the estimated cost of the public art component was\n$100,000.\nThe Community Development Director responded the $100,000 is a way to jump start\nthe public art design and fabrication.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired whether the estimate is for the entire Jean Sweeny\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nOctober 4, 2016", "path": "CityCouncil/2016-10-04.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2016-10-04", "page": 15, "text": "project is $17 million.\nThe Community Development Director responded the public art was not budgeted as\npart of the $17 million; it would need to come out of a grant or fundraising.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired if the public art is part of the plan but the City currently\ndoes not have a way of paying for it, to which the Community Development Director\nresponded in the affirmative.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired if the $100,000 expenditure for the public art at\nJean Sweeny has not been heard by the PAC, to which the Community Development\nDirector responded in the affirmative.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired if the decision to allocate almost half of the\n$224,000 in the public art fund is a staff estimate.\nThe Community Development Director responded in the affirmative; stated Community\nDevelopment and Park and Rec staff came up with the figure.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired if the figure is based on any particular art\ninstallation.\nThe Community Development Director responded the amount is based on the fact that\nfour locations are being contemplated; stated staff does not know whether $100,000 will\ncover one to four locations.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired what other park locations across the City have\nbeen considered for public art funding.\nThe Community Development Director responded the Master Plan did not have a public\nart component.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether public art could be anywhere in the\nCity, not just public parks, to which the Community Development Director responded in\nthe affirmative.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired if there was a public process so that the public\ncould weigh in on where and what kind of public art they would like to see.\nThe Community Development Director responded there was a community workshop for\nthe public where the proposed amendments to the ordinance were presented as well as\nthe RFP process.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the plans are set and if the allocations\nare made.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nOctober 4, 2016", "path": "CityCouncil/2016-10-04.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2016-10-04", "page": 16, "text": "The Community Development Director responded that if the Council were to appropriate\nthe funding for Jean Sweeny Park, the public process for the art would begin.\nMayor Spencer inquired if there are any other Master Plans in the City which include\npublic art that has not been funded, to which the Community Development Director\nresponded only Jean Sweeny Park.\nMayor Spencer inquired if public art was ever contemplated for any other park.\nThe Community Development Director responded public art would be a great idea in a\nnumber of City parks, which could be a part of the $50,000 for capital art in the RFP.\nMayor Spencer inquired if any other parks have public art; stated she is unaware of any\npublic art at any other parks.\nThe Community Development Director responded in the negative.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether the requirement for administrative costs could be\nreduced from 25% to 15%.\nThe Community Development Director responded in the affirmative; stated the cost is\nfor the third party art providers, not the City's administrative expenses.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether staff reports to the PAC how much is being spent.\nThe Community Development Director responded the annual report includes the costs\nspent on administrative expenses; stated the cost is not approved by the PAC.\nMayor Spencer inquired if there is any preauthorization, to which the Community\nDevelopment Director responded in the negative.\nThe Acting City Manager stated the amount is in the budget.\nThe Community Development Director stated the current budget includes $10,000.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired whether there has to be a cap, to which the Community\nDevelopment Director responded in the negative.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired if the cap can be eliminated.\nThe Community Development Director responded in the affirmative.\n***\n(16-504) Mayor Spencer stated a motion is needed to continue past 11:00 p.m.\nCouncilmember Daysog moved approval of continuing the meeting.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nOctober 4, 2016", "path": "CityCouncil/2016-10-04.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2016-10-04", "page": 17, "text": "Mayor Spencer seconded the motion, which failed by the following voice vote: Ayes:\nCouncilmember Daysog and Mayor Spencer - 2. Noes: Councilmembers Ezzy\nAshcraft, Matarrese and Oddie - 3.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft moved approval of continuing the matter to October 18th\nat 6:00 p.m.\nVice Mayor Matarrese seconded the motion which carried by the following voice vote:\nAyes: Councilmembers Ezzy Ashcraft, Matarrese, Oddie and Mayor Spencer - 4.\nNoes: Councilmember Daysog - 1.\n(16-505) Recommendation to Direct Staff to Transmit the City of Alameda 2015 Housing\nElement Annual Report to the State of California Department of Housing and\nCommunity Development. Not heard.\n(16-506) Public Hearing to Consider Introduction of Ordinance Amending the Alameda\nMunicipal Code by Amending Chapter 30 (Zoning Ordinance) to Streamline\nImprovements to Existing Residential Properties and Minor Administrative, Technical,\nand Clarifying Revisions to the Zoning Ordinance Regarding Chimneys, Accessory\nBuildings, Windows, Existing Driveways and Parking, Non-Conforming Setbacks, Home\nOccupation Signage, and Other Miscellaneous Amendments. Not heard.\nCITY MANAGER COMMUNICATIONS\nNone.\nORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA\nNone.\nCOUNCIL REFERRALS\n(16-507) 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. (Vice Mayor Matarrese)\nNot heard.\n(16-508) Consider Directing the City Manager to Schedule a Priority Setting Work\nSession. (Mayor Spencer) Not heard.\n(16-509) Consider Directing the City Manager to Immediately Hold a City Council\nWorkshop on the Final Phase of the Bayport-Alameda Landing Disposition and\nDevelopment Agreement (DDA)\\Development Plan. (Councilmember Daysog) Not\nheard.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nOctober 4, 2016", "path": "CityCouncil/2016-10-04.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2016-10-04", "page": 18, "text": "(16-510) Consider Directing the City Manager to Have the Social Service Human\nRelations Board (SSHRB) Review City Policies and Procedures for Aiding Alameda's\nHomeless in Order to Make Recommendations to the City Council for Policy Revisions\nand Additions. (Vice Mayor Matarrese) Not heard.\n(16-511) Consider Directing the City Manager to Initiate Revisions to the Ordinances\nand Code Sections for Mixed-Use Zoning in the City of Alameda to Aid Retention of\nBeneficial Commercial Uses within Areas Zoned for Mixed Use. (Vice Mayor Matarrese)\nNot heard.\n(16-512) Consider Directing Staff to Review Enacting a Minimum Wage Increase in\nAlameda. (Mayor Spencer) Not heard.\nCOUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS\nNone.\nADJOURNMENT\nAt 10:58 p.m., Mayor Spencer continued the meeting to October 4, 2016 at 6:00 p.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\nOctober 4, 2016", "path": "CityCouncil/2016-10-04.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2016-10-04", "page": 19, "text": "MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING\nTUESDAY--OCTOBER - 4, 2016--6:00 P.M.\nThe meeting was cancelled. The following item was not heard:\n(16-483A) Conference with Real Property Negotiators (Pursuant to Government Code \u00a7\n54956.8); Property: Alameda Point - Building 530 - 120 W. Oriskany Avenue, Alameda,\nCA; City Negotiator: Nanette Mocanu/Cushman & Wakefield; Organizations\nRepresented: Hot Rod Shop Inc., and NorCal Clean Tech, LLC; Issue under\nnegotiation: Real Property Negotiations Price and Terms of Payment. Not heard.\nLara Weisiger\nCity Clerk\nThe agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Sunshine Ordinance.\nSpecial Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nOctober 4, 2016", "path": "CityCouncil/2016-10-04.pdf"}