{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-01-17", "page": 1, "text": "MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING\nTUESDAY- - -JANUARY 17, 2017--5:30 P.M.\nMayor Spencer convened the meeting at 5:33 p.m.\nRoll Call -\nPresent:\nCouncilmembers Ezzy Ashcraft, Matarrese, Oddie, Vella and\nMayor Spencer - 5.\n[Note: Mayor Spencer arrived at 5:43 p.m.]\nAbsent:\nNone.\nThe meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider:\n(17-021) Conference with Legal Counsel - Existing Litigation (Pursuant to Government\nCode \u00a7 54956.9); CASE NAME: Boatworks V City of Alameda, et al; COURT: Superior\nCourt of the State of California, County of Alameda; CASE NUMBERS: RG1474654 and\nRG16823346\n***\nNote: Mayor Spencer left the meeting at 5:52 p.m. and returned at 6:01 p.m.\nFollowing the Closed Session, the meeting was reconvened and Mayor Spencer\nannounced direction was given to staff.\nAdjournment\nThere being no further business, Mayor Spencer adjourned the meeting at 6:38 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\nJanuary 17, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-01-17.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-01-17", "page": 2, "text": "MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING\nTUESDAY--JANUARY 17, 2017--7:00 - - P.M.\nMayor Spencer convened the meeting at 7:01 p.m. Kiera Marshall led the Pledge of\nAllegiance.\nROLL CALL -\nPresent:\nCouncilmembers Ezzy Ashcraft, Matarrese, Oddie,\nVella and Mayor Spencer - 5.\nAbsent:\nNone.\nAGENDA CHANGES\n(17-022) Mayor Spencer stated that she will be leaving the meeting early to catch a\nflight for the Mayor's Conference; requested hearing the Sanctuary City item [paragraph\n(17- 041)] before the Transportation item [paragraph (17-040)].\nThe City Manager stated there are speakers for the Transportation item; that she would\nlike the matter to be addressed tonight since it has already been continued.\nIn response to Mayor Spencer's inquiry, the City Clerk stated there are 16 speakers for\nitem 6-D, nine for 6-B, and three for 6-C.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether Council would like to consider reducing the speaker\ntime.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated that he would prefer to switch the items as suggested by\nMayor Spencer so that she has an opportunity to vote on all the items.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated the audience could be requested not to applaud to\nkeep the speakers moving along in a timely fashion.\nMayor Spencer stated the agenda will be heard in the current order.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated the clock will be monitored as Council moves through\neach item.\nPROCLAMATIONS, SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY AND ANNOUNCEMENTS\n(17-023) Proclamation Declaring January 17th as St. Joseph Notre Dame Women's\nCross Country Champion Kiera Marshall Day.\nMayor Spencer read and presented the proclamation to Kiera Marshall.\nMs. Marshall made brief comments.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nJanuary 17, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-01-17.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-01-17", "page": 3, "text": "(17-024) Mayor Spencer announced that I Am Alameda photos are being exhibited;\nurged anyone interested to submit photos.\n(17-025) Mayor Spencer announced that the meeting would be adjourned in memory of\nRon Cowan.\nORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA\n(17-026) Gaylon Parsons, Alameda, stated that she is thrilled to see Alameda on social\nmedia; the photo exhibit has been phenomenal.\n(17-027) Marleen Gonzalez, Alameda, stated that she has been unlawfully evicted\nwithout written notice; her rent was raised from $1364 to $2200; she was given $3,000\ncash and a $3,000 check which bounced; she said she would go back to her unit and\nwas threatened.\n(17-028) Toni Grimm, Alameda Renters Coalition (ARC), stated ARC's slogan is \"Keep\nAlamedans in Their Homes\"; urged the Council to increase rent protections.\n(17-029) Eric Strimling, Alameda Renters Coalition, stated a tenant with a leak from the\nrain provided a picture which showed a smoke alarm in the wrong place; there is a lack\nin rental inspections to ensure health and safety laws are followed.\nIn response to Mayor Spencer's request, the City Manager stated residents should\ncontact the Housing Authority, as well as the Office of the City Manager or City\nAttorney.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated the Police Department should be contacted in the\ncase of being physically threatened.\nCONSENT CALENDAR\nCouncilmember Oddie moved approval of the Consent Calendar.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice\nvote - 5. [Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk preceding the\nparagraph number.]\n(*17-030 ) Minutes of the Regular City Council Meeting Held on December 20, 2017.\nApproved.\n(*17-031) Ratified bills in the amount of $4,684,805.17.\n(*17-032) Recommendation to Accept the Investment Report for the Quarter Ending\nJune 30, 2016. Accepted.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nJanuary 17, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-01-17.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-01-17", "page": 4, "text": "(*17-033) Recommendation to Authorize the City Manager, or Her Designee, to\nNegotiate and Execute a Purchase Agreement with Tri Tech Software Systems on\nForms Acceptable to the City Attorney to Furnish, Install, and Implement an Upgrade to\nthe Police Department's Computer Aided Dispatch (CAD) and Records Management\nSystems (RMS) Utilizing Previously Approved Funds, in an Amount not to Exceed\n$995,000, in a Technology Account, Resulting in No Additional Costs to the City, and\nAccompanying Five Year Software Support Agreement. Accepted.\n(*17-034) Recommendation to Amend the Contract With Ray's Electric to Increase the\nContract Amount by $58,000, Including Contingency, for the Main Street Ferry Terminal\nAccess Improvement Project for a Total of $176,320. Accepted.\n(*17-035) Recommendation to Authorize the City Manager to Approve the Assignment\nof Lease for Building 9 from 707 West Tower Avenue, LLC to 651/707 West Tower\nAvenue, LLC, a Delaware Limited Liability Company. Accepted.\n(*17-036) Resolution No. 15224, \"Amending Fiscal Year (FY) 2016-17 Community\nDevelopment Block Grant (CDBG) and HOME Investment Partnership Program\n(HOME) Funds Budget for Prior Fiscal Year Unspent Entitlement and Program Income\nAllocations.' Adopted.\n(*17-037) Ordinance No. 3173, \"Approving the Lease of Building 397, Located at 1690\nOrion Street at Alameda Point, with Astra Space, Inc., a Delaware C-Corporation for a\nTwo-Year Lease with Three One-Year Extension Options. [In accordance with the\nCalifornia Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), this Project is Categorically Exempt under\nthe CEQA Guidelines Section 15301(c) -Existing Facilities.]\" [Requires Four Affirmative\nVotes]. Finally passed.\nREGULAR AGENDA ITEMS\n(17-038) Presentation of Accreditation Award to the Public Works Department from the\nAmerican Public Works Association.\nEdric Kwan, American Public Works Association, presented the Accreditation Award.\nThe Interim Public Works Director gave a brief presentation.\n(17-039) Public Hearing to Consider Introduction of Ordinance Amending the\nDisposition and Development Agreement between Alameda Point Partners, LLC (APP)\nand the City of Alameda for Site A at Alameda Point to Extend the Phase 1 Outside\nClosing Date from December 12, 2016 to April 11, 2017 to Allow for Additional Time to\nComplete Property Due Diligence and to Secure Additional Financial Commitments.\nIntroduced.\nThe Base Reuse Director gave a Power Point presentation.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nJanuary 17, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-01-17.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-01-17", "page": 5, "text": "Councilmember Matarrese requested the Trammell Crow Residential letter be reviewed.\nThe Base Reuse Director showed the letter and explained the financing infrastructure.\nCouncilmember Matarrese inquired whether there has been a request for the terms of\nthe agreement other than an extension to April 11, 2017.\nThe Base Reuse Director responded in the negative; stated there have not been any\nadditional requests in terms of finances, the project, or to changing any amounts or\ncontributions to the City.\nMayor Spencer inquired any other Councilmembers had any questions, being none, she\ninquired whether the infrastructure loan was coming from UDR, to which the Base\nReuse Director responded in the affirmative; stated the loan agreement was executed\ntoday.\nIn response to Mayor Spencer's inquiry regarding Blocks 6, 7, 9 and 11, the Base\nReuse Director stated Blocks 6 and 7 have purchase and sale agreements and will be\nsold to a townhome developer; the purchase and sale agreement for Block 9 has been\nsigned today and is apartment-type housing.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether Block 9 is the building which has the condo overlay.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether Council was here tonight to make\nmodifications to plans, or simply extend the date.\nMayor Spencer called a point of order, re-stated her inquiry regarding the condo\noverlay.\nThe Base Reuse Director responded as part of the mapping process, Block 6 and 7\nhave condo overlays, and Blocks 9 and 11 will be apartments.\nMayor Spencer inquired what the status is of Block 9, 11, and 1A.\nThe Base Reuse Director responded Block 11 will be developed by TCR in concert with\nUDR; stated it will be a participating mortgage at this point; TCR will be providing a\ncommitment letter consistent with the DDA for financing of Block 1A.\nIn response to Mayor Spencer's inquiry regarding the deficiencies, the Base Reuse\nDirector stated TCR has significant resources and has offered to provide a commitment\nletter for the financing of the project; UDR is the primary major capital investor on the\nproject; staff felt it was in the City's interest to have TCR as an additional financing\nentity to see evidence of their commitment to the project before transferring the land.\nMayor Spencer inquired what is the incentive for APP to meet the next deadline.\nThe Base Reuse Director responded if the next deadline is not met, APP would be in\ndefault and the City would pursue remedies under the DDA.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nJanuary 17, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-01-17.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-01-17", "page": 6, "text": "Mayor Spencer inquired whether APP is in default for the December deadline, to which\nthe Assistant City Attorney responded in the negative; stated the City has been working\nwith APP to bring the item before the Council; staff caused a scheduling delay and APP\nhas not been issued a default notice.\nMayor Spencer inquired what will change in the next few months versus the last 18\nmonths.\nThe Base Reuse Director responded the infrastructure that needs to occur makes the\nproject complex; stated 18 months is an aggressive timeline to incentivize performance;\nAPP has worked very hard, is continuing to work very hard and there has been no\nlagging; the reality is it is a complicated project; they have shown progress and\ncommitment without taking any breaks; it is reasonable and no surprise there is a four\nmonth delay; the delay does not change any of the actual completion dates.\nIn response to Mayor Spencer's inquiry regarding Block 9, Bruce Dorfman, TCR, stated\nthat UDR is going to map the site as condos for future exit strategies; UDR's business\nplan is to rent; the long term plan is to sell an asset, which could then be converted to\ncondominiums.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether staff felt they have had good\ncommunication with the developer in the past 18 months, to which the Base Reuse\nDirector responded in the affirmative; stated there has been significant interaction with\nthe developer and weekly meetings; communication is an open book; staff will meet with\nUDR to review their financials; there is constant, ongoing communications and a real\nlong term partnership perspective.\nIn response to Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft's inquiry, the Base Reuse Director stated\nCouncil is being asked to approve an extension of the outside closing date to April 11,\n2017; the extension does not change any of the major milestone dates.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired what else is necessary for UDR to meet the expected\ncommitments.\nThe Base Reuse Director responded other property due diligence items need to be\nsorted through final investigations on the open petroleum site; covenants from Water\nBoard; and continuing to work through other conditions to close.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired whether more financing needs to be obtained, to which\nthe Base Reuse Director responded anything not done in time would be committed\nthrough TCR in a commitment letter; stated it was contemplated in the DDA that the\nmanaging partner could provide a commitment letter to help finalize the financing\ncommitments.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired whether UDR would have an opportunity to cure if they\nwere in default.\nThe Base Reuse Director responded in the affirmative; stated the cure period starts at\n30 days and ends at 120 days, depending on the type and extent of cure.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nJanuary 17, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-01-17.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-01-17", "page": 7, "text": "In response to Councilmember Oddie's inquiry, the Base Reuse Director stated having\nto cure a default would jeopardize the potential relationship with UDR and the capital\ninvestment team, and the City would risk losing the capital investor.\nIn response to Vice Mayor Vella's inquiry regarding current litigation, the Assistant City\nAttorney stated a quick legal search for any cases involving UDR and whether or not\nthey defaulted in major development did not reveal any current pending lawsuits or past\nlawsuits under the criteria set forth.\nVice Mayor Vella requested a highlight of the projects TCR has done in the Bay Area.\nMr. Dorfman responded TCR has been involved in two dozen developments in Northern\nCalifornia, including the housing on Bay Street in Emeryville, a 3000 unit mixed-use\nproject in north San Jose called North Park, and an 1800 unit project named River View\nin San Jose; UDR has a national footprint and just completed 399 Fremont, a high rise\nin downtown San Francisco and has been involved in numerous projects from Silicon\nValley to the East Bay.\nUrged Council to approve the extension: Michael McDonough, Chamber of Commerce.\nCommended the Site A development team for attending many Alameda Home Team\nmeetings to answer questions and listen to concerns; stated the project is complex;\nurged the Council to approve the extension: Helen Sause, Alameda Home Team.\nSubmitted information; expressed concern over UDR being in the luxury apartment\nbusiness; urged the Council not to approve APP's request for the extension: Dorothy\nFreeman, Alameda.\nStated fair housing for all Alamedans is critical; UDR's website is full of nothing but\nluxury apartments: Jim Sweeney, Alameda.\nStated the ball is rolling; urged approval of the extension: Philip James, Alameda.\nStated his all union company has been actively engaged with APP for more than a year;\nare currently negotiating a final contract; urged Council support for the extension: Jim\nSummers, DeSilva Gates Construction.\nOutlined construction costs and practices; stated his ideas include raised foundations\nand all copper pipes, rather than plastic: Mike Roddy, Oxbow Partners.\nStated the project is well designed and conceived; the use is very good; the\nconstruction specifications are appropriate; having the project go forward will be good\nfor the community; time has been well spent; additional time is warranted: Andrew Ball,\nBall + Winter.\nUrged Council to approve the extension; the Council approved the project unanimously\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nJanuary 17, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-01-17.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-01-17", "page": 8, "text": "and the deal does not change; the developer should be given extra time: John Knox\nWhite, Alameda.\nStated there is a housing crisis across the country; the Council should take extra time to\nlook at every option; the project is wonderful, but this may be an opportunity to review\ncreating more workforce housing: Janet Gibson, Alameda.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated the City has been working on Alameda Point for\ndecades; 1996 is when the former Naval Air Station landed on the base closure list;\nthere was an economic downturn in the intervening years; now the City is so close to\ntaking the first major step; a lot of due diligence, time and effort has been put into\nbuilding the foundation of a very good project; significant issues include: Site A as the\ncatalyst to development of enterprise zone, housing needs to be made affordable and\naccessible, ferry terminal funding, and transportation and traffic on and off the island.\nMayor Spencer stated that she appreciates the term major milestone; APP has had 18\nmonths to come up with the financing; now staff is asking for an extension, which is\ninappropriate; that she had a conversation with Joe Ernst about the lack of work-force\nhousing; the property belongs to the community; it is a chance to demand affordable,\nwork-force housing; UDR does luxury apartment homes and may take advantage of this\ngift from the Navy; further stated that she is unable to support the extension.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated that he concurs with most of Councilmember Ezzy\nAshcraft's comments; Alameda Point has not been productive for 20 years; he is\nstarting to have a few concerns and hopes the concerns are alleviated after 120 days;\nstaff is smart and prudent to agree not to close while the structure was not in place;\nthere were some warning signs from previous situations, but the current developer is\nnot like that; the leash is going to be short; if Council grants the extension, APP will get\nit done; there will not be an appetite for Council to grant another extension; Alameda\ndoes need market rate to fund affordable housing; Council has a lot of trust in staff; if\nAPP defaults, they have an opportunity to cure the default and three to five months to\nfigure it out; he plans to support granting the 120 day extension.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated the deal is the deal; this Council unanimously\nsupported the deal and is not inclined to give another extension, but the timeline has not\nchanged; referrals regarding the issues have been delayed and delayed; allowing the\ndeveloper to work out their finances is important, and if it does not pencil, Council will\nknow; the City needs to have early warning from the developer and staff if there is\nsomething amiss; there is greater risk if an extension is not granted.\nVice Mayor Vella stated that she was not part of the earlier decision, but agrees that a\ndeal is a deal; she is not inclined to support a second extension; Councilmembers also\nhave a fiduciary responsibility; she would grant a 120 day extension to work towards\ngetting the financing rather than curing a default; any delay is a concern and she is\ninclined to shorten the extension; the community needs the combination of the units and\ntransit infrastructure; the developer has been proactive; the conversation needs to\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nJanuary 17, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-01-17.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-01-17", "page": 9, "text": "continue; Council has been burnt before and the issue needs to be taken seriously; she\nsupports the extension.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft moved introduction of the ordinance amending the\nDisposition and Development Agreement between Alameda Point Partners, LLC and\nthe City of Alameda for Site A at Alameda Point to extend the Phase 1 Outside Closing\nDate from December 12, 2016 to April 11, 2017 to Allow for Additional Time to\nComplete Property Due Diligence and to Secure Additional Financial Commitments.\nCouncilmember Vella seconded the motion, which carried by the following voice vote:\nAyes: Councilmembers Ezzy Ashcraft, Matarrese, Oddie and Vella - 4. Noes: Mayor\nSpencer - 1.\n(17-040) Recommendation to Provide Comments on the Draft Strategies and List of\nProjects and Actions for the Citywide Transit and Transportation Demand Management\n(TDM) Plan.\n***\nMayor Spencer called a recess at 8:46 p.m. and reconvened the meeting at 8:53 p.m.\nThe Base Reuse Director gave a Power Point presentation.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired whether a transfer to and from the ferry to AC Transit is\nfree prior to the clipper card, to which the Base Reuse Director responded in the\naffirmative; stated the clipper card system would be reprogrammed to get the discount;\nthe goal is to try to make it seamless.\nIn response to Vice Mayor Vella's inquiry regarding the impact of the Park & Ride on\nBay Farm Island, the Base Reuse Director stated staff has not looked at it as a strategy,\nbut will look into it.\nVice Mayor Vella stated she would like to see bus access for teachers and staff and\nsafe routes to schools explored.\nThe Base Reuse Director stated it is a great idea and the School District will be\napproached.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the goal of reducing dive-alone trips on\nand off the Island was considered.\nThe Base Reuse Director responded staff is in the process of obtaining baseline\nnumbers on how effective the packages of improvements will be in achieving the goals;\nstated some will be more successful at meeting the goals than others; more quantitative\nanalysis is needed; it would take a big shift, but staff can look at what it may take to\nmake the improvements; the desire is to be aggressive but realistic.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nJanuary 17, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-01-17.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-01-17", "page": 10, "text": "Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the plan will continue to include West\nEnd access on pedestrian bicycle bridge, to which the Base Reuse Director responded\nin the affirmative; stated it was agreed to have it in the plan.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated a possible partnership with electric shuttles or\ndriverless transport would be good to consider; inquired whether emission free shuttles\nare being considered, to which the Base Reuse Director responded it could be added to\nthe list for consideration; stated driverless buses have physical implications and may be\ngetting ahead of the curve; bus service is intended to be electric vehicles.\nIn response to Mayor Spencer's inquiry regarding a discrepancy in survey results, the\nBase Reuse Director stated she does not have the data tonight, but can provide it.\nIn response to Mayor Spencer's inquiry regarding land lines versus cell phones, the\nBase Reuse Director stated staff could get the information but the consultant is not here\ntonight; the City contracted with a public opinion survey so it is done as scientific.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether anything costing more would come through the\nCouncil process, to which the Base Reuse Director responded in the affirmative.\nIn response to Mayor Spencer's inquiry, the Base Reuse Director stated most of the\nplanning comes from Measure B; at this point staff is not asking for funding from the\nGeneral Fund.\nOutlined an idea for a free shuttle; urged the shuttle be a priority: Tony Kuttner, Greater\nAlameda Business Association.\nStated the project is a viable solution for Alameda and the Chamber of Commerce\nsupports it; there are a lot of advantages for Alameda to have its own service; urged\nCouncil not to take it off the table: Michael McDonough, Chamber of Commerce.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated the City should continue to push for grants to get the Bike\nShare idea done; a bus to the Main Street ferry is a priority; that he was expecting a\nmore holistic approach to solving the traffic problem and establish a citywide TDM; he\nwas expecting more efficient transportation which would include everything on the list;\nso far $500,000 was spent to say the City should have busses; what is missing is the\noverarching connection to future development; if the City does the list of projects,\npedestrian safety needs to be included; overall the plan is a good start, but he was\nexpecting a little more.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated the problem is that over 50% of people ride alone as\nshown in the survey data; more attention needs to be paid to why that is; measuring the\nsuccess of a strategy will show if there is good use of money; he agrees that free is not\nfree, someone is paying, and that jolt of reality has to be monitored on every project;\ngrants are one-time and come and go; the City should make the best use of money and\nensure it continues to flow; he would like to see the Drive 25 project incorporated in the\nTDM; it is a street and vehicle-use issue that intersects; he observed a phenomenon\nthat on non-school days that are odd holidays there is no back-up at Harbor Bay or the\ntube; there was no mention of the phenomenon in the plan which does not connect with\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nJanuary 17, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-01-17.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-01-17", "page": 11, "text": "the reality of Alameda; the issues with moving on and off the island, and around the\nisland, have to be looked at; the behavior and incentives that will change the\npercentage of drive-alones also have to be reviewed; he would like to see the\nTransportation Commission recommendations explicit in the plan; as a top priority the\nTransportation Commission should deliberate and give the Council their\nrecommendations by vote.\nVice Mayor Vella stated the highest ranking project is getting on and off the Island and\nthe on-island transit issues; she thinks they are also separate issues; there is a lot of\nconcern for West End estuary crossings when evaluating long term; she primarily uses\nbike and public transit to get around the island and only drives to work; finding ways to\nget people comfortable with using public transit is important; estuary crossing is\nimportant; the City needs to plan now and be serious about it; for the people who want\nto get their cars off the road, the City should serve them by providing long term options\nand the means for doing so; she would like feedback from the Commission on\nDisabilities Issues as able-ism should not be assumed.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated she concurred with her colleagues and\ncommended staff for looking at Citywide strategy; parking management strategy has\ngreat objectives; reducing incentives by parking strategy should be used in tandem with\nother objectives and not discourage people already inclined to use public transit; safe\nalternatives for students should be provided so parents are willing to allow their kids to\nwalk, ride bikes, or take the bus, and there would be less congested traffic; finding a\nway to pay for free shuttle is a continuing obligation; not everyone needs to be offered\nthe service for free; students, low income, and seniors, could be included, but she would\nlike the incentive to be more need-based; the free shuttle is a great idea but would be a\nchallenge to underwrite; inquired what are the next steps and when they can begin.\nThe Base Reuse Director responded next steps would include finding a way to package\nthe incentives in a way that provide more of the connections and make the plan more\ncomprehensive; staff has been working with the consultant on tool kits to create\nstandardized TDM and take the strategy to the next level; the intent is to spend the next\ncouple months putting a draft plan together, and returning to Council in the summer with\na draft plan; the plan would go through the whole circuit of the Planning Board,\nTransportation Commission, and the Commission on Disabilities Issues; a draft plan will\nbe presented first, then a final plan.\nMayor Spencer stated that she has concerns about the public opinion survey and the\ndemographics; trying to figure out how to make the plan sustainable is the issue; she\nwould support the plan but would not support raising taxes to support it; figuring out\nways for funding needs to be addressed; Alameda has serious transit problems, rush\nhour and access to and from schools is always an issue; there are ways to do the plan\nwith the support of the community; establishing a sustainable long term plan to meet the\nneeds is important; the priorities include sustainability with no money from the General\nFund; Council could continue to advocate, but figuring out how it is going to be done\nhere is important; considerations can include grants, things that can be improved,\nworking with the Coast Guard, and figuring out a bridge; feeling comfortable and safe\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nJanuary 17, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-01-17.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-01-17", "page": 12, "text": "riding bikes on and off the island should be a priority; Alameda does have discounted\nbus passes but would like to find a way to offer discounts to everyone who lives in\nAlameda; negotiations should happen sooner than later; Alameda has unique needs\nwhich require unique solutions; she would like to know the data regarding who took the\nsurvey to ensure all community members are being reached.\n(17-041) Resolution No. 15225, \"Affirming the City of Alameda's Commitment to the\nValues of Dignity, Inclusivity, and Respect for All Individuals, Regardless of Ethnic or\nNational Origin, Gender, Race, Religious Affiliation, Sexual Orientation, or Immigration\nStatus.\nMayor Spencer stated there are 30 speakers on the item which would take 90 minutes;\nreducing speaker limit to two minutes each would still be an hour; the issue is important\nand she would like to weigh in on it.\nVice Mayor Vella suggested reducing each speaker time to two minutes.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired whether Mayor Spencer could make comments before\nshe leaves, to which the City Attorney responded in the affirmative; stated it would not\nviolated the Brown Act.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated she concurs with Vice Mayor Vella on speaker\ntime.\nMayor Spencer stated she apologizes she cannot be here for all speakers and offered\nher comments to Council: She is ok with the title with the caveat that inclusivity could be\nslightly misleading , immigration status needs to be stricken in the first whereas\nbecause it does not fall under the summary of the Constitutions; change \"a\" cornerstone\nin the fourth whereas; the Board of Social Services is the correct title, not Social\nServices Board; she would like to include an annual meeting with SSHRB and City\nCouncil; stated there should be a whereas added referencing the police policy; in the\nlast whereas, prefers using \"those\" communities instead of \"the\" community; she\nsuggests alphabetizing the list of protected classes and include a whereas for financial\nimpact; she proposes a sentence \"if a federal policy adopted requiring officials use\npublic resources, then City of Alameda officials will not use any public resources, but\nbring it back to Council for further direction\"; Section 5 should read federal \"law\" or\n\"program\" to be consistent and more broad; she would support the resolution with these\nchanges.\n***\nMayor Spencer left the meeting at 10:15 p.m. in order to travel to attend the U.S.\nConference of Mayors.\n***\nThe City Manager gave a Power Point presentation.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nJanuary 17, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-01-17.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-01-17", "page": 13, "text": "Stated that she made a commitment to stand up for human rights in the community;\nexpressed support for the resolution: Susan Paulukonis, Alameda.\nStated that she supports the resolution, which is a significant step toward a more just\nand compassionate city and nation; she will monitor housing regulations to ensure that\nthe values are more than spoken: Sister Pat Nagle, Welcome the Stranger.\nUrged the Council to support a strong sanctuary resolution; shared her family's\nimmigration story: Holly Lim, Alameda resident and Filipino Advocates for Justice.\nStated hopefully the President-elect will not follow through on campaign promises;\nurged adoption of the resolution: Philip James, Alameda resident and East Bay Young\nDemocrats.\nSubmitted and outlined information: Joseph Woodard, Alameda.\nStated the he agrees with most of the resolution; however, he is opposed to putting\nlegal citizens at risk by providing support, aid and sanctuary for those who do not abide\nby immigration laws: Warren Serkin, Alameda.\nStated that he appreciates the support of the faith organizations; expressed support for\nthe resolution: Doyle Saylor, Renewed Hope.\nDiscussed the growth of diversity in Alameda; urged the Council to adopt the resolution:\nHelen Sause, Alameda.\n(17-042) Acting Mayor Vella stated a motion is needed to continue the meeting.\nCouncilmember Matarrese moved approval [of continuing the meeting].\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft seconded the motion.\nUnder discussion, Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated she would support the motion if\nit not include the Board and Commission appointment item.\nThe City Clerk stated the item is announcing Mayor Spencer's nomination to the Public\nUtilities Board.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether all the applicants were interviewed, to\nwhich the City Clerk responded in the affirmative.\nOn the call for the question, the motion carried by unanimous voice vote - 4. [Absent:\nMayor Spencer - 1.]\n***\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nJanuary 17, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-01-17.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-01-17", "page": 14, "text": "Expressed concern that Alameda as a Sanctuary City violates federal law: Brian\nKennedy, Alameda.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated she wanted to remind Council, as a point of order,\nthat a public speaker is speaking to the entire Council and not intended to direct any\npersonal comments to any particular Councilmember.\nStated that she is speaking on behalf of Catherine Tactaquin; urged the term Sanctuary\nCity be used; : Lillian Galedo.\nStated she supports the resolution and urged the Council to make a real commitment\nto\nthe community: Katin Lindsey, The Child Unique Montessori.\nUrged Council to support on the Sanctuary City resolution: Austin Tam, Alameda.\nStated Alameda stands as a community where everyone is safe; suggested adding a\nWhereas to the resolution about violations to the State or Federal Constitution: Gaby\nDolphin, Alameda.\nStated that he has been on the receiving end of racial bullying; urged Council to adopt\nthe resolution: Michael Lee, Alameda.\nStated the Alameda Progressives held an Everyone Belongs Here event last Saturday;\npeople feel citizens will be protected and safe; the community supports everyone being\nwelcome here: Cheri Johansen, Alameda Progressives.\nExpressed support for the resolution, which is a small step in the right direction:\nReverend Stephen McHale, Christ Episcopal Church.\nStated the resolution does not change any policy, does not include the term Sanctuary\nCity and includes that the City will comply with federal law; urged the term Sanctuary\nCity be added and doing more: Eric Strimling, Alameda Renters Coalition.\nStated that he is Veteran; legal immigrants have fled their country to get away from\nlaws, Sanctuary Cities protect illegal immigrants that want to do harm: Christian\nMartwelli, Alameda.\nStated last Saturday a human billboard vigil was held to express beliefs about\ninclusivity; urged Council to support the resolution: Ruth Smiles, Alameda.\nExpressed appreciation for the Board meeting on November 29, 2016 to address bias-\nmotivated events; stated the Board looks forward to continue working on the matter; the\nresolution provides some teeth to a sentiment that already exists and provide assurance\nto those with doubts: Nicole Blake, Social Service Human Relations Board (SSHRB).\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nJanuary 17, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-01-17.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-01-17", "page": 15, "text": "Shared a story of classmates telling her 8 year old daughter she should have been\nkilled with other jews: Alicia Cernitz-Schwartz, Alameda.\nStated there were a number of recommendations from the November 29th SHHRB\nmeeting which she provided in a letter to the Mayor; stated that she supports the\nresolution: Jennifer Williams, Alameda.\nExpressed support for the resolution; suggested Council consider using the term\nSanctuary City: John Knox White, Alameda.\nStated that she supports the resolution because it supports diversity and community\nvalues: Audrey Hyman, SSHRB.\nStated that he was crushed the term Sanctuary City was removed from the resolution:\nSean Manzano, Alameda.\nStated there has been an increase in hate speech and bullying at schools; encouraged\na message be sent to the community that bullying will not be tolerated and all are\nwelcome; encouraged Alameda be called a Sanctuary City: Kristin Welch, Alameda.\nStated the he supports the intent of the resolution; urged the term Sanctuary City be\nincluded: Reverend Michael Yoshii, Buena Vista United Methodist Church.\nStated that Alameda is home to many immigrant residents, who need a voice; removing\nthe language of Sanctuary City removes its teeth; completely defunding Sanctuary\nCities has been pulled back: Chelsea Haleynelson, Alameda.\nStated if making Alameda a Sanctuary City is a small step to make people stand up for\nothers, it is worth it: Leslie VanEvery, Solidarity Sundays.\nStated that she works with an immigrant family; the organization of Catholic Churches\nwill probably bring in more immigrant families, which is worthwhile for the organization:\nKathy Schumacher, Alameda.\nDiscussed the related School Board action as symbolic versus making the effort real;\nstated the real issue is to help the illegal immigrants who live in fear; give them a\npathway to being legal that they understand: Janet Gibson, Alameda.\nCouncilmember Matarrese suggested striking the first sentence of Section 5; stated\nreporting needs to be hardwired and added into Section 5, suggested language for\nSection 5.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether Council would want to know reports\nimmediately rather than the City Manager reporting on a regular basis.\nThe City Attorney requested clarification of Councilmember Matarrese's sentence.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nJanuary 17, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-01-17.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-01-17", "page": 16, "text": "Councilmember Matarrese stated the power of the words \"Sanctuary City\" cannot be\nhidden by the absence of the term in the resolution and supports including \"Sanctuary\nCity\" in the resolution title.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated that he concurs with Councilmember Matarrese and\nMayor Spencer's suggestions; supports joint SSHRB/City Council meetings; taking the\nsuggestions that come through and evaluating them in six or eight months is a good\nidea; the stories he heard from the speakers frame where he is coming from; he does\nnot want to see a situation of immigrant families torn apart similar to the Japanese\ninternment camps; he described his own family story of his mother's visit to Southern\nPoland and Auschwitz; stated the horrors are being normalized; the dichotomy of this\nweek with the Martin Luther King holiday and ending with the inauguration; stated that\nhe stands with all of the immigrant population, brothers and sisters of Muslim and all\nfaiths, that he is proud to say Council has your back.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated it is both an honor and humbling to represent the\ncommunity, which is a diverse community; Council has heard divergent views\nexpressed with civility; the staff report referenced 100 years in Alameda caring for the\nneedy; learning from the past is important; staff stated that immigrant families were\nafraid to sign up with any database, so the staff arranged for Allen Temple Baptist\nChurch to ensure toys went to immigrant families during the holidays; stated she does\nnot want people to live in fear; she is happy to support the resolution.\nVice Mayor Vella stated it is important to address a few things; she is fundamentally\nopposed to mass deportation; Council took an oath to support the Constitution; the\nmeeting was started with the Pledge of Allegiance; we are still fighting for the notion of\njustice for all someday; there are fiscal impacts ahead; stated there has to be a Nexus,\nas a fiduciary, as there is no price on civil liberties; what makes the community great is\nits diversity; the government is not infallible; she is concerned about school kids; the\nlanguage of hate is being used which is a problem happening in the community; it is not\nabout immigration status, it is about other people questioning your status; devotion to\nthe Constitution and the United States is an obligation to each other; she would like the\nresolution to conflict with unconstitutional imposed by federal law; there are things that\ncould come down and she does not want Alameda be first in line; she would be in favor\nof changing the title to include Sanctuary City; she would like people to know they have\na place in Alameda and want to make it a little stronger; she takes the issue personally,\nas she has family that were interned; the resolution is a first big step that is much\nneeded; Council should strengthen the resolution and add the term Sanctuary City.\nThe City Attorney stated the reason why the term Sanctuary City was not used was\nbecause it is not clearly defined; but could come back to Council with a stronger Section\n5.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated the point of the resolution is this is how Alameda sees\nSanctuary City; the term does not need to be defined.\nVice Mayor Vella requested Councilmember Matarrese to restate his suggested\nlanguage for Section 5.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nJanuary 17, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-01-17.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-01-17", "page": 17, "text": "Councilmember Matarrese stated remove \"nothing in this resolution shall be construed\nor implemented to conflict with obligation imposed by federal law\" and replace with \"the\nCity Manager shall report on a regular basis all requests or mandates from the federal\ngovernment for use of City resources to the City Council for advice and direction or\nreport the absence of such requests or mandates.'\nVice Mayor Vella stated for clarification that staff does not actually make the decision\nwhether or not to comply; that the decision is brought to the Council.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft suggested the language in the title be\n..affirming\nthe\nCity of Alameda's commitment as a Sanctuary City\n\"\nCouncilmember Oddie stated he concurs with Councilmember Matarrese's language.\nVice Mayor Vella and Councilmember Matarrese concurred to include Sanctuary City in\nthe title.\nVice Mayor Vella inquired about Mayor Spencer's suggestions.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated the SSHRB does not belong in the resolution;\nSection 4 sounds fine the way it is.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated the Mayor's suggestion of including a whereas\nregarding the Police Department is important.\nThe City Attorney inquired whether Council wanted the litany of things the Mayor\nrequested alphabetized.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft responded in the negative; stated it is fine the way it is.\nCouncilmember Oddie motioned to adopt the resolution with the amendments: 1)\ninclude Sanctuary City in the title; 2) correct changes to Section 5 as per\nCouncilmember Matarrese's suggested language; 3) the reference to existing policy and\nnew whereas clause as suggested by Mayor Spencer.\nCouncilmember Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice\nvote - 4. [Absent: Mayor Spencer - 1.]\nCITY MANAGER COMMUNICATIONS\n(17-043) The City Manager announced January is Black History Month and the Public\nInformation Officer is planning a lot of activities; announced the City finally has a long\nterm plan for dredging at MARAD.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired about the Friends of the Alameda Animal Shelter.\nThe City Manager stated staff has received draft audited financials on January 11th and\nwill schedule a meeting to talk about the findings early next week.\nORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nJanuary 17, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-01-17.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-01-17", "page": 18, "text": "(17-044) Janet Gibson, Alameda, expressed concern over Councilmembers interrupting\nothers speaking; suggested Council reach an agreement to not interrupt each other.\n(17-045) Reverend Michael Yoshii, Buena Vista Methodist Church, stated there needs\nto be space to acknowledge Alameda has not been perfect; historic covenants should\nbe named to give a full composite of the narrative.\nCOUNCIL REFERRALS\nNone.\nCOUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS\n(17-046) Consideration of Mayor's Nomination for Appointment to the Public Utilities\nBoard.\nThe City Clerk announced Mayor Spencer nominated Gerald Serventi for appointment\nto the Public Utilities Board.\n(17-047) Councilmember Oddie stated he attended a Stope Waste board meeting;\ndiscussed debris removal; gave Kerry Parker from Public Works kudos for a great\npresentation.\n(17-048) Acting Mayor Vella stated that she would be attending the airport noise forum\ntomorrow night.\nADJOURNMENT\n(17-049) There being no further business, Acting Mayor Vella adjourned the meeting at\n12:25 a.m. in memory of Ron Cowan.\nRespectfully submitted,\nIrma Glidden\nAssistant City Clerk\nThe agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Sunshine Ordinance.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nJanuary 17, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-01-17.pdf"}