{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-02-21", "page": 1, "text": "MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING\nTUESDAY- - - FEBRUARY 21, 2017--7:00 P.M.\nMayor Spencer convened the meeting at 7:02 p.m. and led the Pledge of Allegiance.\nROLL CALL -\nPresent:\nCouncilmembers Ezzy Ashcraft, Matarrese, Oddie,\nVella and Mayor Spencer - 5.\n[Note: Vice Mayor Vella arrived at 7:30 p.m.]\nAbsent:\nNone.\nAGENDA CHANGES\n(17-106) Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft proposed moving the Williams-Sonoma lease\n[paragraph no. 17-132 to the top of the regular agenda.\nMayor Spencer inquired about the number of speakers; stated the first regular item [call\nfor review: paragraph no. 17-127 has 10 speakers; proposed the Bladium Parcel Map\n[paragraph no. 17-131] and the Williams-Sonoma lease [paragraph no. 17-132\nbe\ncalled after the call for review.\nCouncilmember Oddie expressed support for the Mayor's suggestion.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated the Williams-Sonoma lease would probably not\ntake long.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated the agenda should remain as is.\nPROCLAMATIONS, SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY AND ANNOUNCEMENTS\n(17-107) Mayor Spencer announced there is a vacancy on the Rent Review Advisory\nCommittee for the Housing Provider Seat, and that rent workshops would be held on\nFebruary 23rd, and March 16th and 30th.\n(17-108) Mayor Spencer did the daily reading on love for Season for Nonviolence.\n(17-109) Mayor Spencer stated that she would be adjourning in memory of Betty\nSanderson, John Villa, Solana Henneberry, Michael Devlin, and Dona Hoard.\n(17-110) Proclamation Declaring February 2017 as Black History Month.\nMayor Spencer read the proclamation and presented it to Robbie Wilson.\nMs. Wilson made brief comments.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n1\nFebruary 21, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-02-21.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-02-21", "page": 2, "text": "(17-111) Proclamation Declaring February 21, 2017 as David Needle Day.\nMayor Spencer read the proclamation and presented it to Gina Ward, David's daughter.\n(17-112) Proclamation Declaring February 2017 as Teen Dating Violence Prevention\nand Awareness Month.\nMayor Spencer read the proclamation and presented it to Liz Varela, Executive Director,\nBuilding Futures with Women and Children.\nMs. Varela made brief comments.\nORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA\n(17-113) Kenny Mai and Lauren Bulino, Alameda Youth Committee, showed a video,\ngave a brief overview of the Piece and Kindness campaign and provided the\nCouncilmembers with information and puzzle pieces.\n(17-114) Rosemary Jordan, Alameda 4 Impeachment, submitted information; urged\nCouncil to adopt a resolution to support a congressional investigation of President\nTrump.\n(17-115) Gaby Dolphin, Alameda Progressives, stated that she supports a resolution for\nimpeachment.\n(17-116) Maxwell Bunshalt, Alameda, urged Council to do everything possible to\nreverse the debacle of the government and preserve democracy; stated that he\nsupports a petition to impeach the President.\n(17-117) Richard Bangert, Alameda, expressed concern over the lack of information for\nan Alameda Municipal Power planning meeting; stated having the meeting at 3:00 p.m.\non a Monday is not accessible for citizen participation and no staff reports were\nassociated with the agenda.\nCONSENT CALENDAR\nMayor Spencer announced that the Enterprise District update [paragraph no. 17-121]\nand the resolution regarding Island City Lighting and Landscaping District [paragraph\nno.\n17-124 were removed from the Consent Calendar for discussion.\nCouncilmember Matarrese moved approval of the remainder of the Consent Calendar.\nCouncilmember Oddie seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote -\n5. [Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk preceding the paragraph\nnumber.]\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n2\nFebruary 21, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-02-21.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-02-21", "page": 3, "text": "(*17-118) Minutes of the Special and Regular City Council Meeting Held on January 17,\n2017. Approved.\n(*17-119) Ratified bills in the amount of $3,309,335.54.\n(*17-120) Recommendation to Accept the Quarterly Sales Tax Report for the Period\nEnding September 30, 2016 Collected During the Period April 1, 2016 to June 30, 2016.\nAccepted.\n(17-121) Recommendation to Receive the 6-Month Status Update on the Enterprise\nDistrict Development Approach (July 2016 to December 2016).\nStated business parks should not be built without housing; housing is needed;\ncommercial development should be leveraged for affordable housing: Angela\nHockabout, Renewed Hope.\nIn response to Mayor Spencer's inquiry, the Base Reuse Director stated the\ndevelopment is part of a larger mixed-use development; the area focuses on jobs;\n18,000 jobs were lost when the Base closed causing an imbalance of housing and jobs;\nthe no-cost conveyance is supposed to replace jobs; a condition of getting the land\nunder the no-cost, economic conveyance agreement with the Navy requires focusing on\na mixed-use community and bringing jobs that were lost when the Base was closed; the\n20 to 30 year plan makes sure commercial land is available.\nMayor Spencer stated if more than 1,400 homes are built, the City would have to pay\n$50,000 per unit, which will be inflated over time.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated the point of closed military bases is to replace lost\njobs; the need for balance is important; jobs left, but houses did not leave.\nCouncilmember Matarrese moved approval of the staff recommendation.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft Seconded the motion which carried by unanimous voice\nvotes - 5.\n(*17-122) Resolution No. 15230, \"Amending Resolution No. 9460 to Reflect Current\nPositions and Entities to be included in the City of Alameda's Conflict of Interest Code\nand Rescind Resolution No. 14992.\" Adopted.\n(*17-123) Resolution No. 15231, \"Approving Two Workforce Changes at Alameda\nMunicipal Power: Delete One Position, Senior Account Clerk; Add One New Position,\nUtility Information Systems Billing Specialist; and Amend the Salary Schedule of Electric\nUtility Professionals of Alameda (EUPA) to Retitle Engineering Supervisor to\nEngineering Manager, Effective March 5, 2017. Adopted.\n(17-124) Resolution No. 15232, \"Appointing an Engineer-of-Work and an Attorney-of-\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n3\nFebruary 21, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-02-21.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-02-21", "page": 4, "text": "Record for Island City Landscaping and Lighting District 84-2.\" Adopted.\nCouncilmember Matarrese and Vice Mayor Vella recused themselves and left the dais.\nMayor Spencer moved adoption of the resolution.\nCouncilmember Oddie seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote -\n3. [Absent: Councilmembers Matarrese and Vella - 2.]\n(*17-125) Resolution No. 15233, \"Appointing an Engineer-of-Work and an Attorney-of-\nRecord for Maintenance Assessment District 01-1 (Marina Cove). Adopted.\n(*17-126) Resolution No. 15234, \"Authorizing Residential Parking Program for Public\nStreets within Columbia Homeowners Association (HOA) Pursuant to Alameda\nMunicipal Code Section 12-17.6(g). Adopted; and\n(*17-126A) Resolution No. 15235, \"Authorizing Residential Parking Program for Public\nStreets within Headlands Homeowners Association (HOA) Pursuant to Alameda\nMunicipal Code Section 12-17.6(g). Adopted.\nREGULAR AGENDA ITEMS\n(17-127) Public Hearing to Consider Resolution No. 15236, \"Upholding the Planning\nBoard Decision to Approve Design Review Permit File No. PLN16-0232 for the\nConstruction of an 880 Square Foot Accessory Structure at 1208 Saint Charles Street,\nincluding Demolition of a Two-Car Garage and Construction of an Accessory Structure\nwith a Three-Car Garage and an Artist Studio.\" Adopted. This project is categorically\nexempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA\nGuidelines Section 15303.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director gave a Power Point presentation.\nStated they would like the ability to pursue their plans for an addition; the plans meet all\nrequirements; the process has gone on for a long time; they are good neighbors and\ngood citizens; their team is present tonight to speak on their behalf: Paula Mathis and\nTom Ellebie, property owners.\nStated her client's neighbors challenged the project regarding drainage, oak trees and a\nCEQA challenge; staff findings support her clients; studies show no negative impact\nfrom the project; the applicant's experts are working on facts not opinion; urged Council\nto support upholding the Planning Board decision: Rena Rickles, Applicant's Attorney.\nStated she has resided in Alameda for 23 years; the design and construction can be\ncompatible; the location and layout is most appropriate for least disturbance to the site;\nher professional opinion is that the project will enhance the health and beauty of all\nheritage trees: Jennifer Bowles, Applicant's Landscape Architect.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n4\nFebruary 21, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-02-21.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-02-21", "page": 5, "text": "Showed a video clip of a Planning Board meeting where a commissioner called the\nproject for review: Scott Dawson, Alameda.\nStated that she visited the neighbor's properties and made recommendations\non\nconstruction zones; she is not in dispute with the applicant's arborist, but does not\nunderstand how the project can comply with the arborist recommendations: Darya\nBarar, Hort Science Inc.\nIn response to Vice Mayor Vella's inquiry regarding Ms. Barar's qualifications, Ms. Barar\nstated that she is a Cal Poly Pomona graduate and has been a certified arborist since\n2002; she has 14 years work experience with the City of Pasadena.\nStated the City needs to update rules, regulations, and the Code; the neighbors are only\ntrying to save trees; she has the right to fight for herself as well as her neighbors; she\nthinks the project is too much of a chance to take and may jeopardize the oak trees;\nurged the applicant to rebuild the garage where it has always been and find another\nlocation for the art studio: Dee Keltner, Alameda.\nShowed a video clip of a Planning Board meeting where the project was called for\nreview: Antonia Nicosia, Alameda.\nSubmitted information; stated the structure should be built as pier and graybeam\nconstruction, which can be done without cutting large roots; the trees are healthy; she\nsupports the construction: Judy Thomas, Applicant's Arborist.\nStated he is the applicant's neighbor; he supports the garage construction; the owners\nhave resources to fix their home; as a tax payer, he is concerned with the process and\nthat the item is before the Council tonight; the Planning Board meeting clips do not\nshow the whole picture; urged Council to uphold the Planning Board decision: Robert\nDoud, Alameda.\nStated he is the architect for the project with over 40 years in practice in Alameda; the\ndesign is a collaborative effort of many consultants; the owners proposed several\nversions of the project; the one approved addressed all the requirements; the\nfoundation was designed consistent with the arborists report: Italo Calpestri, Applicant's\nArchitect.\nAsked Council to vote against the project if it impacts the trees; urged Council to\nconsider the wide ranging benefits of trees: Sylvia Gibson, Alameda.\nMayor Spencer stated that she called the project for review because there was enough\ncontroversy between the neighbors and conflicting comments in the expert reports to\nhave Council weigh in on the issue; she still has concerns as to how appropriate it\nwould be to proceed after hearing the comments tonight.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n5\nFebruary 21, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-02-21.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-02-21", "page": 6, "text": "In response to Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft's inquiry, the Assistant Community\nDevelopment Director stated the construction is a combination of existing slab on new\nextensions on the pier system.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired what date the two Planning Board video clips\nwere from, to which the Assistant Community Development Director responded both\nvideo clips were from the night the item was called for review.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether there was a unanimous vote to approve\nthe project when it came back for review on January 23, 2017.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded in the affirmative; stated\nstaff revised the plans in between the time the project was called for review and the\nJanuary 23rd meeting; all the issues were addressed, including making sure the oak\ntrees would be protected and thrive; nobody disagrees that the trees are incredible and\nneed to be preserved; the vote was 6-0 to approve the project.\nCouncilmember Matarrese inquired whether the combination of beam grade for new\nload and the slab for the existing footprint has been reviewed by the applicant's arborist,\nfound to be protective and minimizes the risk to the trees, and if the City arborist\nconcurred, to which the Assistant Community Development Director responded in the\naffirmative.\nIn response to Councilmember Oddie's inquiry regarding the review process, the\nAssistant Community Development Director stated Council is reviewing a decision that\nhas already been made by the Planning Board; the Planning Board made findings\nbased on three key things: 1) the project is consistent with the General Plan and zoning,\n2) the design architecture is consistent with the main building, and 3) nothing about the\nproject would be detrimental to the general health, welfare and safety of the community;\nthe Planning Board made the final decision based on the third finding and determined\nthe project would not hurt the trees; the Planning Board made the right decision.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired whether some type of evidence is needed to make a\ncontrary finding, to which the Assistant Community Development Director responded in\nthe affirmative, stated evidence would have to be specifically pointed out.\nIn response to Councilmember Oddie's injury, the Assistant Community Development\nDirector stated that he asked the City arborist to make a determination regarding the\ntrees; the City arborist reported that the property owners are doing everything right; the\nCity mitigated the design to make sure it would be okay; the Planning Board, staff, and\nthe City arborist have taken all the right measures to protect the trees; no one wants to\nlose the trees.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether the City arborist provided a written report, to which the\nAssistant Community Development Director responded in the negative; stated staff did\nnot request a written report.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n6\nFebruary 21, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-02-21.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-02-21", "page": 7, "text": "Mayor Spencer stated that she would like to have seen a written, impartial report from\nthe City arborist; knowing his credentials and qualifications is important; the other\nparty's arborist credentials were requested; an independent report would have been\npreferred; the City does not have a written report from the tie-breaker expert.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director stated staff could discuss changing the\nprocess; staff, the Planning Board, and the City arborist all felt comfortable another\nopinion was not needed for the project.\nVice Mayor Vella inquired whether the City arborist attended the Planning Board\nmeetings regarding the project, to which the Assistant Community Development\nDirector responded in the negative; stated the City arborist reviewed all the materials\npresented at the meetings and found no issues.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated Council and Boards have to rely on the expertise of the\nprofessionals.\nIn response to Mayor Spencer's inquiry, the Assistant Community Development Director\nstated the garage foundation will be replaced with no new load.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether the foundation has to be replaced because the old\nfoundation would not be able to hold the new building.\nMr. Calpestri responded the old foundation lacks reinforcement; it is better to remove\nthe old foundation and spread the load; the slab size will remain the same.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether the foundation size matches the size of the building, to\nwhich Mr. Calpestri responded in the affirmative.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she visited to the property; the neighbors\nexpressing concern for the well-being of the trees is appropriate; the homeowners care\nabout the trees as much as the neighbors; she hopes there was no attempt to mislead\nthe Council with the two video clips that did not show the outcome; the Planning Board\nis competent; concerns were addressed at the January 23rd meeting; she feels due\ndiligence has been done and is prepared to support the Planning Board decision;\nhaving the neighborhood feeling resurrected again is important going forward.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft moved adoption of the resolution.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated the Council's charge tonight is to determine whether\nor not the Planning Board made an error; he has reviewed all the reports and watched\nthe videos; he does not see any new information that the Planning Board determination\nwas made in error; he is satisfied with the judgements and findings of staff.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n7\nFebruary 21, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-02-21.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-02-21", "page": 8, "text": "Vice Mayor Vella stated that she watched the Planning Board videos and visited the\nsite; the process needs to be streamlined; approval of a project should not take so much\ntime and so many resources; she has not seen anything that conflicts with the Planning\nBoard information or undermines the three findings; she is familiar with the form of\nconstruction; she supports the project.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated that he concurs with Councilmember Matarrese; the\napplicant has done everything right and has the same right as a fourth generation\nAlamedan; he was heartened by the property owners' comments that, after all is said\nand done, they still want to make Alameda their home; as a Councilmember, it is\nimportant to trust staff; the Assistant Community Development Director would inform\nCouncil if he thought the project would kill the trees; he plans to support upholding the\nPlanning Board decision.\nMayor Spencer stated that she will not support the Planning Board decision; she is\ndisappointed there is not a more stringent policy to protect heritage trees; there are\nmany things that will be unknown until the damage happens; Alameda does not have\nhomes with three car garages; the project is not compatible with the City; she is not able\nto support the project.\nCouncilmember Matarrese seconded the motion.\nUnder discussion, Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she has never known a\njudge to present a report as a matter of tie-breaking, but as a matter of evidence; the\nPlanning Board did its due diligence in reviewing the reports from all experts and\npresented findings in making a correct decision.\nOn the call for the questions, the motion carried by the following voice vote: Ayes:\nCouncilmembers Ezzy Ashcraft, Matarrese, Oddie and Vella - 4. Noes: Mayor Spencer\n- 1.\n***\nMayor Spencer called a recess at 9:20 p.m. and reconvened the meeting at 9:30 p.m.\n(17-128) Recommendation to Review and Approve the 2017 Legislative Agenda for the\nCity of Alameda.\nThe Public Information Officer gave a Power Point presentation.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired whether the Broadway/Jackson discussions have been\nstalled.\nThe Base Reuse Director responded staff has been meeting with Alameda County\nTransportation Commission (ACTC) about Broadway/Jackson: a Transportation\nCommission meeting is being planned for March; the City tried to take a different, well-\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n8\nFebruary 21, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-02-21.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-02-21", "page": 9, "text": "coordinated approach; other stakeholders are on board and staff wants to be careful not\nto stall again; Chinatown and Oakland support a basic plan; the project is not ready to\nbe discussed publicly.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated she is familiar with the stakeholders; in the past,\nthe plan never got buy-in; inquired whether it is a totally new plan, or new thinking.\nThe Base Reuse Director responded the previous plan was beneficial to Oakland; over\ntime, guidelines have changed and became more technical; having a plan that was\nreviewed in the past would be ideal; staff is working with Caltrans to overcome\nimportant issues; the new plan would focus on new solutions and be creative; the\nbuilding blocks are being tweaked to meet technical hurdles.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated there is a reference to the continued work for\nVeteran's Administration (VA); the legislative update refers to efforts in Sacramento and\nWashington DC; inquired whether there may be some roadblocks with the VA.\nThe Base Reuse Director responded there are no roadblocks; the VA is in the design\nphase; Congress mandates that the VA be turned over to other federal agencies; the\nproject is moving forward; meetings with engineering and infrastructure are being called.\nIn response to Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft's inquiry, the Base Reuse Director stated\nfunding is not entirely adequate; $80 million out of $220 million has been appropriated,\nwhich includes site preparation and offsite utilities; there has not been a lot of day to day\ncontact; but staff is aware by activities; the City is trying to help broker some\nrelationships and lend civil engineering support; she is not sure when everything will\nhappen.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether revenue taxation is a statewide\nmeasure, to which the City Manager responded in the affirmative.\nIn response to Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft's inquiry regarding reducing the threshold,\nthe City Manager stated bills have been going through the process, but have not been\nsuccessful.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the City is looking for the State to help\nwith Other Post-Employment Benefits (OPEB) and CalPers.\nThe Assistant City Manager responded the State modified the CalPers system; stated\nthere has been some discussion to do similar reform for OPEB; there is nothing going\non now, but the City would like to support any efforts.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether specific legislation addresses\naffordable housing, to which the City Manager responded in the negative; stated it is\njust general legislation.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n9\nFebruary 21, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-02-21.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-02-21", "page": 10, "text": "Vice Mayor Vella stated she reviewed the proposed Federal Aviation Administration\n(FAA) revisions to airport noise; noted the proposal deals with more than just\ncommercial airplanes; suggested removing the word \"commercial\"; she would not want\nto limit the types of aircraft.\nIn response to Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft's inquiry, Vice Mayor Vella stated the\nairport noise not only comes from planes; other factors include general ground\nelevation, climate, and the atmosphere; she wants to make sure the correction is made.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated the Maritime Administration (MARAD) is the number one\ntenant for Alameda; he would like to nurture and keep the relationship positive; he\nsupports Senate Bill 2 (SB 2) by Senator Atkins which is the $75 recording fee, which\nwould raise up to $500 million for affordable housing; Assembly Bill 71 (AB 71) is\nanother $300 million for affordable housing which will be matched and raised by\neliminating the tax deduction for second mortgages; he hopes Alameda can support a\nlot of sanctuary bills and have realistic responses to the homelessness crisis; Assembly\nBill 1643 (AB 1643) increases renters' tax credit.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated he thinks the plan is good; he hopes to receive notice\nif things move ahead at the Capital; information should be broadcast so the plan is not a\nonce a year exercise carried over from year to year; he would like to see Council\ndirection return in March for public discussion of the results of the priority setting\nmeeting; he hopes to align priorities with the legislative program; the renters' credit\nshould be moved up and there should be discussion of the housing crises; income\ninequality contributes to the housing crisis; Del Monte units will cost about $600,000 to\nbuild; Council needs to do more regarding the homeless issue; getting the government\nto declare a state of emergency should be a priority; the problem is growing; the\nlegislative approach should be with the County, State and neighboring cities; he\nsupports a tax deduction for rent paid under a certain level.\nMayor Spencer stated that she would like to figure out a place to add workforce\nhousing; projects have affordable and luxury housing, but nothing for workforce\nhousing.\nThe City Manager stated workforce housing is a high priority for Council as part of\ninclusionary housing; inquired whether Mayor Spencer wants the City to ask for State\nfunding.\nMayor Spencer responded in the affirmative; stated Council has to intentionally support\nworkforce housing, otherwise the City will not get funding.\nIn\nresponse to the City Manager's inquiry, Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated Council\nshould support legislation to add affordable and workforce housing.\nMayor Spencer stated she would like to see the housing programs spelled out as a City\npriority, not just a League of California Cities priority; she would like the City to support\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n10\nFebruary 21, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-02-21.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-02-21", "page": 11, "text": "the last mile bike and pedestrian access to BART; figuring out transportation off the\nisland is crucial.\nThe Public Information Officer stated there are more details and examples in staff report\nregarding transportation; the last mile was included.\nMayor Spencer stated the plan needs to be spelled out as a priority for Alameda; a bike\nbridge or access to BART should be included; Council is not voting tonight, just\nrecommending changes.\nCouncilmember Matarrese inquired how staff will catalogue all the changes, to which\nthe Public Information Officer responded she will review the video.\nThe City Manager inquired whether Council would like the legislative items to come\nback on the Consent Calendar, to which Councilmember Matarrese responded in the\naffirmative.\nCouncilmember Matarrese moved approval of directing the City Manager to take the\ninput from tonight and bring a revised list to Council.\nVice Mayor Vella seconded the motion.\nUnder discussion, Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the report will come\nback fully fleshed out, to which the City Manager responded staff will track the changes\nand bring it back.\nOn the call for the question, the motion carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.\n(17-129) Recommendation to Review the Strategies Matrix and Provide Direction for\nDrafting the Economic Development Strategic Plan (EDSP).\nThe Economic Development Manager gave a brief presentation and Sujata Srivastava,\nStrategic Economics, gave a Power Point presentation.\n(17-130) Mayor Spencer stated a motion is needed to consider remaining items [the\nBladium Map, Williams-Sonoma lease and referrals].\nCouncilmember Matarrese moved approval [of considering the remaining items].\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft suggested hearing to the end of the regular items and\nnot the referrals.\nMayor Spencer stated Councilmembers not being able to support hearing remaining\nitems, especially the referrals, is a problem.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n11\nFebruary 21, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-02-21.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-02-21", "page": 12, "text": "Mayor Spencer seconded the motion.\nOn the call for the question, the motion carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated housing advocates were not involved in developing the\nprincipal; there is a limited amount of land; the plan seems conflicted; Council has to\ndecide whether to focus on housing, true mixed-use, or commercial; Council needs to\nstand behind the issues deemed important; attracting hotels is an issue; yet, when a\nhotel project came forward, the project fell through with the Bay Conservation and\nDevelopment Commission (BCDC); there is a lot of disconnect; the desire is to have\nhigh quality jobs, yet there was a proposal to have a Ranch 99, which is a non-labor,\nnon-union grocer who depresses wages for all other grocery workers; key stakeholders\nwere missed left out of the process.\nVice Mayor Vella stated that she saw a lot of conflicts in the report; a number of skilled-\ntrade unions are involved in different apprenticeship programs in Alameda and none of\nthem were involved in process; as a job pathway, unions should be involved as a\nresource; she supports incubator space and nurturing space to grow businesses; one\nthing missing in the draft strategy is how incubator spaces and technology infrastructure\nwill be supported; from an IT standpoint, the work is already being done and should be\nincorporated in the Strategic Plan; converting previous car lots should also be included;\nloss of businesses impacts revenues; the City needs to work with existing businesses to\nfigure out options; the issues should be recognized in the strategic plan; revenue\ngeneration should also be a focus.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated housing, transportation and jobs should rise to the\ntop at the priority setting workshop; she would like to see a focus on housing; figuring\nout funding is important; inquired what the reference to the need for student housing\nmeans.\nMs. Srivastava responded one of the ideas from the Peralta Community College District\nwas exploring adding student housing to the College of Alameda campus; details are\nnot worked out, but if the idea could be fleshed out if it is of interest.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated she would not be interested in non-funded\nmandates; tourism bumps down to a lower tier; the need for hotels for the business\ncommunity should be kept in mind; transportation and jobs are important; she is\nintrigued by the suggestion that Alameda should work with other cities with maritime\nindustries; the City has ageing infrastructure of the piers and grapples with the leases\nfor maritime businesses; she is interested in knowing if there are examples of\npartnerships.\nMs. Srivastava stated there are examples for other types of infrastructure; the idea\ncame directly out of a maritime industry focus group; the Metropolitan Transportation\nCommission (MTC) should play a role rather than going at it alone.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n12\nFebruary 21, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-02-21.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-02-21", "page": 13, "text": "Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated the City is open to all suggestions, Alameda is an\nisland and needs maritime industry.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated there is a fundamental flaw on how the plan is being\ndeveloped; the plan is not community driven, it is staff driven; Council is expected to sift\nit out; there is no mention of the Economic Development Commission (EDC); when the\nEDC was first formed, its focus was to provide input and challenge ideas; some things\nin the current proposed plan are exactly the same as the 1996 plan; the 1996 plan\ndelivered a number of foundations for Alameda Landing and the resurrection of South\nShore; he does not understand the Plan not addressing the new way businesses have\ncome to Alameda Point; businesses have not come by usual ways of marketing, they\nhave come by word of mouth; he is surprised the City has not figured out a way to use\nsaid strategy; Alameda has to become cutting edge and should look forward instead of\nbackward; more input and more ideas are needed from the Economic Development\nAdvisory Panel (EDAP) and Planning Board; there is lot of value in using the talents on\nthe two boards.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated there is more than one way of reaching a solution\nsuch as community workshops and meetings of bodies; she does not see resurrecting\nthe EDC; she agrees with the need to be cutting edge; urged staff to provide\nopportunities for Alameda Point businesses to invite folks to visit; the City needs a\nbetter website; Alameda should look at what other Cities are doing.\nMayor Spencer stated the Plan comments are way all too over the place; she does not\nlike \"quirky\", she likes \"unique\" and \"magical\"; name recognition is not a problem; a\ndining sector and retail is not a solution; there should be higher paying jobs; being paid\nminimum wage is a serious problem; she supports increasing the minimum wage; the\nstrategy cannot be all over the place.\nCouncilmember Oddie concurred with Councilmember Matarrese; stated there is a\nconflict about vacancy rates; another conflict that should be discussed is tracking\nexisting business and finding more creative ways to attract businesses.\n(17-131) Resolution No. 15237, \"Approving the Alameda Point Bladium Tentative Parcel\nMap Application: PLN16-0544.\" Adopted.\nThe Base Reuse Director gave a brief presentation.\nCouncilmember Matarrese moved adoption of the resolution approving the Alameda\nPoint Bladium Tentative Parcel Map Application: PLN16-0544.\nVice Mayor Vella seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.\n(17-132) Introduction of Ordinance Approving a Lease and Authorizing the City\nManager to Execute Documents Necessary to Implement the Terms of a 3 Year Lease\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n13\nFebruary 21, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-02-21.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-02-21", "page": 14, "text": "with No Extension Options with Williams-Sonoma, Inc. a Delaware Corporation, for\nBuilding 169, Suite 102 Located at 1680 Viking Street, Alameda Point. Introduced. [In\naccordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), this project is\nCategorically Exempt under the CEQA Guidelines Section 15301(c - Existing\nFacilities.]\nThe Assistant Community Development Director gave a brief presentation.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft moved introduction of the ordinance approving a lease\nand authorizing the City Manager to execute documents necessary to implement the\nterms of a 3 year lease with no extension options with Williams-Sonoma, Inc. a\nDelaware Corporation, for Building 169, Suite 102 located at 1680 Viking Street,\nAlameda Point.\nVice Mayor Vella seconded the motion.\nUnder discussion, Mayor Spencer stated there are 10,000 visitors every month and that\nis how people are finding Alameda.\nOn the call for the questions, the motion carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.\nCITY MANAGER COMMUNICATIONS\n(17-133) The City Manager announced there have been concerns about the number of\nU.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) vehicles on Webster Street; there is\na customs office at Mariner Square and the vehicles are just employees going to lunch\nand not for any other reason.\nORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA\n(17-134) Rasheed Shabazz, Alameda, invited the public to a presentation on the\nStruggles of African Americans for Housing in Alameda on February 28th at the College\nof Alameda Student Lounge.\nCOUNCIL REFERRALS\n(17-135) Consider: 1) Directing Staff to Provide an Update on the Negotiations between\nthe City and the Friends of the Alameda Animal Shelter (FAAS) at the March 7, 2017\nCity Council Meeting; and 2) If a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) has not been\nReached between the City and FAAS, that Council Provide Direction to Staff on the\nTerms of a MOU between the City and FAAS. (Mayor Spencer)\nMayor Spencer made brief comments.\nStated she was looking forward to robust discussion about FAAS; similar to the\ndiscussion on oak trees: Swati Shah, FAAS.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n14\nFebruary 21, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-02-21.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-02-21", "page": 15, "text": "Stated the strength of volunteer force keeps FAAS going: Marcy Morrison Pearce,\nFAAS.\n***\n(17-136) Councilmember Matarrese moved approval of continuing the meeting past\n11:00 p.m.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice\nvote - 5.\n***\nUrged Council to accept the FAAS proposal: Tenzin Petersen, Alameda.\nStated FAAS will lose volunteers if funds are not received to continue providing service:\nPatricia Phillips, FAAS.\nExpressed support for FAAS funding request; stated she loves volunteering at FAAS:\nSusan Getman, FAAS.\nUrged staff to update the website with more accurate information; announced an MOU\nwith Alameda Point Collaborative (APC) has been drafted to begin working with APC on\nan ongoing basis: Deb Knowles, FAAS.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated she toured the shelter; the City only received the\nFAAS financials in January; the matter is on the next meeting on March 7th. progress is\nbeing made.\nMayor Spencer stated it is critical to have certainty that the issue is being heard.\nThe City Manager stated there has been movement on both sides; details are more\napproachable and it feels like there is good will on both sides; the City does not intend\nto bring the operation back under the Police Department; staff is working on details; the\nitem is scheduled for March 7th closed session; staff will meet with the FAAS board and\ncome back to Council soon after.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated the plan sounds reasonable; that he does not want to\nsee a sign on the door that FAAS is closed because there is no money.\nThe City Manager stated until a decision is made, FAAS employees and animals are\nsecure.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated the discussion of the true budget and projections is\nneeded; everyone will be in better place than rushing through; his expectation is not to\ncome out of closed session until there is a deal.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n15\nFebruary 21, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-02-21.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-02-21", "page": 16, "text": "Mayor Spencer stated she does not think there is a conflict; many items have been\ndiscussed in closed session and then in open session to update the public and people\ncan weigh in on the issue.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated giving direction in open session is a bad idea and not\ngood faith bargaining.\nMayor Spencer stated Council could give direction to staff if an agreement is not\nreached; there should still be an update for the public.\nThe City Attorney stated negotiations are better done in closed session; staff has\nadvised FAAS that there will be a closed session on March 7th, the draft document will\ncome back to Council; she recommends against announcing anything in open session.\nVice Mayor Vella stated Council normally handles contract negotiations in closed\nsession; there are open lines of communication on both sides; she wants to empower\nstaff to get a deal done which would be the point of the closed session.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether the website can be revised in the meantime, to which\nthe City Manager responded in the affirmative.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated typically negotiations do not occur in public; suggested\nrather than updating websites, both sides take down their websites and stop the press\nreleases and letter writing; clamping down and making a deal is better than getting\nmisinformation.\nMayor Spencer stated the matter is taking way too much time, it is appropriate for\nCouncil to give direction.\nThe City Manager stated the problem with not meeting in closed session to get price\nand terms is Council does not give the FAAS board the opportunity to review the\ninformation to see if it works.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated she does not think Council could stop the first\namendment.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated dueling press releases are not helpful.\nMayor Spencer moved approval of directing staff to provide an update on the\nnegotiations between the City and FAAS at the March 7, 2017 City Council meeting.\nCouncilmember Matarrese seconded the motion, with the amendment that the update\nbe the reporting out from the closed session, which FAILED by the following voice vote:\nAyes: Councilmember Matarrese and Mayor Spencer - 2.\nAbstentions:\nCouncilmembers Ezzy Ashcraft, Oddie and Vella - 3.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n16\nFebruary 21, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-02-21.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-02-21", "page": 17, "text": "(17-137) Consider: 1) Sending a Letter to Alameda Health System and Appropriate\nHealth Insurance Plans regarding the Lack of Contracts Covering Many Alameda\nResidents and Urging Them to Reach Agreements; and 2) Creating a Committee to\nReview the Issue of Providing Access to on Island Heathcare for Alameda Residents\nand Make Recommendations of How to Proceed. (Mayor Spencer and Councilmember\nOddie)\nMayor Spencer and Councilmember Oddie made brief comments.\nCouncilmember Matarrese moved approval of the referral.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice\nvote - 5.\n(17-138) Consider Directing Staff to: 1) Identify All Accounts with Wells Fargo and\nInvestments in Wells Fargo Securities; 2) Draft a Request for Proposal (RFP) for\nBanking Services for the City of Alameda; and 3) Exclude Wells Fargo from the RFP\nprocess and Refrain from Making New Investments in Wells Fargo Securities for a\nPeriod of Three Years. (Vice Mayor Vella and Councilmember Oddie)\nCouncilmember Oddie and Vice Mayor Vella made brief comments.\nIn response to Mayor Spencer's inquiry, Vice Mayor Vella stated the request is to not\nmake any investments with Wells Fargo after Council votes on it tonight.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated the City Treasurer could come back with a report; some\naccounts may not be feasible; he would like to know more information and be socially\nresponsible before issuing an RFP.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether Council should vote now or wait for a report to come\nback.\nThe City Manager stated she interprets the item as a referral; the question is whether to\ncompile data and bring it back to Council to make a determination; in the meantime, the\nCity will not make any additional investments in Wells Fargo.\nStated massive financial institutions are making irresponsible investments; urged\nCouncil to define the community by choosing financial institutions who exhibit socially\nresponsible actions: Gaby Dolphin, Alameda Progressives.\nSubmitted information; stated he fully supports the proposal; urged Council to consider\nusing a local credit union as a best choice for a banking business: Maxwell Bunshadt.\nDiscussed a prisoner who suffered maltreatment and died because the company that\ncontrolled the for-profit correctional facility valued profit over human life; stated Wells\nFargo promotes the abuse of practices for private prisons; urged Council to end\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n17\nFebruary 21, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-02-21.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-02-21", "page": 18, "text": "Alameda's relationship with Wells Fargo: Benjamin Davis, Berkeley.\nUrged Council to approve the proposition and investigate other measures which would\nensure Alameda does business with socially responsible institutions: Cheri Johansen,\nAlameda Progressives.\nStated that his group led a campaign to get the University of California to divest from\nprivate prisons; he supports the proposal; urged Council to make investments that align\nwith good values: Yoel Haile, African Black Coalition.\nStated that his unions have taken a position against the Dakota Access Pipeline; he\nsupports the referral; urged Council to consider using credit unions: Marcus Holder,\nAlameda resident, ILW Local 10 and San Francisco Labor Council.\nStated that she supports Council's efforts to make Alameda a responsible and\nhumanitarian city: Jessica Reed, Alameda.\nSubmitted information; urged Council to divest from Wells Fargo; named other financial\ninstitutions that are better choices: Laura Kindsvater, Alameda.\nStated that she hopes Alameda will be able to divest from Wells Fargo and move on to\nother financial institutions: Becca Loux, Oakland.\nStated that she appreciates being heard as part of the civic process; urged support of\nthe referral: Austen Wianecki-Wang, Alameda.\nListed reasons why Alameda should divest from Wells Fargo: Sacha Moustakas,\nAlameda.\nThe City Treasurer stated the process has been happening for a couple months;\nAlameda has a good grasp on the situation; he is happy to work with the Council and\nthe City if the referral is approved; the plan is to do the annual investment policy review\nin six weeks; decisions can be incorporated in the investment policy; it sounds like the\nmoney managers need to be notified as soon as tomorrow morning; inquired whether\nthe issue will be handled through a revision of the investment policy, which would be the\nformal way, or have an interim ad hoc solution.\nVice Mayor Vella inquired what the ad hoc solution would entail, to which the City\nTreasurer responded Alameda would be best served as an organization to give the\nmoney managers formal direction, which would be through the investment policy;\nsuggested the referral be to discuss the issue more in-depth and plan to approve an\ninvestment policy in April which will incorporate any revisions and give formal notice on\nhow to address the three securities owned today; stated the money managers would be\nvery clear on how to execute the City's instructions.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n18\nFebruary 21, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-02-21.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-02-21", "page": 19, "text": "Vice Mayor Vella stated she would be amenable to the City Treasurer's suggestion; she\nwould rather have quality than misinformation.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated the City Treasurer has a good point; he does not want\nthe City to be part owner of a company who defrauds people and prisons; he would like\nno more investments in the interim, then wait for the investment policy in April.\nThe City Treasurer stated between now and when a policy is approved, which reflects\nCouncil's conclusions, it would be difficult to instruct staff and the people handling the\nmoney on a day-to-day basis that no more money should be going in that direction;\nsuggested a more thoughtful, formal approach on how to address the issue, which\nwould be comprehensively through the investment policy.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated Alameda should not invest any more money;\ninformation is needed to set the parameters; on the investment side, more securities\nshould not be bought until there is criteria to measure.\nThe City Treasurer inquired whether he should call the investment broker tomorrow and\ninstruct them not to buy anymore Wells Fargo securities, to which each member of the\nCouncil responded in the affirmative.\nMayor Spencer stated Alameda will not be purchasing any more securities and the City\nTreasurer would come back with a plan on divesting the current investments.\nThe City Attorney stated the City Treasurer is hoping to give direction to the investment\nfolks with the investment policy instead of making a phone call tomorrow morning.\nThe City Treasurer stated he understands what Council is aiming for, but the best way\nto do so is by the investment policy, which addresses investments going forward as well\nas current investments; verbal instruction is not enough to ensure direction will be\nexecuted; what is happening now is the investment policy is being modified through the\nreferral at 12:15 a.m.\nMayor Spencer stated Council should at least be able to give the verbal direction; if\nverbal direction is not sufficient, Council will get the update in April and do more; at this\npoint a majority would like the referral to be revised to read \"refrain from making new\ninvestments in Wells Fargo Securities until further Council direction.\"\nCouncilmember Oddie moved approval of the entire referral with the Mayor Spencer's\namendment to add \"until further Council direction.\"\nMayor Spencer seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.\nCOUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS\n(17-139) Councilmember Oddie thanked the City Treasurer and staff; stated the City\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n19\nFebruary 21, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-02-21.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-02-21", "page": 20, "text": "Treasurer updated the investment policy last year and now the City is not investing in\nany coal companies.\nADJOURNMENT\n(17-140) There being no further business, Mayor Spencer adjourned the meeting at\n12:22 a.m. in memory of Betty Sanderson, John Villa, Solana Henneberry, Michael\nDevlin, and Dona Hoard.\nRespectfully submitted,\nLara Weisiger\nCity Clerk\nThe agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Sunshine Ordinance.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n20\nFebruary 21, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-02-21.pdf"}