{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-03-21", "page": 1, "text": "MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING\nTUESDAY- - - MARCH 21, 2017--5:00 P.M.\nMayor Spencer convened the meeting at 5:00 p.m.\nRoll Call -\nPresent:\nCouncilmembers Ezzy Ashcraft, Matarrese, Oddie, Vella and\nMayor Spencer - 5.\nAbsent:\nNone.\nPublic Comment\nEric Gantos, Hot Rod, submitted a letter; urged the Council to vote to take the next step\nand have the City negotiate a deal based on the terms of the Letter of Intent (LOI).\nEerik Hantsoo, Sila Nanotechnologies, outlined the history of Sila and the demand for\nbattery technology; stated Sila is expanding into commercial deployment; requested to\nbe permitted to negotiate with the City for Building 510.\nMichael Laufer, Kairos Power, stated Kairos Power also has a proposal for Building\n530; Kairos Power is a nuclear energy and technology company focused on developing\nsafe and clean energy; outlined the company's growth; stated the building would be\nused as a research facility and radioactive materials would not be used on the site.\nThe meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider:\n(17-168) 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: RG14746654 &\nRG16823346\n(17-169) Conference with Real Property Negotiators (Pursuant to Government Code \u00a7\n54956.8); Property: Alameda Point - Building 530 - 120 W. Oriskany Avenue, Alameda,\nCA; City Negotiator: Nanette Mocanu/Cushman & Wakefield; Organizations\nRepresented: Hot Rod Shop Inc., Kairos Power, LLC and Free Wire Technologies;\nIssue Under Negotiation: Real Property Negotiations Price and Terms of Payment\n(17-170) Conference with Real Property Negotiators (Pursuant to Government Code \u00a7\n54956.8); Property: Tennis Courts near O'Club Area (no address); City Negotiator:\nNanette Mocanu/Cushman & Wakefield; Organizations Represented: Gotham\nGreens\\810 Humboldt Street, Brooklyn, NY 11222; Issue Under Negotiation: Real\nProperty Negotiations Price and Terms of Payment\nSpecial Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nMarch 21, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-03-21.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-03-21", "page": 2, "text": "Following the Closed Session, the meeting was reconvened and Mayor Spencer\nannounced direction was given to staff regarding all three matters.\nAdjournment\nThere being no further business, Mayor Spencer adjourned the meeting at 6:20 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\nMarch 21, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-03-21.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-03-21", "page": 3, "text": "MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING\nTUESDAY- - - MARCH 21, 2017--7:00 P.M.\nMayor Spencer convened the meeting at 7:00 p.m. Boys and Girls Club members led\nthe Pledge of Allegiance.\nROLL CALL -\nPresent:\nCouncilmembers Ezzy Ashcraft, Matarrese, Oddie,\nVella and Mayor Spencer - 5.\nAbsent:\nNone.\nAGENDA CHANGES\n(17-171) Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft requested the resolutions of appointment\n[paragraph no. 17- ] be bifurcated.\nPROCLAMATIONS, SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY AND ANNOUNCEMENTS\n(17-172) Mayor Spencer did a reading on action for the Season for Nonviolence.\n(17-173) Mayor Spencer made an announcement regarding an 8 month extension for\nthe Cross Alameda Trail.\n(17-174) Proclamation Declaring March 27 through March 31, 2017, as National Boys &\nGirls Club Week.\nMayor Spencer read the proclamation and presented it to James Adkins, Boys & Girls\nClub.\n(17-175) Proclamation Declaring March 2017 as American Red Cross Month.\nMayor Spencer read the proclamation and presented it to Jack McCredie, American\nRed Cross.\nMr. McCredie and the Associate Civil Engineer made brief comments.\nORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA\n(17-176) Laura Woodard, Alameda Renters Coalition, outlined her experience with\nrenting from a mom and pop landlord; stated Council needs to remove the Sunset\nClause and end no-cause evictions in Alameda.\n(17-177) Sharon Golden, Alameda City Cannabis Community, stated there are cannabis\nbusinesses, other than cultivation and dispensaries, that might be better fitting for the\ncommunity; urged Council to prioritize the cannabis referral on the priority setting list.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nMarch 21, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-03-21.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-03-21", "page": 4, "text": "(17-178) Richard Bangert, Alameda, discussed an information request he made to the\nVeterans Administrations regarding plans for wetland mitigation at the former Base;\nshowed redacted documents; urged the Council to request the documents.\n(17-179) Claudia Young, Housing Authority Director of Rent and Community Programs,\ninvited the community to an upcoming meeting with the local faith-based groups on April\n6 at 10:00 a.m.\n(17-180) Gaby Dolphin, Alameda, discussed an incident of possible harassment;\ncomplimented the Police Chief and Department.\nCONSENT CALENDAR\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft moved approval of the Consent Calendar.\nCouncilmember Matarrese 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(*17-181) Minutes of the Regular City Council Meeting Held on February 17, 2017 and\nthe Special and Regular City Council Meetings Held on February 21, 2017. (City Clerk).\nApproved.\n(*17-182) Ratified bills in the amount of $2,319,011.14.\n(*17-183) Recommendation to Accept Report on Delinquent Business Accounts and\nDelinquent Integrated Waste Management Accounts. Accepted. (Finance 2450)\n(*17-184) Recommendation to Accept the Quarterly Sales Tax Report for the Period\nEnding December 31, 2016 Collected During the Period July 1, 2016 to September 30,\n2016. Accepted. (Finance 2410)\n(*17-185) Recommendation to Authorize the City Manager to Execute an Amendment to\nan Agreement with Russell Resources, Inc. to Extend Term until June of 2018 and to\nAdd the Amount of $102,500 for a Total Contract Amount of $779,900 for Environmental\nConsulting Services Related to Alameda Point. Accepted. (Base Reuse 819099)\n(*17-186) Recommendation to Approve the Second Amendment to the Services\nAgreement between the City of Alameda and the Housing Authority of the City of\nAlameda to Extend the Term of the Agreement to June 30, 2017, and Add $50,000 for a\nRent Program Office Relocation Allowance. Accepted; and\n(*17-186A) Resolution No. 15243, \"Amending the General Fund and Rent Stabilization\nFund Operating Budget for Fiscal Year 2016-17.\" Adopted. (Housing 265)\n(*17-187) Recommendation to Approve the 2017 Legislative Agenda for the City of\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nMarch 21, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-03-21.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-03-21", "page": 5, "text": "Alameda. Accepted. (City Manager 2110)\n(*17-188) Recommendation to Adopt Tow Specifications and Authorize a Request for\nProposals for Emergency and Non-Emergency Vehicle Towing Services Contract for\nthe Alameda Police Department. Accepted. (Police 3123)\n(*17-189) Recommendation to Accept the Work of Ranger Pipeline Inc. for Lagoon\nSeawall Trunk Sewer Relocation Project, No. P.W. 01-12-03. Accepted. (Public Works\n602)\n(*17-190) Resolution No. 15244, \"Approving the Final Map and Authorizing Execution of\nthe Public Improvement Agreement for Tract 8336 for the First Final Map for Site A,\nPhase 1 at Alameda Point.\" Adopted. (Public Works 310)\n(*17-191) Resolution No. 15245, \"Authorizing Naming the Jean Sweeney Open Space\nPark Picnic Pavilion the Alameda Rotary Pavilion.\" Adopted. (Recreation and Parks\n280-5110)\n(*17-192) Resolution No. 15246, \"Approving Workforce Changes at Alameda Municipal\nPower: A) Delete Four Positions of Electric Maintenance Technician; B) Add Two New\nPositions of Meter Technician and Add Two New Positions of Substation Technician;\nand C) Amend the Salary Schedule of International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers\n(IBEW) to Add the Classification Titles of Meter Technician and Substation Technician,\nEffective April 2, 2017.\" Adopted. (Human Resources 2510)\n(*17-193) Ordinance No. 3176, \"Approving a Lease and Authorizing the City Manager to\nExecute Documents Necessary to Implement the Terms of a Lease with Delphi\nProductions, Inc. a California Corporation, for a Ten-Year Lease with One Five-Year\nRenewal Option for Building 39 Located at 950 West Tower Street at Alameda Point.\"\nFinally passed. [In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA),\nthis project is Categorically Exempt under the CEQA Guidelines Section 15301( -\nExisting Facilities.]\nREGULAR AGENDA ITEMS\n(17-194) Resolution No. 15247, \"Appointing Mindi Chen as a Member of the Recreation\nand Park Commission.\" Adopted; and\n(17-194A) Resolution No. 15248, \"Appointing Jeff Cambra as a Member of the Rent\nReview Advisory Committee.\" Adopted.\nCouncilmember Matarrese moved adoption of the resolution appointing Mindi Chen.\nCouncilmember Oddie seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote -\n5.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nMarch 21, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-03-21.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-03-21", "page": 6, "text": "Councilmember Matarrese moved adoption of the resolution appointing Jeff Cambra.\nCouncilmember Oddie seconded the motion.\nUnder discussion, Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she appreciates Mr.\nCambra volunteering for the RRAC position, but there is a mixture of opinion on both\nsides; the RRAC has gone through a lot of challenges and she would like the situation\nto be as non-controversial as possible; she will not be supporting Mr. Cambra's\nappointment.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated Mr. Cambra's understanding of the Rent Ordinance and\nhis strength and experience as a mediator will be helpful to the RRAC.\nOn the call for the question, the motion carried by the following voice vote: Ayes:\nCouncilmembers Matarrese, Oddie, Vella and Mayor Spencer - 4. Noes:\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft - 1.\nThe City Clerk administered the Oath of Office and presented Ms. Chen and Mr.\nCambra with certificates of appointment.\n(17-195) Public Hearing to Consider Introduction of Ordinance Adopting the Alameda\nPoint Main Street Neighborhood Specific Plan. Introduced. (Base Reuse 819099)\nThe Redevelopment Project Manager gave a Power Point presentation.\nCouncilmember Matarrese inquired whether adopting the plan would preclude city\nowned units from being sold, to which the Redevelopment Project Manager responded\nin the negative.\nIn response to Mayor Spencer's inquiry, the Redevelopment Project Manager stated the\nscenarios were included as analysis examples.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether Scenario 4 is off the table, to which the\nRedevelopment Project Manager responded the scenarios are not being discussed at\nthis time; stated the next step would be to go through a developer selection process.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired whether Scenario 4 shows the highest percentage of\nworkforce units that could be done while still meeting the feasibility threshold.\nJames Edison, Wildan Financial Services, responded in the affirmative; stated Scenario\n4 shows the policy tradeoffs and mixes of units; each scenario illustrates the range of\npossibilities; Council has discretion to choose how many units make the project feasible.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired whether the units will be for sale or rent, to which Mr.\nEdison responded for sale.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nMarch 21, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-03-21.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-03-21", "page": 7, "text": "Councilmember Oddie inquired whether the plan would go back to the Planning Board\nor if Council is giving direction tonight.\nThe Redevelopment Project Manager responded the Planning Board already approved\nthe plan and recommended Council approval.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired whether the Planning Board had an opportunity to\nweigh-in on the mix of scenarios.\nThe Base Reuse Director responded the Planning Board was involved in the planning,\nbut not the Request for Qualifications (RFQ); the Council is the property owner and\nmakes the ultimate decision on how to proceed.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated there are significant planning implications; he hopes the\nPlanning Board could have input on the RFQ.\nThe Base Reuse Director stated staff contemplates following the same Site A RFQ\nprocess; developers would have to demonstrate the ability to develop a plan that the\nPlanning Board and the community would like; Council would then have an indication of\nwhat the community desires before entering into a long term contract with a developer.\nIn response to Mayor Spencer's inquiry, the Base Reuse Director stated the 277 units in\nScenario 4 is the number of units needed to pay for infrastructure and have units left\nover for north of Midway; there are hundreds of scenarios; 277 units was used to\nprovide a comparison.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired what is the advantage of having a higher net\nresidual value per unit.\nThe Base Reuse Director responded the infrastructure cost and different product types\nhave different value; single family homes have lower construction costs but use more\nland, whereas apartments or high-density townhomes may have lower per-unit residual\nland values, leaving land which can be used for other uses; having a higher net residual\nvalue pays for as much infrastructure or amenities as possible; however, having too\nmuch left over land is not good; there needs to be a balance.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated the plan is not just looking at bottom line; there\nare intangible objectives such as the need to provide housing at different price points.\nThe Base Reuse Director stated staff tried to illustrate scenarios to help confront some\nof the tradeoffs; infrastructure is crucial but land use types are important; everything\ngoes to the bottom line in terms of what is affordable; balancing all the different policy\nobjectives is a tough job for staff and Council.\nThanked everyone involved; stated the plan has had ample input from the community\nthrough online surveys, workshops, and meetings; urged approval of the ordinance:\nDoug Biggs, Alameda Point Collaborative (APC).\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nMarch 21, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-03-21.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-03-21", "page": 8, "text": "Stated that she is proud of the plan which has taken time and input to develop: Liz\nVarela, Building Futures with Women and Children.\nStated MidPen is excited to collaborate on the project and is impressed with the\ninclusiveness; the plan creates a cohesive neighborhood: Abby Goldware, MidPen\nHousing Corporation.\nStated everyone should be proud of the plan, which includes workforce housing;\ndiscussed housing prices: Former Councilmember Tony Daysog, Alameda.\nUrged approval; stated the main street plan will foster many opportunities: Marguerite\nBachand, Operation Dignity.\nStated the Planning Board and City Council asked for levels of analysis that staff could\nuse to develop a plan which reflects the value of the community; urged Council\napproval: Ada Chan, Association of Bay Area Governments/Metropolitan Transportation\nCommission.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated the workforce housing is on a different tract than APC;\ninquired whether the APC plan will move forward now, regardless of how other items\niron out.\nThe Base Reuse Director responded in the affirmative; stated staff is moving very\nquickly and will return on April 4th with a term sheet with MidPen; staff is hoping to bring\na Disposition and Development Agreement (DDA) and a Development Plan to the\nPlanning Board in April; the catch is APC needs the City's support to finance the\ninfrastructure; the RFQ for the market rate units need to be expedited to get the\ninfrastructure; next steps include outlining an RFQ to hash out policy issues and get the\nRFQ out after Council approval.\nIn\nresponse to Mayor Spencer's inquiry, the Base Reuse Director stated $53 million\nmeets the full burden of all of the acres of development south of Midway, which is\ncomparable to Site A; the City was able to negotiate additional acres in Site A; in this\nplan, infrastructure is subsidized for land that is not going to generate any value for\nAPC; the infrastructure adjacent to the property is being paid for as well.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether staff is looking for specificity from Council, to which the\nBase Reuse Director responded in the negative; stated staff will develop an outline and\nreturn to Council with recommendations.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she thinks the plan has gotten better with\ndifferent iterations; the plan has a much needed model for housing which the City can\nmake an excellent development; Alameda is one of a very small number of cities that\ndid not just pay for homeless offsite; older infrastructure has been challenging; changes\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nMarch 21, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-03-21.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-03-21", "page": 9, "text": "do not happen overnight; the project is an appropriate place to house the formerly\nhomeless; she hopes the plan moves forward.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated that he hopes Council considers deed restrictions\nwhen defining workforce housing; he wants to make sure public funds are not gifted; the\nplan is long overdue and he is ready to vote for it.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated that he appreciates the scenarios broken down; workforce\nhousing should be addressed; he is looking forward to moving forward.\nCouncilmember Oddie moved introduction of the ordinance.\nCouncilmember Matarrese seconded the motion.\nUnder discussion, Vice Mayor Vella stated the matter has been a long time coming;\ndiscussions have been productive; the plan is something the City can be proud of and\nhas a lot of potential; more workforce housing in Scenario 4 is exciting; affordable\nhousing is important; it is a nice step forward; she supports the project.\nIn response to Mayor Spencer's inquiry, the Base Reuse Director stated the property is\npublic property.\nMayor Spencer stated that people's property should be for the people; she voted no on\nthe last go round when the plan had a high-end apartment builder; she is excited to see\nthe additional 67 units and the breakdown in Scenario 4 which is what she was looking\nfor and what a project on the people's property should look like; she hopes the project\nends up with the 343 units suggested in Scenario 4; asking hard questions is critical;\nshe would not support Scenarios 1, 2, or 3 because the numbers are not there; she\nhopes the community would advocate for Scenario 4.\nOn the call for the question, the motion carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.\n(17-196) Summary: 1) Public Hearing to Consider Forming City of Alameda Community\nFacilities District (CFD) (Alameda Point Public Services District), 2) Form the District, 3)\nCall for a Special Election, 4) Declare the Results of the Election, and 5) Introduce an\nOrdinance Levying Special Taxes within the District.\nPublic Hearing to Consider Formation of City of Alameda Community Facilities District\nNo. 17-1 (Alameda Point Public Services District) Called Pursuant to Resolution of\nIntention to Form the CFD Adopted March 7, 2017;\n(17-196A) Resolution No. 15249, \"Of Formation of the City of Alameda Community\nFacilities District No. 17-1 (Alameda Point Public Services District), Authorizing the Levy\nof a Special Tax within the District, Preliminarily Establishing an Appropriations Limit for\nthe District, and Submitting Levy of the Special Tax and the Establishment of the\nAppropriations Limit to the Qualified Electors of the District.\" Adopted;\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nMarch 21, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-03-21.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-03-21", "page": 10, "text": "(17-196B) Resolution No. 15250, \"Calling Special Election of the Owner of Property\nwithin the District to Approve the Levy of Special Taxes and an Appropriations Limit\nWithin City of Alameda Community Facilities District No. 17-1 (Alameda Point Public\nServices District); Conduct Special Election.\" Adopted;\n(17-196C) Resolution No. 15251, \"Declaring Results of Special Election and, if Two-\nThirds (2/3) or More of the Votes Cast Are in Favor of the District, Direct Recording of\nNotice of Special Tax Lien - Alameda Point Public Services District.\" Adopted; and\n(17-196D) Introduction of Ordinance Levying Special Taxes within the City of Alameda\nCommunity Facilities District No. 17-1 (Alameda Point Public Services District).\nIntroduced. (Base Reuse 858)\nThe Base Reuse Director gave a brief presentation.\nMayor Spencer opened the Public Hearing.\nThere being no speakers, Mayor Spencer closed the Public Hearing.\nCouncilmember Matarrese moved adoption of the resolution of formation of the City of\nAlameda Community Facilities District No. 17-1 (Alameda Point Public Services\nDistrict), authorizing the levy of a special tax within the District, preliminarily establishing\nan appropriations limit for the District, and submitting levy of the Special Tax and the\nestablishment of the appropriations limit to the qualified electors of the District.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice\nvote - 5.\nCouncilmember Oddie moved adoption of the resolution calling special election of the\nowner of property within the District to approve the levy of special taxes and an\nappropriations limit within City of Alameda Community Facilities District No. 17-1,\nAlameda Point Public Services District.\nVice Mayor Vella seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.\nThe City Clerk opened the ballot and announced the ballot has 170 votes in favor and\nnone against.\nThe Mayor announced being that the vote is in favor, the final actions could proceed.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft moved adoption of the resolution declaring results of\nspecial election and, if two-thirds (2/3) or more of the votes cast are in favor of the\nDistrict, direct recording of Notice of Special Tax Lien - Alameda Point Public Services\nDistrict.\nCouncilmember Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice\nvote - 5.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nMarch 21, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-03-21.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-03-21", "page": 11, "text": "Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft moved introduction of ordinance levying special taxes\nwithin the City of Alameda Community Facilities District No. 17-1 (Alameda Point Public\nServices District).\n***\nMayor Spencer called a recess at 8:28 p.m. and reconvened the meeting at 8:36 p.m.\n***\n(17-197) Resolution No. 15252, \"Amending the Fiscal Year (FY) 2016-17 Operating and\nCapital Improvement Program Budget.\" Adopted. (Finance 2410)\nThe Finance Director gave a Power Point presentation.\nMayor Spencer stated the budget is coming to Council at the last minute; inquired\nwhether Council has to accept the changes tonight.\nThe Finance Director responded that some parts are appropriate to approve tonight and\nsome can wait.\nIn response to Mayor Spencer's inquiry, the City Manager stated staff would like the\nEmergency Operations Center (EOC) and Fire Station 3 items to move forward tonight.\nMayor Spencer stated she is concerned the EOC and Fire Station 3 items are coming to\nCouncil for the first time tonight with no time for review.\nThe City Manager stated there was an update in November but there were no finalized\nnumbers at that time.\nThe Finance Director continued the presentation.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she is concerned about equipment breaking\ndown; inquired what is being done to avoid vehicle breakdowns in the future.\nThe Fire Chief responded a lot of vehicle maintenance has been deferred in the past; all\nvehicles are now being serviced regularly; he has revamped the vehicle replacement\nprogram which will be a good program going forward once the maintenance is caught\nup.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether other departments asked for more money at this time,\nto which the Finance Director responded in the negative; stated there have been no\nrequests for more money on the expense side.\nMayor Spencer stated there were a lot of department requests in the original budget;\nmost departments had to wait for the next budget cycle; now two departments are\nasking for additional expenditures.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nMarch 21, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-03-21.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-03-21", "page": 12, "text": "expenditures.\nIn response to Mayor Spencer's inquiry regarding why other departments were told to\nwait, the Finance Director stated she recommended the departments wait until the two-\nyear budget cycle because staff could review the bigger picture Citywide.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether there is a list of outstanding items that were not funded\nbefore.\nThe Finance Director responded the list is not included in the report.\nIn response to Mayor Spencer's inquiry, the Assistant City Manager stated the majority\nof the General Fund is for public safety.\nMayor Spencer stated that she would have liked to have an attachment which lists the\ndepartments that have to wait for the next budget cycle.\nThe Assistant City Manager stated staff would be contemplating other department\nrequests if they were urgent.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated the Police and Fire Departments are not asking to spend\nadditional funds on Fire Fighters or Police Officers.\nThe Finance Director continued presentation.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she appreciates the allocation of Fire\nDepartment funds, but the cost overrun for the EOC and Fire Station 3 is about $1.4\nmillion.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated the EOC is another $0.5 million.\nThe Finance Director continued presentation.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether Measure B funds are being\nreprogrammed to the pavement management project, to which the Interim Public Works\nDirector responded in the affirmative; stated the pavement management project is\nroughly $5 million to make sure funds are a match to ensure the Estuary Crossing\nShuttle.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she hates to pit one fund against another;\ninquired how the determination was made to get the $78,000.\nThe Interim Public Works Director responded the commitment to the Estuary Crossing\nShuttle is until June 30th; the matching dollars were not included in the approved budget;\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nMarch 21, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-03-21.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-03-21", "page": 13, "text": "the onus is on the City to find the matching dollars; Alameda's pavement condition has\nmoved to good range for the first time in a decade according to Metropolitan\nTransportation Commission (MTC).\nThe Finance Director continued presentation.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired why staff did not budget enough on parking meters.\nThe Interim Public Works Director responded the credit card fee was a difficult variable\nto know during the development stage; staff now knows the charges with the data.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired whether the fee is flat, to which the Interim Public Works\nDirector responded in the affirmative.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired what the parking meter revenue is, to which the\nInterim Public Works Director responded $1.5 million.\nCouncilmember Matarrese inquired why is there a request to increase funds if the\nprogram is pulling in money.\nThe Finance Director responded it is accounting; stated gross revenues and gross\nexpenses have to be recognized separately; the two cannot be connected.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired what other funds are being contemplated to\ndraw from.\nThe Interim Public Works Director stated there are not many transportation funds to look\nat; the objective is to find matching dollars.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the department would be able to keep\nthe pavement management program operating at the level now, even with the $78,000\nre-appropriation, to which the Interim Public Works Director responded in the\naffirmative.\nIn response to Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft's inquiry, the Interim Public Works\nDirector stated pavement condition has improved and is a top priority; the $78,000 is not\ngoing to make an impact on the pavement condition.\nThe Finance Director continued presentation.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated Fire Station 3 needs to be replaced; she does not\nunderstand how staff did not anticipate that the EOC would need IT equipment, new\ngear, and new furnishings to be purchased and installed; she would also like to know\nwhat the updated total cost is to build the EOC and the additional costs Council should\nanticipate; there is a contingency plan built into every contract; there are lessons to be\nlearned.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nMarch 21, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-03-21.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-03-21", "page": 14, "text": "The Interim Public Works Director stated the project budget is about $10.3 million; staff\ndoes not anticipate returning to Council; the EOC would be done by June with Council\napproval tonight; the construction costs only included a 5% contingency; vertical\nconstruction should have at least a 10% contingency; the EOC is not a typical project;\nmany expenses were reasonably incurred; roughly one-third of the additional budget is\nfor permit fees, which were not budgeted; determining the permit fees was difficult;\nsome costs were harder to foresee; there were weather and utilities factors; getting\nservices on the site was difficult during inclement weather and costs went up due to\ndelays; the contract is ready to execute with Council approval tonight.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated she wants the public to know the Interim Public\nWorks Director was not at the helm when the contract was done; she would like\nassurances that all the information is now before the Council and the additional budget\nrequest is the bottom line.\nThe Interim Public Works Director responded in the affirmative; stated staff wants to\nmake sure the number Council is seeing now is the last request.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired why the IT equipment and furniture was not\nbudgeted.\nThe Interim Public Works Director responded there is new cutting edge technology that\ncould not have been foreseen.\nIn response to Councilmember Oddie's inquiry, the Finance Director stated the\nproceeds of the sale of the existing Fire House is estimated to be $450,000 and is\nalready included in the cost.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired whether $50,000 would go back into the General Fund if\nthe Fire House is sold for $500,000, to which the Finance Director responded in the\naffirmative.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated the capital improvements for the Fire Stations and Police\nDepartment total approximately $250,000; in addition to the amount the Fire\nDepartment is contributing revenue; public safety is contributing another $250,000 to\ncover the short fall; public safety is bearing the brunt of the additional expenses.\nVice Mayor Vella stated in connection with learning opportunities, expenditures being\nconsidered need to be added to the list and built-in in the future; she would like\nreassurances to ensure future projects include costs.\nThe IT Director stated there was no IT department when project began; IT equipment is\non the list now.\nThe Finance Director continued presentation.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nMarch 21, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-03-21.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-03-21", "page": 15, "text": "In response to Mayor Spencer's inquiry, the Police Chief stated he was not going to ask\nfor additional funds for the locker room project, but since the vacancies were all filled\nand the money was already allocated, he decided to take advantage of the additional\nfunds.\nIn response to Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft's inquiry, the Police Chief stated the\nlockers were built over 40 years ago; the equipment officers are required to carry and\nmaintain is different now and requires transitioning to vests; the women's locker room is\nold and not functional; there is less adequate space; command staff was approached 10\nyears ago to upgrade the locker room but it was set aside; now is the time to do\nsomething about it.\nIn response to Mayor Spencer's inquiry, the Finance Director stated there are\nunrestricted funds from General Fund; the locker room funds were already allocated\nand the savings still exist even after hiring new officers; funds will drop to the bottom\nline if not spent; Council can approve the project or not; the Finance Director continued\nthe presentation.\nIn response to Mayor Spencer's inquiry, the Interim Public Works Director stated two-\nthirds of the projects on the list are actually completed, under budget, and with savings;\nthe request is to move the savings over.\nMayor Spencer inquired the dollar amount for the one-third projects that are waiting, to\nwhich the Interim Public Works Director responded he does not have a dollar amount.\nMayor Spencer stated the one-third projects that do not need money now will still need\nmoney in the future; it is not a savings, it is just a deferring.\nIn response to the City Manager's inquiry, the Interim Public Works Director stated the\nbenefit of the facilities assessment is that staff would be able to produce a over ten year\nplan for repairs and forecast costs.\nThe City Manager inquired whether combining two separate projects is a cost savings,\nto which the Interim Public Works Director responded in the affirmative.\nMayor Spencer stated the request is for money to spend now, but one-third of the\nprojects will still need money in the future.\nThe City Manager stated the policy question is whether Council wants to use the funds\nnot used for closed-out projects, or funds out of the General Fund.\nMayor Spencer stated there is a specific request for Council to approve the mid-year\nbudget tonight, not the policy.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nMarch 21, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-03-21.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-03-21", "page": 16, "text": "Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether there is a process in the budget to\nallocate funds for the Capital Improvement Program (CIP), to which the Interim Public\nWorks Director responded in the affirmative.\nThe Finance Director concluded the presentation.\nIn response to Mayor Spencer's inquiry, the Finance Director stated the Utility Users\nTax (UUT) revenue is not significant enough to put it in a higher bracket.\nMayor Spencer stated the analysis of the UUT impacts should have been included;\nCouncil needs to plan for the impacts.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated that he is ready to adopt the proposed mid-year\nbudget; he is mindful of the comments that anticipated basic costs were not included in\nthe budget; the positioning of allocations against future projects is appropriate.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft concurred with Councilmember Matarrese; stated she is\nnot pleased with the EOC cost; she is heartened by lessons learned across the\ndepartments; people need to remember the importance of public safety; she is\nextremely proud of the Police Department which is a model of forward-thinking policing;\ngiving the Police Department adequate lockers lets them know they are valued; she is\nprepared to support the mid-year budget.\nVice Mayor Vella stated the City could always do better; utilizing new department heads\nand gaining internal knowledge for all projects is important; updating lockers for the\nwomen in the Police Department is crucial; she supports the budget amendment.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated that he is disappointed the EOC project came back three\ntimes requesting more money; there are lessons learned; the Police and Fire budgets\nare taking an extraordinary hit; he does not want people to lose site that public safety is\nbearing the brunt of the overages; he supports the mid-year budget amendments.\nMayor Spencer stated that she will not support the amendments; she is concerned there\nis no analysis on the UUT; a two-part process would have been better; she is also\nconcerned there is no dollar amount for one-third of CIP projects; a long term plan is\nneeded; the policy is that any new expenditure is extraordinary; funds should be spread\nover all the departments; the public did not have a chance to weigh-in on the budget\nadjustments.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated the public does have a chance to weigh in; the\nagenda goes out 12 days before the meeting; there were no public speakers on the\nitem; there was the same opportunity for public input as there were for the other items\non the agenda which had several public speakers.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nMarch 21, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-03-21.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-03-21", "page": 17, "text": "Mayor Spencer stated that she disagrees; General Fund expenditures are critical to the\nlong-term health of the City; Council had many questions; she would like to be able to\ncommunicate with the public and give them a chance to come back.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft moved adoption of the resolution.\nCouncilmember Matarrese seconded the motion with a comment that he treats a mid-\nyear budget adjustment differently than two-year budget; he will be looking carefully at\nwhat is projected; money was not being spent form the Ground Emergency Medical\nTransportation funds (GEMT) which means something is not getting done; he would like\nto know how the next two years will play out; there are overly conservative numbers that\nmake the budget less real than he would like.\nThe City Manager stated the GEMT was a one-time unanticipated additional revenue\nfrom reimbursed charges for transport from previous years; the UUT revenue will be\nreviewed at the two-year budget.\nOn the call for the question, the motion carried by the following voice vote: Ayes:\nCouncilmembers Ezzy Ashcraft, Matarrese, Oddie and Vella - 4. Noes: Mayor Spencer\n- 1.\n***\n(17-198) Mayor Spencer moved approval of hearing the referrals before the Other Post\nEmployment Benefits (OPEB) matter [paragraph no. 17-\n1.\n.\nThe motion failed due to lack of a second.\n(17-199) Resolution No. 15253, \"Authorizing Participation in the Public Agency\nRetirement Services (PARS) Post-Employment Benefits Trust to be Used for Prefunding\nof Pension and Other Post-Employment Benefits (OPEB) Obligation.\" Adopted; and\n(17-199A) Recommendation to Appoint the City Manager or Her Designee as the City's\nPlan Administrator for the Trust Program; Direct the City Manager to Execute All\nNecessary Agreements and Plan Documents Associated with Establishment of the New\nTrust; and Adopt a Pension Rate Stabilization Program and Other Post-Employment\nBenefits Funding Policy. (Finance 2410)\nThe Finance Director gave a Power Point presentation.\n***\n(17-200) Mayor Spencer moved approval of considering the referrals.\nThe motion failed for a lack of second.\n***\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nMarch 21, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-03-21.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-03-21", "page": 18, "text": "***\nMayor Spencer called a recess at 10:30 p.m. and reconvened the meeting at 10:33 p.m.\nThe Finance Director continued the Power Point presentation.\nIn response to Mayor Spencer's inquiry, the Finance Director stated the contributions to\nthe OPEB Trust will be proportionately spread based on the number of employees.\nIn response to Mayor Spencer's inquiry, the Assistant City Manager stated library\nemployees have a pension and a very small OPEB liability.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether there will be less money for library services for the\npublic, to which the Finance Director responded having less money could potentially be\nthe case.\nIn response to Mayor Spencer's inquiry, the Finance Director stated if the Trust is not\nfunded now, there will eventually be cuts to services when it is time to make payments\nin the future; the objective is to try to prevent the cuts from happening in the future.\nIn response to Mayor Spencer's inquiry, the City Manager stated budgets of each\ndepartment are being reviewed as a whole; staff is requesting Council to look at a\nproactive way to address the unfunded pension and OPEB liability.\nMayor Spencer stated the Council is being asked to adopt a very specific policy.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated if the liability goes from $15.6 million in FY16-17 to $35.5\nmillion in FY22-23, there may not be a library or public safety departments by then if\nsomething is not done now.\nIn response to Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft's inquiry, the Finance Director stated all\nemployees contribute to pensions, and Police and Fire employees contribute to OPEB.\nVice Mayor Vella inquired whether employees contribute the same amounts, to which\nthe Finance Director responded the contribution amount depends on the employee's\nsalary; stated employees also do a cost-share; public safety employees currently pick\nup 6% of the employer contributions and miscellaneous employees pick up 1.868% of\nemployer contributions.\nIn response to Councilmember Oddie's inquiry, the Finance Director stated the goal is\nto set up a trust policy; staff is not asking Council to allocate funds tonight.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the City can make contributions\nanytime during the year, to which the Finance Director responded in the affirmative.\nIn response to Council Member Ezzy Ashcraft's inquiry, the Finance Director stated the\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nMarch 21, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-03-21.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-03-21", "page": 19, "text": "trust will remain in place until terminated by Council.\nMayor Spencer inquired how much the consultant has been paid, to which the Finance\nDirector responded she does not have that number.\nThe Assistant City Manager stated he is the PARS Trust Administrator, not a consultant.\nMayor Spencer inquired how will the PARS Trust Administrator be paid, to which the\nAssistant City Manager stated he will be paid as part of the fees in the Trust.\nCouncilmember Matarrese moved adoption of the resolution and approval of the staff\nrecommendation, with amendment to remove the incentive of taking 10% of department\nsavings.\nCouncilmember Oddie seconded the motion.\nUnder discussion, Mayor Spencer requested the actions be considered separately.\nCouncilmember Matarrese moved adoption of the resolution authorizing participation in\nthe Public Agency Retirement Services (PARS) Post-Employment Benefits Trust to be\nused for prefunding of pension and Other Post-Employment Benefits (OPEB) obligation.\nCouncilmember Oddie seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.\nCouncilmember Matarrese moved approval of appointing the City Manager or her\ndesignee as the City's Plan Administrator for the Trust Program.\nCouncilmember Oddie seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.\nCouncilmember Matarrese moved approval of directing the City Manager to execute all\nnecessary agreements and Plan documents associated with establishment of the new\nTrust.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice\nvote 5.\nCouncilmember Matarrese moved approval of adopting the pension rate stabilization\nprogram as listed, with the exception of 10% contribution from savings.\nVice Mayor Vella seconded the motion, which carried by the following voice vote:\nCouncilmembers Ezzy Ashcraft, Matarrese, Oddie, and Vice Mayor Vella - 4. Noes:\nMayor Spencer - 1.\nCITY MANAGER COMMUNICATIONS\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nMarch 21, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-03-21.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-03-21", "page": 20, "text": "(17-201) The City Manager gave an update on the Jackson/Broadway design; stated\nthe Public Utilities Board approved seven segments for the Underground Utility District\nwhich will come before Council in summer; congratulated the Police Department for\n90% of staff completing implicit bias training.\n(17-202) Mayor Spencer moved approval of continuing the meeting past 11:00 p.m.\nThe motion failed for a lack of second.\n***\nORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA\n(17-203) Pat Lamborn, Alameda, stated she feels disrespected when not able to speak.\n(17-204) Janet Gibson, Alameda, stated there is something wrong with the way Council\nis treating the public; Council should be more supportive of the community; suggested\nchanging the order of the oral communications section.\nCOUNCIL REFERRALS\n(17-205) Consider Adopting a \"Bird-Safe Buildings\" Ordinance. Not heard. (Vice Mayor\nVella and Councilmember Oddie)\n(17-206) Consider Directing Staff to Provide Standards for Bird-Safe Buildings for\nCouncil to Adopt. Not head. (Mayor Spencer)\n(17-207) Consider Directing Staff to Prepare a Report on the City of Alameda\nAcquiring/Taking Title to the Uncompleted Strip of Shoreline Park next to Harbor Bay\nParkway. Not heard. (Mayor Spencer)\nCOUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS\nNot heard.\nADJOURNMENT\nThere being no motion to continue past 11:00 p.m., Mayor Spencer adjourned the\nmeeting at 10:59 p.m.\nRespectfully submitted,\nLara Weisiger\nCity Clerk\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nMarch 21, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-03-21.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-03-21", "page": 21, "text": "The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Sunshine Ordinance.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nMarch 21, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-03-21.pdf"}