{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-06-20", "page": 1, "text": "MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING\nTUESDAY-JUNE 20, 2017--5:00 P.M.\nMayor Spencer convened the meeting at 6:00 p.m.\nRoll Call -\nPresent:\nCouncilmembers Ezzy Ashcraft, Matarrese, Oddie, Vella and\nMayor Spencer - 5.\nAbsent:\nNone.\nThe meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider:\n(17-369) Public Employee Performance Evaluation; Pursuant to Government Code \u00a7\n54957; Positions Evaluated: City Manager - Jill Keimach, City Attorney - Janet Kern\nand City Clerk - Lara Weisiger.\nFollowing the Closed Session, the meeting was reconvened and Mayor Spencer\nannounce direction was given to staff.\nAdjournment\nThere being no further business, Mayor Spencer adjourned the meeting at 6:47 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\nJune 20, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-06-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-06-20", "page": 2, "text": "MINUTES FOR THE SPECIAL JOINT MEETING OF THE\nCITY COUNCIL AND SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO\nTHE COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION (SACIC)\nTUESDAY--JUNE 20, 2017-6:59 - P.M.\nMayor/Chair Spencer convened the meeting at 7:02 p.m. and led the Pledge of\nAllegiance.\nROLL CALL -\nPresent:\nCouncilmembers/Commissioners Ezzy Ashcraft,\nMatarrese, Oddie, Vella and Mayor/Chair Spencer -\n5.\nAbsent:\nNone.\nORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA\nNone.\nCONSENT CALENDAR\nCouncilmember/Commissioner Matarrese moved approval of the Consent Calendar.\nCouncilmember/Commissioner Oddie seconded the motion, which carried by\nunanimous voice vote - 5. [Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk\npreceding the paragraph number.]\n(*17-370 CC/17-008 SACIC) Recommendation to Accept the Second Quarter Financial\nReport for the Period Ending December 31, 2016. [City Council and SACIC]. Accepted.\n(*17-371 CC/17-009 SACIC) Recommendation to Accept the Third Quarter Financial\nReport for the Period Ending March 31, 2017. [City Council and SACIC]. Accepted.\nADJOURNMENT\nThere being no further business, Mayor/Chair Spencer adjourned the meeting at 7:03\np.m.\nRespectfully submitted,\nLara Weisiger\nCity Clerk and Secretary, SACIC\nThe agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Sunshine Ordinance.\nSpecial Joint Meeting\nAlameda City Council and Successor Agency to\nthe Community Improvement Commission\nJune 20, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-06-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-06-20", "page": 3, "text": "MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING\nTUESDAY--JUNE - 20, 2017- -7:00 P.M.\nMayor Spencer convened the meeting at 7:03 p.m.\nROLL CALL -\nPresent:\nCouncilmembers Ezzy Ashcraft, Matarrese, Oddie,\nVella and Mayor Spencer - 5.\nAbsent:\nNone.\nAGENDA CHANGES\n(17-372) Mayor Spencer announced the work force change resolution [paragraph no.\n17-\n]\nwould not be heard.\nPROCLAMATIONS, SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY AND ANNOUNCEMENTS\n(17-373) Proclamation Declaring June 19, 2017 as Juneteenth Day.\nMayor Spencer read the proclamation and presented it to Robbie Wilson.\nORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA\n(17-374) David Maxey, Alameda, discussed the influx of traffic, the School District and\nthe shortage of schools.\n(17-375) Lisa Klofkorn and Jim Lott, Jackson Park Heritage Area, expressed\nappreciation for the prompt response and painting the Kentucky Fried Chicken (KFC).\n(17-376) Mary Manning, Jackson Park Watch/Park Avenue Heritage Area, expressed\nappreciation for the prompt response and painting the KFC; encouraged the City to\nincrease the 100 foot notification requirement.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether staff could review expanding the 100 foot notification\nrequirement.\nThe City Manager responded in the affirmative; stated the requirement is typically 300\nfeet; the KFC issue was presented differently to the Planning Board.\nThe Planning Services Manager stated KFC inquired about painting the building over\nthe counter; the Planning Department informed KFC a permit was not required since the\ncolor palette was approved in 2008; the Planning Department has reached out to KFC\nto inform them they must return to the previous color palette; design review requires 100\nfoot notice and public hearings require 300 foot notice.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether a referral needs to be done to review the notice\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nJune 20, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-06-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-06-20", "page": 4, "text": "requirement.\nThe City Manager responded a referral is needed; stated the City is honoring the\noriginal color palette which required a 300 foot notice in 2008.\nCONSENT CALENDAR\nMayor Spencer announced the legal notices contract [paragraph no. 17- ] was\nremoved from the Consent Calendar for discussion and the work force change\nresolution would not be heard [paragraph no. 17- ].\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft moved approval of the remainder of the Consent\nCalendar.\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(*17-377) Minutes of the Special Joint City Council and Alameda Public Financing\nAuthority (APFA) Meeting Held on May 2, 2017, the Special and Regular City Council\nMeetings Held on May 16, 2017 and the Special City Council Meeting Held on May 17,\n2017. Approved.\n(*17-378) Ratified bills in the amount of $2,735,188.67.\n(*17-379) Recommendation to Approve an Interfund Loan of $700,000 from the General\nFund to the Development Impact Fees (DIF) Parks Fund and $700,000 from the Fleet\nIndustrial Supply Center (FISC) Lease Revenue Fund to the DIF Parks Fund for the\nFinancing of the Estuary Park Improvements Project. Accepted.\n(*17-380) Recommendation to Award a Contract in the Amount of $156,359 to IPS\nGroup, Inc. for the Upgrade of Alameda's Single Space Parking Meter Revenue\nCollection and Vault Equipment. Accepted.\n(17-381) Recommendation to Award a Contract for the Publication of Legal Notices to\nthe Alameda Journal for Fiscal Year 2017-18.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired whether the difference in the two numbers for the\nverified audit makes a difference in the bid process.\nThe City Attorney responded the Government Code determines what a legal newspaper\nis; newspapers have to be adjudicated by a court to meet the requirements; there are a\ncouple of tests; the audit is not part of the tests; the Alameda Journal was adjudicated in\n1992; the Alameda Sun is now adjudicated; the Alameda City Charter requires the City\nClerk to solicit bids from adjudicated newspapers annually and to award the contract to\nthe lowest responsive bidder; the Alameda Sun would need to petition the court if they\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nJune 20, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-06-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-06-20", "page": 5, "text": "believe any information they have could affect the adjudicated result.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired whether the City is required to go with the lowest bid.\nThe City Attorney responded in the affirmative; stated the Charter states to go with the\nlowest and best bid; read the Charter Section 3-18.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired whether the word best is defined.\nThe City Attorney responded in the negative.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether the word best allows an opening to evaluate beyond\nthe lowest bidder.\nThe City Attorney responded if Council can find a reason why one is better than the\nother when both are adjudicated legal newspapers.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated the local ownership and local operation of the\nAlameda Sun qualifies it as being the best.\nCouncilmember Oddie added the local circulation based on the audit numbers shows\nthe Alameda Sun's circulation is higher.\nCouncilmember Matarrese moved approval of accepting the Alameda Sun, by virtue of\nits higher circulation and its local ownership, qualifying it as best and should be awarded\nthe contract for legal notices for the City of Alameda.\nCouncilmember Oddie seconded the motion.\nUnder discussion, Vice Mayor Vella stated the prices are substantially higher for the\nAlameda Sun; requested the difference in the circulation be clarified for the record.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether there it is possible to do six months with the Alameda\nJournal and six months with the Alameda Sun.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated awarding the contract to the Alameda Sun would\ncause the cost to triple; inquired where the funds would come from.\nThe City Manager responded the total cost would go from $18,000 to approximately\n$60,000; the amount would be split between departments who utilize the service, of\nwhich one quarter comes from the General Fund.\nVice Mayor Vella inquired which departments primarily use the service.\nThe City Manager responded primarily the Planning Department.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nJune 20, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-06-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-06-20", "page": 6, "text": "Mayor Spencer inquired whether Councilmember Matarrese would accept a friendly\namendment to the motion to do six months with the Alameda Journal and six months\nwith the Alameda Sun; stated generally people receive one paper or the other, not both.\nCouncilmember Matarrese did not accept the friendly amendment to the motion.\nVice Mayor Vella inquired what the exact numbers are for the circulation on each\nnewspaper.\nThe City Clerk responded the Alameda Sun is 23,500: paid circulation is 175, free\ncirculation is 22,930; the Alameda Journal is 18,012.\nOn the call for the question, the motion carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.\n(*17-382) Recommendation to Authorize the City Manager to Execute a Second\nAmendment to an Agreement with BKF Engineers to Add the Amount of $42,461 for a\nTotal Agreement Amount of $297,964 for the Design of the Cross Alameda Trail,\nWebster Street to Sherman Street through Jean Sweeney Open Space Park. Accepted.\n(*17-383) Recommendation to Award a Contract in the Amount of $3,353,576, Including\nContingencies, to McGuire and Hester, for Cross Alameda Trail - Jean Sweeney\nImprovements Project, No. P.W. 05-16-11; and\n(*17- 383B) Approve a $900,000 Interfund Loan for the Financing of Cross Alameda\nTrail - Jean Sweeney Improvements Project. Accepted; and\n(*17-383C) Resolution No. 15274, \"Amending the Capital Budget for Fiscal Year 2016-\n17\". Adopted.\n(17-384) Adoption of Resolution Approving One Workforce Change at Alameda\nMunicipal Power: Add One New Position, Utility Distribution Automation Analyst; and\nAmend the Salary Schedule of Electric Utility Professionals of Alameda (EUPA) to Add\nthe Classification Title of Utility Distribution Automation Analyst, Effective June 25,\n2017. Not heard.\n(*17-385) Resolution No. 15275, \"Authorizing the Mayor to Sign a Memorandum of\nUnderstanding (MOU) Regarding the Formulation and Implementation of Sister City\nRelations Between Yeongdong-gun (County of Yeongdong), South Korea and the City\nof Alameda.\" Adopted.\n(*17-386) Ordinance No. 3181, \"Approving a Lease and Authorizing the City Manager to\nExecute Documents Necessary to Implement the Terms of a Five-Year Lease with Two\nFive-Year Extension Options and a Right of First Negotiation to Purchase with\nSaildrone, Inc. a Delaware Corporation, for Building 12 Located at 1050 West Tower\nAvenue at Alameda Point.\" Finally passed.\nREGULAR AGENDA ITEMS\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nJune 20, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-06-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-06-20", "page": 7, "text": "(17-387) Resolution No. 15276, \"Reappointing Ann McCormick as a Member of the\nPublic Utilities Board.\" Adopted;\n(17-387A) Resolution No. 15277, \"Reappointing Christopher Griffiths as a Member of\nthe Rent Review Advisory Committee (RRAC) (Tenant Seat). Adopted;\n(17-387B) Resolution No. 15278, \"Appointing Sarah Murray as a Member of the RRAC\n(Housing Provider Seat). Adopted; and\n(17-387C) Resolution No. 15279, \"Appointing Claudia Medina as a Member of the\nSocial Service Human Relations Board. Adopted.\nMayor Spencer moved adoption of the resolutions.\nCouncilmember Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice\nvote - 5.\nThe City Clerk administered the oath of office and presented certificates of appointment\nto Ms. McCormick, Ms. Murray and Ms. Medina.\nMs. McCormick, Ms. Murray and Ms. Medina all made brief comments.\n(17-388) Introduction of Ordinance Amending Ordinance 3850 Approving and\nAuthorizing the City Manager to Execute Documents Necessary to Implement the\nTerms of an Amended and Restated Lease with Bay Ship and Yacht Corporation to\nClarify the Parties Obligations, Modify the Leased Premises and Adjust Rent Payments\nfor the Tideland Property Located at 2900 Main #2100 and Surrounding Area.\nIntroduced.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director gave a brief presentation.\nMayor Spencer stated at a Planning Board meeting, she became aware that Bay Ship\nand Yacht is possibly working with an adjacent developer; inquired whether the\namendment has nothing to do with the Bay Ship and Yacht project.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded the leasehold mortgage\nagreement could possibly apply to the project because the wording says Alameda\ncommercial properties and adjoining premises; the property under negotiations adjoins\nto the property.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether the language in the original lease.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded the language is a change to\nthe lease.\nMayor Spencer inquired why the language being added.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nJune 20, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-06-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-06-20", "page": 8, "text": "The Assistant Community Development Director responded the language is being\nadded due to Bay Ship and Yacht purchasing title from Alameda Gateway; the language\ndoes not exclude the new adjoining properties; language has been added, in concept,\nfor the City's Tidelands and Alameda Gateway.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft moved introduction of the ordinance amending\nOrdinance 3850 approving and authorizing the City Manager to execute documents\nnecessary to implement the terms of an amended and restated Lease with Bay Ship\nand Yacht Corporation to clarify the parties obligations, modify the leased premises and\nadjust rent payments for the Tideland Property located at 2900 Main #2100 and\nsurrounding area.\nVice Mayor Vella seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.\n(17-389) SUMMARY TITLE: This Ordinance facilitates shared living facilities in certain\nzoning districts, with a discretionary use permit, to allow private living quarters without\nprivate kitchen facilities.\nPublic Hearing to Consider Introduction of Ordinance Amending the Alameda Municipal\nCode by Amending Chapter XXX (Zoning Ordinance) to Add Shared Living to the\nDefinitions and the Commercial Districts with Approval of a Use Permit in the\nNeighborhood Business, Central Business, and Community Commercial Districts. The\nAmendment Allows a Proposed Shared Living Project at 1629 Webster Street. [The\nproposed amendments are categorically exempt from the California Environmental\nQuality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15305, Minor Alterations to\nLand Use Limitations]. Introduced.\nThe Planning Services Manager gave a Power Point presentation.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated that he is ready to support the ordinance.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she fully supports the project; the project is\ngood for Webster Street and the seniors that will utilize the space; the project will\nprovide much needed housing.\nCouncilmember Oddie moved introduction of the ordinance.\nVice Mayor Vella stated that she hopes the price will be kept affordable; the project\nallows more [housing] options.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether future builders or businesses would still need to go\nthrough the discretionary use permit process.\nThe Planning Services Manager responded in the affirmative; stated proposals involving\na new building would require design review; shared living uses would be conditionally\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nJune 20, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-06-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-06-20", "page": 9, "text": "permitted; any approval would require a public hearing, a discretionary use permit and\nnoticing within 300 feet.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice\nvote - 5.\n(17-390) Public Hearing to Consider Introduction of Ordinance Amending the Alameda\nMunicipal Code by Amending Regulations Pertaining to Second Units/Accessory\nDwelling Units (ADU), and Related Regulations, for Compliance with State Law.\nIntroduced.\nThe Planning Services Manager gave a Power Point presentation and provided revised\nordinance language.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether the proposed amendments are in the packet.\nThe City Clerk responded in the negative.\nMayor Spencer requested the amendments be shown on the overhead projector.\nCouncilmember Matarrese inquired whether waiving the parking requirement does not\ndispense of requiring design review for an addition to a house.\nThe Planning Services Manager responded in the affirmative.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired whether the City could certify making ADU housing\naffordable.\nThe Planning Services Manager responded under the State law, the City is no longer\nallowed to add requirements above and beyond the State requirements; stated an\naffordability requirement would be considered burdensome.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated the City has received a lot of correspondence on the size\nof ADUs; inquired whether the City has flexibility.\nThe Planning Services Manager responded the State recommends at least 850 square\nfeet to be a viable investment for homeowners; stated the Planning Board recommends\ngoing with the State standard of 1,200 square feet to provide for flexibility; a lot of\nAlameda properties would not meet the requirements to build a 1,200 square foot ADU.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired how many Alameda homes are eligible for up to 1,200\nsquare foot ADU.\nThe Planning Services Manager responded 15% of single family lots, which is\napproximately 1,000 units.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nJune 20, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-06-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-06-20", "page": 10, "text": "Vice Mayor Vella inquired where the cap of 3,000 square feet or greater came from if\nthe State is capping the expansions at 1,200.\nThe Planning Services Manager responded the 3,000 square foot threshold already\nexists in parking requirements; stated in the City of Alameda, for a single family home,\nthe parking requirement is 2 parking spaces; if the home exceeds 3,000 square feet, the\nrequirement is 3 parking spaces; the Planning Board deferred to the existing parking\nrequirement as a standard.\nVice Mayor Vella inquired whether there is anything preventing the City from\nincentivizing affordability with ADUs.\nThe Planning Services Manager responded inclusion of incentives would depend on\nhow the regulation is drafted.\nVice Mayor Vella stated visibility is a concern for many residents; inquired whether the\nrequirement could read: \"where the proposed design would be visible from the street.'\nThe Planning Services Manager responded defining \"visible from the street\" would be\nproblematic; stated the Planning Board regulations pertain to an ADU being built in\nhomes with a very large front yard or a corner lot home.\nVice Mayor Vella inquired what would the process be if an ADU is being proposed on a\ndetached garage in a house that is in a historical district.\nThe Planning Services Manager responded the design of the addition needs to be the\nsame style of the existing house.\nVice Mayor Vella inquired whether the information would be given during the design\nreview permitting process, to which the Planning Services Manager responded in the\naffirmative.\nVice Mayor Vella inquired whether the owner occupancy requirement would require the\nowner to remain in the property until completion of the addition of the ADU.\nThe Planning Services Manager responded staff would review the requirements; stated\nif staff finds any issues, the ordinance could be amended.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated a concern is that there is no way to receive input\nfrom neighbors; inquired whether there is a way to incorporate input from neighbors.\nThe Planning Services Manager responded the ordinance requires a ministerial review\nprocess; the State would consider public comment a burdensome requirement.\nVice Mayor Vella inquired whether the Housing Authority Board (HAB) would be\ninvolved in any of the design review process.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nJune 20, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-06-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-06-20", "page": 11, "text": "The Planning Services Manager responded there are certain restrictions with the\nministerial review process; if the ADU does not meet the required checklist, the project\nwould be under discretionary review.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether the State requirement legally allows the City to have\nan applicant, who wants to build an ADU over 600 square feet, apply for a use permit\nfor design review to allow public review of the impact to neighboring properties.\nThe Planning Services Manager responded the State law sets an upper ceiling for the\nsize of an ADU and allows cities to set an appropriate maximum size for the ADU; if\nCouncil sets an upper ceiling and a homeowner wants to go above that ceiling, the\nproject would need to go through the design review process.\nMayor Spencer inquired if the project would have to go through design review if the\ndesign is not consistent.\nThe Planning Services Manager responded staff is proposing specific design standards;\nstated the design standards provide scenarios about what staff will evaluate; review for\nconsistency will be done using the City's adopted design review manual as a guide.\nMayor Spencer stated the Alameda Architectural Preservation Society (AAPS) is\nconcerned about a proposed change to the design review process; inquired whether\nthere is a change to the process.\nThe Planning Services Manager responded the City would still require going through\ndesign review and apply guidelines to the proposals.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether the language is the same with regards to the design of\nthe ADUs.\nThe Planning Services Manager responded the process is the same; stated the\nlanguage has been expanded to address front yards and corner lots.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether the language in the current ordinance states that every\ntime an ADU is designed, it must be consistent with the primary residence.\nThe Planning Services Manager responded the language is being changed.\nMayor Spencer inquired if there is more flexibility.\nThe Planning Services Manager responded there is not more flexibility; stated there are\ndifferent standards; a number of requirements have been added.\nMayor Spencer inquired if the language allows for secondary units that are not\nconsistent with the primary residence.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nJune 20, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-06-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-06-20", "page": 12, "text": "The Planning Services Manager responded only if the primary dwelling does not have\nany specific architectural style.\nIn response to Mayor Spencer's inquiry about changing the language, the Planning\nServices Manager stated the proposed language is from the design review manual; staff\ntried not to use new words; the word compliment is already in the language.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired whether the Bay Farm Island housing subject to\nCovenants Conditions and Restrictions (CC&Rs) would also be subject to the\nrequirements.\nThe Planning Services Manager responded the Bay Farm Island homes are also\nsubject to State Law.\nStated State law prohibits making the ADU affordable; a full design review with public\ninput is important: David Baker, Alameda.\nStated historical value is lost by adding something that was not there originally;\nrequested if the home is on the Historic Building Study List, contemporary compatible is\nan acceptable design guideline: Alan Teague, Alameda.\nUrged the Council to make ADUs as feasible as possible to build; urged Council not to\nmake requirements that would eliminate prefab construction: Alexandra Saikley,\nAlameda.\nExpressed concern with adding housing to a historic city; stated the addition of ADUs\nwill result in the loss of parking and green space: Doree Miles, Alameda Architectural\nPreservation Society (AAPS).\nExpressed support for the AAPS recommendations: Erich Stiger, Alameda.\nExpressed concern about the language; stated limiting the size will be a safe way to\npreserve the integrity of the town: Alice Chen, Alameda.\nExpressed support for the full 1,200 square feet being made available for second units;\nstated increasing density will encourage people to get out of cars: Angela Hockabout,\nAlameda Home Team.\nShowed a diagram of a 1,200 square foot ADU; stated limiting the size of an ADU to\n600 square foot is reasonable; the proposed language is very subjective: Christopher\nBuckley, AAPS.\nUrged design review be retained: Pat Lamborn, Alameda.\nIn response to Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft's request for clarification on the proposed\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nJune 20, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-06-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-06-20", "page": 13, "text": "ordinance, the Planning Services Manager stated the plans will still go through a review\nprocess for ministerial review: staff would still review plans; under State law, the City\nhas 120 days to take action; plans would be reviewed against the City's adopted design\nreview manual and design guidelines; the ministerial process does not require\nnotification to the neighborhood.\nIn response to Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft's inquiry about the percentage of\ncoverage and non-permeable surfaces, the Planning Services Manager stated not more\nthan 60% of the lot can be covered.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated ADUs are a valuable source of housing; the\nsmaller footprint of the ADUs might be more affordable for people; not every\nhomeowner will build the same size ADU; she supports the ordinance.\nVice Mayor Vella stated in certain scenarios the design review will still be triggered and\nrequire HAB review; she is concerned about the clarity of the language on page 7,\nSubsection B, which reads: \"subordinate relative to the footprint;\" Subsection A\nregarding detached units states 60% of permeable sources; the 60% requirement is not\nincluded for attached units; requested clarification.\nThe Planning Services Manager responded the maximum aggregate lot coverage of\n60% applies to both scenarios, whether adding on to the back of the house, attached\nADU or a separate cottage.\nVice Mayor Vella inquired why the 60% language is not listed under detached.\nThe Planning Services Manager responded staff would make the clarifying change to\napply 60% to both attached and detached ADUs.\nVice Mayor Vella inquired how subordinate does the footprint need to be to still allow for\n60% of permeable surfaces.\nThe Planning Services Manager responded said detail would be resolved during the\ndesign review process; stated the footprint of the ADU should not be larger than the\nprimary dwelling.\nVice Mayor Vella inquired whether 60% of the surface would still have to be permeable,\nto which the Planning Services Manager responded in the affirmative.\nVice Mayor Vella stated the footprint is capped at 50% of the floor space, but not more\nthan 1,200 square feet or whichever is less; stated the \"whichever is less\" language\naddresses a lot of the concerns; a lot of different scenarios will trigger the design review\nprocess; she is willing to support the ordinance.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether Vice Mayor Vella's question was answered regarding\nthe 60% language.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nJune 20, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-06-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-06-20", "page": 14, "text": "Vice Mayor Vella responded staff would add language.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded the intent has always been\nthat the 60% would apply to all second units, whether attached or detached; the\nlanguage would be clarified.\nVice Mayor Vella stated the intent should match the language.\nThe City Attorney stated the language needs to be clarified now to be published\nbetween the first and second reading.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated the design standards state: \"where there is clearly\narchitectural design style present in the immediate surroundings, the attached building\nshall have the same architectural style and level of interest as the immediate\nsurrounding buildings;\" stated there is a housing crisis and the State will step in if more\nis not done to address the issue; giving all Alamedan's an opportunity to stay in\nAlameda is important; residents should be able to age in place; the ordinance is a step\nin the right direction; he will support the ordinance.\nMayor Spencer inquired about houses on the study list and about the contemporary\ncompatible design appropriate to specific neighborhoods versus eclectic\nneighborhoods.\nThe Planning Services Manager responded the ordinance addresses the preservation\nof the historic properties.\nCouncilmember Matarrese inquired whether AAPS is proposing a 600 square feet\nthreshold, to which the Planning Services Manager responded in the affirmative.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated a good compromise is to have no design review\nrequired if the second addition is within the envelope of a building; he agrees that if the\nADU is visible from the street, staff should determine if the ADU is ministerial or requires\ndesign review; he would like a threshold to say: if a building is past a certain size, it will\nrequire design review; he is concerned with the affordability standards; he would like to\nincentivize affordability; with the exception of the trigger that states there is no design\nreview, even for a 1,200 square foot addition, he supports the guidelines and rules for\nthe ADU mandates.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether a person wanting to do a two story ADU would be\nrequired to do design review if the project is within the acceptable square footage.\nThe Planning Services Manager responded there are two scenarios: 1) if there is a two\nstory addition to the back of the house or 2) if the unit is detached, which does not allow\nfor a two story ADU.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nJune 20, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-06-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-06-20", "page": 15, "text": "Vice Mayor Vella inquired how many properties in Alameda could add 1,200 square feet\nand still have 60% of permeable space.\nThe Planning Services Manager responded based on County data, approximately 15%\nof the lots, or 1,700 Citywide.\nVice Mayor Vella inquired whether the amount is without reviewing the amount of\npermeable surfaces, to which the Planning Services Manager responded in the\naffirmative.\nMayor Spencer stated her preference would be to limit the square footage to 600 and\nrequire a design review for projects above 600 square feet to allow for public input.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated there is a housing crisis in Alameda; the addition\nof ADUs will increase housing supply and allow for affordable units.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft moved introduction of the ordinance amending the\nAlameda Municipal Code by amending regulations pertaining to Second\nUnits/Accessory Dwelling Units, and related regulations, for compliance with State law.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired whether the motion includes staff and Vice Mayor\nVella's amendments, to which Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft responded in the\naffirmative.\nCouncilmember Oddie seconded the motion.\nUnder discussed, the Planning Services Manager read the amendment proposed by\nVice Mayor Vella into the record to clarify that the aggregate lot coverage applies to\nattached ADUs; stated the change would be to page 7, Subsection C Development\nStandards, #3 Attached Accessory Dwelling Units to add a new Subsection C\nAggregate Lot Coverage as follows: \"The aggregate lot coverage of all building\nfootprints in non-permeable surfaces on the lot, shall not exceed 60%.\nCouncilmember Matarrese proposed an amendment to the motion to have a lower\nthreshold in which design review and neighborhood notification would be triggered.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she respectfully declines the amendment to\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nJune 20, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-06-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-06-20", "page": 16, "text": "the motion; the design review requirement adds to the cost for potential applicants; she\nis confident that the Planning Board and staff have put together guidelines to ensure\nstandards would be met.\nCouncilmember Matarrese inquired whether there is a cost incurred for having the\npublic notification.\nThe Planning Services Manager responded the design review application cost is $600\nplus $1,000 deposit, which covers staff time and public notification.\nCouncilmember Matarrese inquired whether the deposit is refundable.\nThe Planning Services Manager responded the deposit can be refundable, but the\n$1,600 fee pretty accurately reflects the cost.\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***\nMayor Spencer called a recess at 9:19 p.m. and reconvened the meeting at 9:30 p.m.\n(17-391) Public Hearing to Consider Resolution No. 15280, \"Approving the Engineer's\nReport, Confirming Diagram and Assessment, and Ordering the Levy of Assessments,\nIsland City Landscaping and Lighting District 84-2, All Zones.\" Adopted.\nCouncilmember recused himself and left the dais.\nThe Acting Public Works Coordinator gave a brief presentation.\nCouncilmember Oddie moved adoption of the resolution.\nVice Mayor Vella seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 4.\n[Absent: Councilmember Matarrese - 1.]\n(17-392) Public Hearing to Consider Resolution No. 15281, \"Approving the Engineer's\nReport, Confirming Diagram and Assessment, and Ordering the Levy of Assessments,\nMaintenance Assessment District 01-01 (Marina Cove). Adopted.\nThe Acting Public Works Coordinator gave a brief presentation.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft moved adoption of the resolution approving the\nEngineer's Report, confirming diagram and assessment, and ordering the levy of\nassessments, Maintenance Assessment District Marina Cove.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nJune 20, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-06-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-06-20", "page": 17, "text": "Councilmember Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice\nvote - 5.\n(17-393) Public Hearing to Consider Resolution No. 15282, \"Establishing Integrated\nWaste Collection Ceiling Rates and Service Fees for Alameda County Industries, Inc.\nfor Rate Period 16 (July 2017 to June 2018). Adopted.\nThe Interim Public Works Director gave a Power Point presentation.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether the percentage rate was previously discussed and will\nbe for a projected number of years.\nThe Interim Public Works Director responded the rate projected out what impacts would\nbe for Alameda; stated the projected impacts were correct and have been incorporated\nin the last couple of adjustments.\nMayor Spencer stated the rates are the same as previously discussed.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the reason the revenue is going up is\ndue to incorporating the recycling program.\nThe Interim Public Works Director responded in the affirmative.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether that means Alamedan's are recycling\nmore materials.\nThe Interim Public Works Director responded yes and no; stated the dollar amount\nfluctuates; the revenue depends on the year and how the market is doing.\nCouncilmember Matarrese moved adoption of the resolution.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice\nvote - 5.\n(17-394) Public Hearing to Consider Collection of Delinquent Business License Taxes\nand Fees and Delinquent Integrated Waste Management Accounts Via the Property Tax\nBills.\nThe Finance Director gave a brief presentation.\nUrged more stringent measures against 873 Laurel Street; outlined other issues with the\nproperty, including hoarding and drug dealing; suggested taking the issue to small\nclaims court: Jeanne Witherspoon, Alameda.\nProvided information about 873 Laurel Street from Police reports; urged the Council to\ncollect all fees due to the City: Lynn Lassalle-Klein, Alameda.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nJune 20, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-06-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-06-20", "page": 18, "text": "Mayor Spencer inquired what options the City has; suggested 873 Laurel Street be\nseparated from the rest and be pursued.\nThe City Attorney responded the matter is a legal issue and she would prefer it not be\ndiscussed in open session.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether the property could be addressed separately.\nThe City Attorney responded there is a legal strategy for the property; she does not\nwant to publicly discuss the plan.\nMayor Spencer moved approval of both lists, excluding 873 Lauren Street.\nThe motion FAILED for a lack of second.\nCouncilmember Matarrese moved approval of the collection of delinquent business\nlicense taxes and fees and delinquent integrated waste management accounts via the\nproperty tax bills.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft seconded the motion, which carried by the following\nvoice vote: Ayes: Councilmembers Ezzy Ashcraft, Matarrese, Oddie and Vella - 4.\nNoes: Mayor Spencer - 1.\n(17-395) Public Hearing to Consider Resolution No. 15283, \"Amending Master Fee\nResolution No. 12191 to Add and Revise Fees.\" Adopted.\nThe Finance Director gave a brief presentation.\nIn response to Mayor Spencer's inquiry about the passport photograph fee, the City\nClerk stated the printing costs were more expensive than anticipated; the revenue goes\nback into the General Fund towards the City Clerk budget.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether the increase is to offset the actual cost, to which the\nCity Clerk responded in the affirmative.\nMayor Spencer inquired what happens to the additional cost for the tow fee.\nThe Finance Director responded when a car is parked illegally and towed, the owner\nhas to pay the fee to have the car returned; the fees are collected by the Police\nDepartment.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether there are costs than the administrative fees when a\ncar is towed.\nThe City Manager responded in the affirmative; stated there is an administrative tow fee\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nJune 20, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-06-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-06-20", "page": 19, "text": "and the fee for the tow company.\nMayor Spencer inquired how much is the tow company fee.\nThe City Manager responded the amount depends on the company.\nMayor Spencer stated increasing the administrative fee would make Alameda higher\nthan other cities by not including the cost of the towing company; the owner of the car\nhas to pay both fees.\nThe City Manager responded having to pay both fees is typical in other cities.\nMayor Spencer stated data is missing; inquired whether the combined total of the tow\ncompany fee and the administrative fee is more than other cities.\nThe City Manager responded if the Council requests the data, staff will return with the\ndata; stated the intention is to cover the City's administrative costs, not to compete with\nother cities; the cars are only towed when they are parked illegally.\nMayor Spencer stated there is no analysis of the increased cost; the only rational in the\npresentation is that other cities were surveyed.\nThe Finance Director stated if more detail is needed, staff could return with the\nnecessary data.\nMayor Spencer stated that she will not support the tow fee because the total cost is not\nknown; the cost for towing is very significant.\nVice Mayor Vella inquired whether the administrative tow fee is increased each day.\nThe City Manager responded in the negative; stated the tow company charges\nadditional costs each day for storage of a vehicle that was not picked up.\nVice Mayor Vella inquired whether the administrative tow fee is a flat, one-time fee to\ncover internal costs and is increasing by $25.\nThe City Manager responded in the affirmative.\nCouncilmember Matarrese inquired whether the increase is part of the budget approval.\nThe City Manager responded in the affirmative.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the City has control over what the\nimpound lot charges.\nThe City Manager responded in the negative.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nJune 20, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-06-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-06-20", "page": 20, "text": "Councilmember Matarrese stated the City has a contract with the tow company, so\nthere is some control.\nThe City Manager responded during the contract award, the City selects the company.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she does not find the request unreasonable.\nCouncilmember Matarrese moved approval of the fees [adoption of the resolution].\nCouncilmember Oddie seconded the motion, which carried by the following voice vote:\nAyes: Councilmembers Ezzy Ashcraft, Matarrese, Oddie and Vella - 4. Noes: Mayor\nSpencer - 1.\n(17-396) Public Hearing to Establish the Proposition 4 (Appropriations) Limit for Fiscal\nYear (FY) 2017-18 and to Consider Resolution No. 15284, \"Establishing the\nAppropriations Limit for FY 2017-18. Adopted.\nThe Finance Director gave a brief presentation.\nCouncilmember Oddie moved adoption of the resolution.\nCouncilmember Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice\nvote - 5.\nCITY MANAGER COMMUNICATIONS\n(17-397) The City Manager informed Council that the Federal Aviation Administration\n(FAA) Noise Consortium will be providing a presentation at the July 5th Council meeting\nregarding maintenance at the Oakland airport; East Bay Municipal Utility District\n(EBMUD) is increasing water rates by 9.25% next year and 9% the subsequent year\nand increasing sewer rates by 5% for both years.\nMayor Spencer inquired what day the public had to address any concerns.\nThe City Manager responded the end of the month; customers should have received the\ninformation.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether staff would discuss the concerns for the green\ninitiative.\nThe City Manager responded the matter will be discussed when the referral for the\nStraws on Request item is heard.\nVice Mayor Vella noted the EBMUD public hearing will be at 1:00 p.m. on July 11th, at\n375 11 th Street, Oakland; if approved, the rate increases go into effect the next day, July\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nJune 20, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-06-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-06-20", "page": 21, "text": "12th.\nORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA\n(17-398) Alan Teague, Alameda, urged the Council to direct staff to participate in the\nMills Act, which pertains to preservation and enhancement of historic buildings.\n(17-399) Andrew Huntoon, Alameda, urged the Mayor be treated with respect when\nchairing meetings.\nCOUNCIL REFERRALS\n(17-400) Consider Directing Staff to Create a \"Straws on Request\" Ordinance and\nReview Ordinance No. 2977 to Address that \"To Go\" Food Ware, Including Straws, be\nCompostable or Recyclable. (Mayor Spencer)\nMayor Spencer made brief comments regarding the referral.\nStated that he does not use straws unless driving in his car: Andrew Huntoon, Alameda.\nStated the School District banned straws; urged the City to interpret the City's existing\nordinance as preventing straws since they are required to be recyclable; outlined Clean\nWater Funds de-packaging program: Ruth Abbe, Community Action for a Sustainable\nAlameda.\nStated she is passionate about the ordinance; she is making art pieces with the\nenormous amount of straws discarded at the beach: Pat Lamborn, Alameda.\nCouncilmember Oddie named off a number of options for the ban on straws; requested\nstaff to return with a goal to reduce all disposable food ware.\nVice Mayor Vella stating adding the intent to include all other disposable food ware into\nthe existing ordinance would be helpful; education is key; she would like the City to work\nwith the local fast food restaurants on the issue and also be mindful of people who need\nto use straws due to a disability; people should be educated on other straw material\noptions.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated public education is important.\n(17-401) Mayor Spencer stated a motion is needed to consider the remaining items\nafter 10:30 p.m. the cannabis referral [paragraph no. 17- ] and the League delegate\n[paragraph no. 17- ].\nCouncilmember Matarrese moved approval of considering the remaining items.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nJune 20, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-06-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-06-20", "page": 22, "text": "Vice Mayor Vella seconded the motion, which requires four votes, so it FAILED by the\nfollowing voice vote: Ayes: Councilmembers Matarrese, Vella and Mayor Spencer - 3.\nNoes: Councilmembers Ezzy Ashcraft and Oddie - 2.\n***\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she wants to hear what staff proposes\nregarding the straws on request ordinance.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated the referral is important because of the local action\nplan; staff should to create a straws on request ordinance broader than just straws,\nincluding disposable food ware and highlighting straws, taking into account the Council\ncomments.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether staff's comments would be regarding the straws on\nrequest referral, to which the City Manager responded in the affirmative.\nThe Deputy Public Works Director stated staff is in support of the referral; there will be\noutreach and education to 80 or more local businesses to rethink packaging; he will\nreturn to Council in December with a climate action plan for Council to choose which\npolicies to move forward with.\nMayor Spencer stated she does not want to wait until December; she would like to\ndirect staff to interpret the current ordinance to include straws.\nThe Deputy Public Works Director inquired what timeline Mayor Spencer is requesting.\nMayor Spencer responded September; stated that she would like staff to separate the\nclimate action plan and move forward with a straws on request ordinance sooner.\nThe Deputy Public Works Director stated the Santa Cruz ordinance is not a straws on\nrequest ordinance, it addresses using a different material.\nVice Mayor Vella inquired whether staff can reinterpret the existing ordinance or if new\nlanguage has to be done; stated if the language has to be changed, inquired what the\ntime frame is for changing the language.\nThe Deputy Public Works Director stated Santa Cruz has a polystyrene ordinance\nsimilar to the City of Alameda ordinance; they Santa Cruz's Public Works Department\nissued a rule that was approved by its County Board of Supervisors, making a\nclarification of the language within their ordinance; in Alameda, all of the business\nassociations have not replied to say express whether or not they are in support of the\nordinance.\nMayor Spencer stated the referral is to direct staff to review the matter; there will be\nanother agenda item to allow the public to comment.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nJune 20, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-06-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-06-20", "page": 23, "text": "The City Manager clarified staff is currently starting outreach to the businesses and\neducation to the public.\nMayor Spencer stated doing so is not the referral process; staff should determine\nwhether the current ordinance needs additional language or can be interpreted and\nenforced with the local businesses.\nCouncilmember Matarrese moved approval of directing staff to create a straws on\nrequest ordinance with the appropriate additions, including the question of composting,\nstraws for people who need them, and reviewing the current ordinance to see if it covers\nthe intent.\nVice Mayor Vella inquired whether the motion includes other disposables or just straws.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated the motion includes plastic to go wares, as written in\nthe body of the referral.\nCouncilmember Oddie seconded the motion with a friendly amendment to not have to\nwait to start outreach.\nCouncilmember Matarrese concurred; stated that he heard the City Manager and the\nInterim Public Works Director state that the outreach is starting now regardless; he\naccepts the amendment.\nUnder discussion, Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired what is the timeframe.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated that he would like a determination on which way staff\nis going to go before Council is out for recess in August; a new ordinance would take\ntwo meetings.\nThe City Manager responded staff would only have one week to make the July 18th\nmeeting.\nCouncilmember Matarrese agrees the earliest practical meeting would be September.\nMayor Spencer stated that she had requested September.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether Council is referring to a new ordinance\nor making amendments.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated he put that as an \"or\" in his motion; staff would return\nwith the suggestion on which option is recommended.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the decision is up to staff.\nCouncilmember Matarrese responded in the negative; stated staff would provide\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nJune 20, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-06-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-06-20", "page": 24, "text": "Council with the options and the recommendation, Council would make the decision.\nVice Mayor Vella clarified the Council is requesting staff to return with whether or not\nthe current ordinance should be amended or if a separate ordinance should be created\nor if there could be a rule process.\nMayor Spencer stated the easiest possible option.\nVice Mayor Vella stated Council would make a determination and go through the\nnecessary steps of a first or second reading, if needed.\nMayor Spencer stated the proposed change should be in place as quickly as possible.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated the most effective option in a timely manner.\nThe City Manager stated that she hears that Council would like an ordinance\nregardless; Stop Waste has informed the City that the most effective way to start the\nprocess is through education; inquired whether Council is directing staff to recommend\none of two ordinances.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated his motion is recognizing that staff is already starting\nwith the education; he wants an ordinance; if it is not written down, it does not count; his\nmotion is to have an ordinance, there was a second with the conditions.\nOn the call for the question, the motion carried by the following voice vote: Ayes:\nCouncilmember Matarrese, Oddie, Vella and Mayor Spencer - 4. Abstention:\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft - 1.\n(17-402) Consider Directing Staff to Propose Regulations to Authorize Convenient and\nSafe Cannabis Businesses in Alameda. (Mayor Spencer) Not heard.\nCOUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS\n(17-403) Designation of Voting Delegates and Alternates for the League of California\nCities Annual Conference. Not heard.\n(17-404) Consideration of Mayor's Nominations for Appointment to the Commission on\nDisability Issues (CDI), Golf Commission, Historical Advisory Board (HAB), Library\nBoard, Planning Board, Public Art Commission (PAC) and Transportation Commission\n(TC).\nMayor Spencer nominated Anto Aghapekian, Jennifer Barrett and Lisa Hall to the CDI;\nRon Taylor and Joseph Van Winkle to the Golf Commission; Amber Bales, Cynthia\nSilva and Travis Wilson to the Library Board; and Laura Palmer to the TC.\n(17-405) Councilmember Oddie requested the Council meeting be adjourned in memory\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nJune 20, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-06-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-06-20", "page": 25, "text": "of Ruth Belikove, former Library Board Member.\nCouncilmember Matarrese noted Ms. Belikove played a major role in getting the new\nlibrary funded.\n(17-406) Vice Mayor Vella requested the Council meeting also be adjourned in the\nmemory of Michael Dunsmore, an activist at Independence Plaza.\n(17-407) Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft requested the movie on climate change, Time\nfor Change, be shown at the Alameda Theater.\n(17-408) Vice Mayor Vella announced that she attended the Best of Alameda event.\n(17-409) Mayor Spencer stated the Council meeting would also be adjourned in\nmemory of Loranne Talsh, a breast cancer warrior; announced the Relay for Life event\nwould be at Encinal High School, at 10:00 a.m. Saturday; encouraged the community to\ncome out and walk for cancer.\nADJOURNMENT\n(17-410) There being no further business, Mayor Spencer adjourned the meeting at\n10:50 p.m. in a moment of silence for the above mentioned individuals.\nRespectfully submitted,\nLara Weisiger\nCity Clerk\nThe agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Sunshine Ordinance.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nJune 20, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-06-20.pdf"}