{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-12-05", "page": 1, "text": "MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING\nTUESDAY--DECEMBER - 5, 2017--7:00 P.M.\nMayor Spencer convened the meeting at 7:05 p.m.\nROLL CALL -\nPresent:\nCouncilmembers Daysog, Ezzy Ashcraft, Matarrese,\nOddie and Mayor Spencer - 5.\nAbsent:\nNone.\nAGENDA CHANGES\n(17-713) Mayor Spencer announced the Parcel Map resolution [paragraph no. 17-726\nwas withdrawn by staff; requested the Sister City item [paragraph no. 17-732 be heard\nearlier on the agenda.\nCouncil agreed to hear the Sister City item after the Master Fee hearing [paragraph no.\n17-731].\nPROCLAMATIONS, SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY AND ANNOUNCEMENTS\nNone.\nORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA\n(17-714) Charles Rodenbusch, Alameda, expressed concerns with pedestrian safety at\ntwo-way stops.\n(17-715) Marianne Carter, Alameda, submitted information; expressed concern with\nimprovements needed at Alameda Point Gym.\nCONSENT CALENDAR\nMayor Spencer announced the access to the Harbor Bay Ferry Terminal [paragraph no.\n17-718], the Information Technology Strategic Plan [paragraph no. 17-719], and Federal\nCarbon Fee resolution [paragraph no. 17-724 were withdrawn from the Consent\nCalendar for discussion.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft moved approval of the remainder of the Consent\nCalendar.\nCouncilmember Oddie seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote\n-\n5. [Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk preceding the paragraph\nnumber.]\n(*17-716) Minutes of the Special City Council Meeting Held on October 21, 2017 and\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n1\nDecember 5, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-12-05.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-12-05", "page": 2, "text": "the Regular City Council Meeting Held on November 7, 2017. Approved.\n(*17-717) Ratified bills in the amount of $3,083,246.82.\n(17-718) Recommendation to Receive Status Report on Implementation of the\nApproved Plan for Access to the Harbor Bay Ferry Terminal.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether a shuttle from the Harbor Bay ferry to a\nsatellite parking lot can be included in the plan.\nThe Base Reuse Director responded staff has not reviewed the shuttle service yet;\nstated the shuttle would compete with AC Transit's Line 21.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she would like the City to keep options open.\nThe Base Reuse Director stated the City will explore other options; staff has discussed\nways to shorten the route with AC Transit.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired whether the item is in response to a referral, to which\nthe Base Reuse Director responded in the affirmative.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated that he thought there was going to be a workshop.\nThe Base Reuse Director responded the data is a status report and is a culmination of\nmany meetings regarding the issue.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired whether the bus leaves early from certain locations.\nAustin Lee, AC Transit, responded the bus will be at the ferry on time, before the ferry\ndeparts.\nCouncilmember Oddie expressed concern with the bus being on time for ferry riders;\nstated the bus being late affects people getting to work on time.\nMr. Lee stated AC Transit strives to have all trips arrive on time.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated it is critical for the bus to be on time to encourage people\nto use public transit.\nCouncilmember Matarrese inquired whether staff can submit the ridership data for Line\n21, to which the Base Reuse Director responded in the affirmative.\nVice Mayor Vella inquired whether the plan can include a connector to the overflow\nparking and ridership from the East End, to which the Base Reuse Director responded\nin the affirmative.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n2\nDecember 5, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-12-05.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-12-05", "page": 3, "text": "Mayor Spencer inquired whether any other pertinent information needs to be shared\nwith the public regarding the status.\nThe Base Reuse Director responded staff is working with the Water Emergency\nTransportation Authority (WETA) and AC Transit to implement parking charges.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether the City is doing anything to not allow overnight\nparking.\nKevin Connolly, WETA, responded a security firm cites and tows vehicles parked\novernight.\nMayor Spencer stressed the importance of busses not being late.\nThe Base Reuse Director stated staff will relay the message at the next meeting with\nthe AC Transit Board Members.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she is interested in a shuttle from satellite\nparking.\nMayor Spencer expressed concern over AC Transit busses arriving late 10% of the\ntime.\nCouncilmember Oddie moved approval of receiving the status report on implementation\nof the approved Plan for access to the Harbor Bay Ferry Terminal.\nVice Mayor Vella seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.\nUrged Council to address the issues with the transit system to encourage more ferry\nriders: Christine Lok, Alameda.\n(17-719) Recommendation to Receive the Information Technology Strategic Plan\n(ITSP).\nThe Information Technology Director and Terry Hackelman, NexLevel, gave a Power\nPoint presentation.\nMayor Spencer requested clarification on the public WiFi and the e-911.\nThe Information Technology Director explained the process for installing the public WiFi.\nMayor Spencer inquired what the timeframe is for the free public WiFi.\nThe Information Technology Director responded 2018-19.\nThe Police Chief provided a brief description on the e-911 system.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n3\nDecember 5, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-12-05.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-12-05", "page": 4, "text": "Mayor Spencer inquired whether the system is new.\nThe Police Chief responded the system is only being updated; stated the City has had\nthe system for years.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft moved approval of receiving the ITSP.\nVice Mayor Vella seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.\n(*17-720) Recommendation to Authorize the City Manager to Purchase and Install Fully\nInclusive Playground Equipment and Safety Surfacing from GameTime for Littlejohn\nPark in an Amount Not to Exceed $230,000; and\n(*17-720A) Resolution No. 15325, \"Amending the Recreation Fund and Capital\nImprovement Fund Budget for Fiscal Year 2017-18 for the Project.' Adopted.\n(*17-721) Resolution No. 15326, \"Setting the 2018 Regular City Council Meeting Dates.'\nAdopted.\n(*17-722) Resolution No. 15327, \"Amending the Salary Schedule for Part-Time\nClassifications Effective December 24, 2017, to Reflect Changes to the California State\nMinimum Wage and to Maintain Adequate Differentials Between Part-Time Job\nCategories.\" Adopted.\n(*17-723) Resolution No. 15328, \"Reappointing Wendi Poulson as Trustee to the\nAlameda County Mosquito Abatement District Board.\" Adopted.\n(17-724) Resolution No. 15329, \"Urging the United States Congress to Enact a Federal\nCarbon Fee and Dividend. Adopted.\nMayor Spencer stated the resolution language is not clear enough; noted she provided\nproposed revisions.\nUrged Council to support the resolution: Anita Rees, Alameda.\nUrged Council to support the resolution to ensure a clean energy future: Tony Sirna,\nCitizens' Climate Lobby.\nUrged Council to support the resolution: Gaby Dolphin, Alameda Solar and Alameda\nProgressives.\nMayor Spencer moved approval of the resolution with proposed revisions.\nCouncilmember Matarrese seconded the motion.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n4\nDecember 5, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-12-05.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-12-05", "page": 5, "text": "Under discussion, Councilmember Oddie inquired what the process will be.\nThe City Manager responded that staff will send the resolution to the Congressman.\nOn the call for the question, the motion carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.\n(*17-725) Resolution No. 15330, \"Approving Projects to be Paid for by the State's Road\nMaintenance and Rehabilitation Account for Fiscal Year 2017-18.\" Adopted.\n(17-726) Adoption of Resolution Approving Parcel Map No. 10275 - A Parcel Map for\nthe Proposed Subdivision of the Parcel at 1700 Harbor Bay Parkway into Two Parcels.\nNot heard.\n(*17-727) Ordinance No. 3203, \"Amending the Alameda Municipal Code by Amending\nSection 3-7 (Regulation of State Video Franchise Holders) at Article I, (Finance) of\nChapter III, (Finance and Taxation) Regulating Holders of State Video Franchises to\nReauthorize the Public, Education, and Government (PEG) Access Fees Applicable to\nState Video Franchises Operating Within the City of Alameda.' Finally passed.\n(*17-728) Ordinance No. 3204, \"Approving a Third Amendment to the Long Term\nSublease between the City of Alameda and the US Department of Transportation\nMaritime Administration (MARAD).\" Finally passed.\n(*17-729) Ordinance No. 3205, \"Approving a First Amendment of a Lease City of and\nAuthorizing the City Manager to Execute Documents Necessary to Implement the\nTerms of a First Amendment of a Lease with Complete Coach Works, Inc. a California\nCorporation, for a Three-Year Lease Extension for a Portion of Building 24 Located at\n2301 Monarch Street at Alameda Point.\" Finally passed.\nREGULAR AGENDA ITEMS\n(17-730) Resolution No. 15331, \"Appointing Jeffrey Cavanaugh as a Member of the\nPlanning Board.\" Adopted.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated that he interviewed Mr. Cavanaugh and believes he\nunderstands the issues facing Alameda.\nCouncilmember Matarrese moved adoption of the resolution.\nCouncilmember Oddie seconded the motion, which carried by the following voice vote:\nAyes: Councilmembers Matarrese, Oddie and Mayor Spencer - 3. Abstentions:\nCouncilmembers Ezzy Ashcraft and Vella - 2.\nThe City Clerk administered the Oath of Office and presented a Certificate of\nAppointment.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n5\nDecember 5, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-12-05.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-12-05", "page": 6, "text": "(17-731) Public Hearing to Consider Resolution No. 15332, \"Amending Master Fee\nResolution No. 12191 to Add New and Revise Existing Recreation and Park Fees.\"\nAdopted.\nThe Recreation and Parks Director gave a Power Point presentation.\nIn response to Mayor Spencer's inquiry about the Recreation and Park Commission's\napproval, the Recreation and Parks Director stated the matter went to Council for\ncontract approval; continued the presentation.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether the 3% is factored into the Fee Schedule, to which the\nRecreation and Parks Director responded in the affirmative; continued the presentation.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether the Krusi Park stage can be utilized on a drop in basis\nif it is not reserved.\nThe Recreation and Parks Director responded in the affirmative; stated all picnic areas\nin the park can be used on a drop in basis if not reserved; continued the presentation.\nVice Mayor Vella inquired whether the Recreation and Parks Director will make a\npresentation at the Parks Commission meeting.\nThe Recreation and Parks Director responded in the affirmative; stated the matter will\non the December 14th agenda.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the fee for use of the Estuary Park\nsynthetic turf is for the whole season, to which the Recreation and Parks Director\nresponded in the affirmative.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired why the residential rate is lower than the non-\nresidential rate.\nThe Recreation and Parks Director responded that she does not want to price out the\nnon-residents or they will not utilize the field.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired if the fees are valid for one year, to which the\nRecreation and Parks Director responded in the affirmative; stated the fees can always\nbe changed.\nExpressed concerns with the portable toilets at the Alameda gym; urged Council to not\npass the 3% fee increase: Marianne Carter, Recreation Commission.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the portable toilets are for events at\nAlameda Point gym.\nThe Recreation and Parks Director responded in the affirmative.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n6\nDecember 5, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-12-05.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-12-05", "page": 7, "text": "Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the request for the portable toilets is at\nthe request of the person renting the facility, to which the Recreation and Parks Director\nresponded in the affirmative.\nIn response to Mayor Spencer's inquiry, the Recreation and Parks Director stated that\nshe has reviewed the invoices with her staff to ensure a team was not charged; if a\nteam was charged incorrectly, they can contact her office; if the toilets inside are not\nworking, the Recreation and Parks Department pays for the toilets.\nVice Mayor Vella inquired whether the City is currently paying the 3% fee on the\ntransactions that go through.\nThe Recreation and Parks Director responded that as of December 4th the City is\npaying the transaction fees.\nVice Mayor Vella inquired if the 3% is not passed tonight will the City be paying for the\nfees.\nMayor Spencer inquired how much time would be required for the matter to go before\nthe Recreation and Park Commission and back to Council.\nThe Recreation and Parks Director responded the matter would go before the\nRecreation and Park Commission in January and back to Council in February.\nMayor Spencer inquired what the plans are if the 3% fee does not pass.\nThe Recreation and Parks Director responded the fees will be discussed with the\nRecreation and Parks Commission again to review if they believe fees are too high.\nMayor Spencer stated that she would prefer the 3% fee increase go through the\nRecreation and Parks Commission first; she does not want to make the decision for the\nRecreation and Parks Commission.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated if the 3% is not passed onto the user, the City will\nhave to look at cutting other programs to cover the costs.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft moved adoption of the resolution amending the Master\nFee to add new and revise existing Recreation and Park fees.\nMayor Spencer requested a friendly amendment to the motion to have the matter of the\n3% fee increase go before the Recreation and Parks Commission first, then circle back\nto Council.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft did not accept the friendly amendment.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n7\nDecember 5, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-12-05.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-12-05", "page": 8, "text": "Vice Mayor Vella inquired whether a change could be made at a later date.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether anyone supports her request to have the Recreation\nand Parks Commission review the 3% fee increase before Council.\nVice Mayor Vella inquired whether Mayor Spencer is conditioning the approval of the\nfee increase based on the Recreation and Parks Commission's approval.\nMayor Spencer stated that she would like feedback from the Commission that they\nagree with the Recreation and Parks Director's recommendation.\nCouncilmember Matarrese inquired whether the Recreation and Parks Director is going\nto review reactions to the fees based on the field allocation activities.\nThe Recreation and Park's Director responded in the affirmative; stated the Commission\nwanted to review the fee allocation policy again.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated that he would prefer to pass the resolution tonight; if\nthe Commission says no to the 3% fee increase, the money will have to come out of\nother programs.\nCouncilmember Oddie seconded the motion, without the friendly amendment.\nUnder discussion, Councilmember Matarrese inquired whether the Commission can\nprovide a recommendation on the 3% fee increase, to which the Recreation and Parks\nDirector responded in the affirmative.\nVice Mayor Vella stated an amendment to the motion is not needed.\nOn the call for the question, the motion carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.\n(17-732) Adoption of Resolution Authorizing the Mayor to Sign a Memorandum of\nUnderstanding (MOU) Regarding the Formulation and Implementation of Sister City\nRelations Between the Village of Wadi Foquin, Palestinian Territories and the City of\nAlameda. Not considered.\nThe City Attorney stated very late in the afternoon, the City received correspondence\nfrom Consulate General in San Francisco raising a number of legal and political issues\nwith the MOU; the City Attorney's Office did not have time to investigate the issue or\nmake modifications to the language; normally, the item would simply be pulled, but\nconsidering the number of people attending the Council meeting regarding the item, the\ndecision was made to let the item remain on the agenda but to recommend Council not\napprove the MOU tonight and rather direct staff to review the issues and come back to\nCouncil; Sister Cities are not political and the City has to be careful to not venture into\nthe political side; an issue raised by the Consulate was the sponsor and the United\nMethodist Church and their leadership are very active in boycott vestment and\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n8\nDecember 5, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-12-05.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-12-05", "page": 9, "text": "sanctions, a movement against Israel; the Consulate expressed very strong concerns\nregarding the issue; the City Attorney's Office would like to ensure that the City is not\ncolored with said initiative should the City decide to go forward on a Sister City basis;\nthe City Attorney's Office would also want to ensure no violation of the establishment\nclause; Council can decide whether to hear the item or continue the matter.\nVice Mayor Vella inquired whether one issue raised is the Assembly Bill (AB) 2844:\nPublic Contracts and discrimination, to which the City Attorney responded in the\naffirmative.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether the email is public record.\nThe City Clerk responded the email has been uploaded to the website and attached to\nthe agenda as correspondence.\nMayor Spencer requested clarification on AB2844.\nThe City Attorney responded the issue has to do with public contracting but staff has not\nhad time to review the complaint.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she would prefer to hear from the speakers.\nVice Mayor Vella stated that she is concerned about hearing from the speakers when\nthe issue is a moving target.\nCouncilmember Matarrese inquired why the Buena Vista United Methodist Church is not\nreferenced as the sponsor in the MOU; stated the City's agent is the Alameda Sister\nCity Association.\nThe City Attorney stated the sponsor has to be an organization in the community and it\nis her understanding that the sponsor is the Buena Vista United Methodist Church and\nReverend Yoshi.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated if the language could change, he would not want\npeople to speak then have people return for something completely different.\nMayor Spencer stated that she does not believe it is appropriate to hear from speakers.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired what the process is if the item has to return to Council.\nThe City Attorney responded if Council would like to have a Sister City relationship with\nWadi Foquin, staff would review the issues and discuss it with the Sister City\norganization.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired if Council gives direction to staff, would there have to be\ndiscussion of the merits.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n9\nDecember 5, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-12-05.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-12-05", "page": 10, "text": "The City Attorney responded that the City Attorney's Office has to review the issue.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she does not feel ready to hear the matter\ntonight.\nVice Mayor Vella inquired whether the City Attorney's Office will reach out to the\ninvolved parties to receive clarification.\nThe City Attorney responded in the affirmative.\nCouncilmember Matarrese moved approval of directing the City Attorney to review\ninferences about being in violation of State law and other legal exposure in a timely\nmanner and provide an opinion and present a compliant MOU.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft suggested the City Attorney and City Manager research\nhow other cities, such as Sacramento, have similar relationships with Bethlehem.\nVice Mayor Vella inquired whether the question from Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft is to\nhave staff look into the difference between cities versus settlements.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft responded that she is not referring to a settlement.\nVice Mayor Vella stated Bethlehem is a city; the current item is a village that is in a\nsettlement zone; stated she is trying to understand the question.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft clarified the question is how Sacramento has sister city\nrelations with Bethlehem without raising the concern of the Israeli Consulate.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft's direction is not a part\nof the motion, only advice.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft requested clarification on Vice Mayor Vella's request.\nVice Mayor Vella clarified whether the City Attorney could hear from all parties to\nreceive clarification, to which the City Attorney responded in the affirmative.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated the Sister City relationship with Sacramento and\nBethlehem could have been before the legislation passed.\nVice Mayor Vella seconded the motion.\nUnder discussion, Councilmember Oddie stated that he does not want to hear from only\none side; he agrees with the consensus to learn more about the complaint.\nOn the call for the question the motion carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n10\nDecember 5, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-12-05.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-12-05", "page": 11, "text": "***\nMayor Spencer called a recess at 8:55 p.m. and reconvened the meeting at 9:11 p.m.\n***\n(17-733) Public Hearing to Consider Introduction of Ordinance Amending the Alameda\nMunicipal Code by Repealing Section 30-5.15 (Medical Marijuana Dispensaries and\nCultivation) in Its Entirety and Adding a New Section 30-10 (Cannabis) to Conditionally\nPermit Specific Types of Cannabis Businesses in Certain Zoning Districts. Introduced.\nThe Community Development Director gave a Power Point presentation.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired how the one mile is measured for the one mile\nseparation.\nThe Community Development Director responded path of travel.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether path of travel is the same as door to door.\nThe Community Development Director responded stated path of travel is defined in the\nordinance.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether the one mile is door to door.\nThe City Manager responded the one mile is door to door.\nThe Assistant City Attorney noted the language reads door to door.\nMayor Spencer stated that she would like the language to be consistent.\nCouncilmember Matarrese inquired whether the language is written anywhere.\nThe Community Development Director responded the language is in the regulatory\nordinance that has been adopted; continued the presentation.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether there are any changes from the Planning Board.\nThe Community Development Director responded the Planning Board did not make any\nchanges to the proposed zones; continued the presentation.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired how is compliance of a personal cultivation area\ndetermined according to Building, Fire and Safety Codes.\nThe Community Development Director responded Code Enforcement operates on a\ncomplaint based system.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n11\nDecember 5, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-12-05.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-12-05", "page": 12, "text": "Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether someone would complain about\nthemselves, to which the Community Development Director responded Code\nEnforcement complaints typically originate from neighbors.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired who will be making the special findings for the\nuse permits.\nThe Community Development Director responded the special findings were removed\nfrom the Zoning Code because they are in the regulator permit; staff would make the\nfindings.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired how the findings could be made without the\noperation being started.\nThe Community Development Director responded through the operators permit and\nannual renewal process.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired if the conditions are not met, could the operators\npermit be revoked, to which the Community Development Director responded in the\naffirmative.\nUrged Council to offer written documentation to enable an operator to apply for a State\ntemporary license while they are in the process of obtaining the local permit; inquired\nwhether the application will be available online: Anne Kelson, Alameda.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired whether clarification can be added on the one mile\nseparation.\nThe City Manager responded Planning typically measures by the radius on a\nGeographic Information Systems (GIS) map.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired whether Google Maps could be used.\nThe Community Development Director responded Google Maps may not be as precise;\nstated the issue can be revisited when proposals are received.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired whether the upper end of Webster Street to the lower\nend of Webster Street could be less than one mile.\nThe Community Development Director responded with the sensitive uses mapping,\nthere could not be a location on the lower end of Webster Street.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether staff could respond to the speaker's concerns.\nThe Community Development Director responded staff is not recommending temporary\nlicenses; stated that she believes jurisdictions issuing temporary licenses did not have a\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n12\nDecember 5, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-12-05.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-12-05", "page": 13, "text": "previous ban; regarding the application process, Council directed staff to issue a\nRequest for Proposals (RFP) for each of the activity types; staff is in the process of\ndeveloping the RFP and hopes to return to Council in early February for approval; the\nRFP will be available online; businesses have to comply with whatever State regulations\nare on the books at the time permits are granted; preference for local ownership will\nreturn to Council at a later date.\nMayor Spencer inquired when the item will return to Council, to which the Community\nDevelopment Director responded February.\nCouncilmember Oddie moved introduction of the ordinance.\nMayor Spencer seconded the motion, which carried by the following voice vote: Ayes:\nCouncilmembers Oddie, Vella and Mayor Spencer - 3. Noes: Councilmembers Ezzy\nAshcraft and Matarrese - 2.\n(17-734) Recommendation to Authorize the City Manager to Issue a Request for\nProposals for the City of Alameda's Climate Plan Update, to Award a Consultant\nContract up to $300,000 Including Contingency to Prepare the Climate Plan Update;\nand\n(17-734A) Resolution No. 15333, \"Amending the General Fund, Measure B and BB\nFunds, Integrated Waste Fund, Stormwater Fund, Sewer Fund, Community\nDevelopment Fund and Capital Projects Fund Budgets for Fiscal Year 2017-18.'\nAdopted.\nThe Public Works Director gave a Power Point presentation.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired whether the renewable energy credits will continue in\nthe future.\nThe Alameda Municipal Power General Manager stated there are no plans to sell any\nmore renewable energy credit.\nThe Public Works Director continued the presentation.\nVice Mayor Vella inquired whether the timeline is realistic to achieve what the City is\nhoping to achieve.\nThe Public Works Director responded that he believes it is doable; stated if the\nCalTrans Adaptation Grant comes through, it will make a big difference to the City and a\nlot less will be spent.\nVice Mayor Vella inquired whether other community groups are involved in the\ncommunication.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n13\nDecember 5, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-12-05.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-12-05", "page": 14, "text": "The Public Works Director responded there have been many workshops; stated staff is\ncommunicating with consultants to see which other community groups should be\ninvolved.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired what the City is doing to integrate the efforts.\nThe Public Works Director responded the City and the community are working in\nparallel.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired whether staff is reviewing more jobs on the Island to\nhelp with transportation.\nThe Public Works Director responded a portion of the scope is looking into green jobs.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired whether the project is being synced with the Economic\nDevelopment Plan to allow more people to work on the Island.\nThe Public Works Director responded in the affirmative.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired how the Climate Action Plan aligns with the\ngoals for 2030 to 2050.\nThe Public Works Director responded the goals are set with timeframes 2030 to 2050;\nstated the goal is to allow the community to see what a truly carbon neutral City might\nbe in 2050.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the City will spend more money for\nimplementation of the consultant's recommendation.\nThe Public Works Director responded the consultant will review ways to fund the work.\nMayor Spencer inquired where ideas in the report pertain to Alameda being an Island.\nThe Transportation Coordinator responded Chapter 3 of the Draft Work Scope speaks\nto bay and open restoration and innovative ideas; stated Chapter 2 under Vision Goals\nand Objectives to not limit to climate.\nMayor Spencer stated the term Marine Permaculture is not listed in the report.\nThe Transportation Coordinator responded the word Marine can be added to the report.\nMayor Spencer stated that she would prefer the word Marine Permaculture be added.\nUrged Council to pass the project: Pat Potter, BikeWalk Alameda,\nUrged Council to review opportunities in carbon farming: Damien Mason, Alameda\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n14\nDecember 5, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-12-05.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-12-05", "page": 15, "text": "Backyard Growers and Community Action for a Sustainable Alameda (CASA).\nExpressed concern with sea level rise: Gaby Dolphin, Alameda.\nExpressed concern with sea level rise; urged Council to take action: Paul Medved,\nCASA.\nProvided a handout; stated the City needs to do something about climate action and\nsea level rise: Sylvia Gibson, The Future.\nStated that he would like to see benefits to wildlife: Richard Bangert, Alameda.\nUrged Council to support the Climate Action Plan: Ruth Abbe, CASA.\nUrged Council to support the Climate Action Plan to reduce Alameda's carbon footprint:\nJulian Pelsner.\nUrged Council to show leadership as a coastal community; stated performance tracking\nand reporting are essential to the scope: Debi Ryan, CASA.\n(17-735) Mayor Spencer stated a motion is needed to consider the remaining agenda\nitems: the two referrals.\nCouncilmember Matarrese moved approval of considering the remaining items.\nVice Mayor Vella seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.\nExpressed concern with sea level rise: Danielle Mieler, Alameda.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether there are green design requirements for\nresidential developments.\nThe Planner Il responded the City follows the State enacted Building Code to enforce\ngreen building standards for residential developments.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the plan needs to be updated, to which\nthe Planner Il responded in the affirmative.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she attended the Midway Shelter 5K walk/run\nand styrofoam cups were being used; inquired whether community members can\nspread the word of the styrofoam cup ban in Alameda to make a difference.\nMayor Spencer noted styrofoam cups were used after the other cups ran out.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n15\nDecember 5, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-12-05.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-12-05", "page": 16, "text": "Vice Mayor Vella stated that she would like to speak to State representatives regarding\nthe direction in the City's plan; she would like the plan to be user friendly and visible;\nshe would like to hear back in six months on the status as the plan; requested\nperformance tracking and reporting be built into the final plan; stressed the importance\nof putting the goals in writing; stated that she would like to hear back from the\nconsultant regarding financing to ensure the City is applying for funding.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated that he would like to do a better job at attracting more jobs\nin Alameda; the plan should be integrated with the Transportation Demand\nManagement (TDM) and the Economic Development Strategy; he would like to move\nfaster on the plan.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated the RFP applicant should have technical expertise; he\nwould like to know what is specifically needed to meet the goals in the current plan;\nadaptation and sea level rise need to be included in the plan; anything the City uses as\nsupporting information needs to be a published peer review source; the work needs to\nbe done quickly.\nMayor Spencer referred to the handout by Ms. Gibson and expressed concern over the\nprojections and where the City actually is today; stated a status report on the\nbenchmarks should have been brought to Council.\nIn response to Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft's inquiry, the City Manager stated the\nFigure 1 table is in the inventory.\nMayor Spencer expressed concerns with hiring consultants and goals not being\nachieved; requested language be added to the plan to ensure the issue returns to\nCouncil for benchmarks and enforcement.\nThe City Manager noted climate change is not only up to staff, it also falls on the\ncommunity.\nMayor Spencer stated that she would like status updates and benchmarks presented to\nCouncil.\nThe City Manager stated staff can do the inventory on a regular basis to check the\nstatus of meeting the goals.\nThe Public Works Director stated the process will address how frequently staff will\nreport to Council.\nMayor Spencer stressed the importance of said language being built into the plan;\ninquired whether the community and Council comments will be incorporated into the\nplan, to which the Public Works Director responded in the affirmative.\nMayor Spencer expressed concern with Alameda being referred to as a coastal\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n16\nDecember 5, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-12-05.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-12-05", "page": 17, "text": "community; stated Alameda is an Island and a peninsula and sea level rise needs to be\naddressed; suggested hiring a consultant that is local or knows Alameda and the needs\nspecific to an Island community.\n***\n(17-736) Mayor Spencer stated a motion is needed to continue past 11:00 p.m.\nCouncilmember Matarrese moved approval.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired whether the meeting going late will not matter due to it\nbeing the end of the year.\nThe City Clerk responded the end of the year does not matter, there cannot be more\nthan three meetings in a row that continue past 11:00 p.m.\nMayor Spencer seconded the motion, which carried by the following voice vote: Ayes:\nCouncilmembers Matarrese, Oddie, Vella and Mayor Spencer - 4. Noes:\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft - 1.\nMayor Spencer stated that she would like a map of sea level rise; the objective needs to\nbe higher paying jobs on the Island; the priority is housing Alamedans; she would like\nMarine Permaculture added to page 8 and any terms that are specific to Alameda; free\npublic WiFi should be offered to allow people to telecommute.\nCouncilmember Matarrese moved approval of authorizing the City Manager to award a\ncontract up to $300,000, including contingency, to prepare for the Climate Action Plan\nupdate.\nVice Mayor Vella seconded the motion,\nUnder discussion, Mayor Spencer inquired whether the motion includes all the\ncomments.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated staff needs to consider all the comments, but the\ncomments are not appropriate in the RFP; staff should let the applicant know and\nencourage them to watch the meeting to evaluate the Council and public direction.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether the motion includes revising the Draft Work Scope to\ninclude the comments.\nCouncilmember Matarrese responded in the negative; stated staff is directed to put the\nRFP out and inform and evaluate the respondents based on the comments from Council\nand the community.\nMayor Spencer inquired why the information would not be included in the Work Scope\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n17\nDecember 5, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-12-05.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-12-05", "page": 18, "text": "and instead the consultant would be asked to review the video.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated a good consultant would watch the video.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether Council is not going to ask staff to revise the\ndocument; the document is a draft.\nMayor Spencer requested a friendly amendment to the motion to have the Draft Work\nScope document be modified to include the comments made by Council and the\ncommunity.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated the expansion of the scope should include adaptation\nand sea level rise; he will accept the friendly amendment.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft seconded the motion.\nUnder discussion, Mayor Spencer inquired whether the comments would also be\nincluded in the motion.\nIn response to Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft's inquiry, Mayor Spencer stated\ncomments from the public should be incorporated.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated not all comments should be incorporated.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated the largest expansion of the scope should be\nbroadened to include the greater sustainability specifically with sea level rise.\nMayor Spencer stated that she would like to be as specific as possible; the consultant\ncan come before Council to explain what can and cannot be incorporated.\nThe City Manager stated the Climate Action Plan team is here tonight and has heard\nthe comments from the public and Council; if a consultant is asked to be too specific,\nthey will not review anything.\nMayor Spencer stated staff indicated specific requests would be incorporated.\nOn the call for the question, the motion carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft moved adoption of the resolution amending the General\nFund, Measure B and BB Funds, Integrated Waste Fund, Stormwater Fund, Sewer\nFund, Community Development Fund and Capital Projects Fund budgets.\nCouncilmember Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice\nvote - 5.\nCITY MANAGER COMMUNICATIONS\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n18\nDecember 5, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-12-05.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-12-05", "page": 19, "text": "(17-737) Update on Tracking of Council Direction through the Referral Process.\n(17-738) The City Manager made an announcement regarding the Fire Station 3 Grand\nOpening.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired whether completed referrals would age off the list.\nThe City Manager responded the completed referrals will age off at the annual priority\ngoal setting meeting.\nORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA\n(17-739) Gaby Dolphin, Alameda, stated AMP and Public Utilities Board (PUB) need to\nbe involved in the climate plan change; expressed concern with having a nuclear\nresearch station in Alameda.\nMayor Spencer suggested staff correct the word in the press release from nuclear to\nrenewable energy.\nCOUNCIL REFERRALS\n(17-740) Consider Providing Direction to Staff on Alameda Municipal Power's (AMP)\nSmart Meter Program, Including Opting Out, City Manager Voting, Radio Frequency\n(RF) Radiation, Maintenance and Inspection. (Mayor Spencer and Vice Mayor Vella)\nVice Mayor Vella and Mayor Spencer made brief comments regarding the referral.\nExpressed concern over AMP's Smart Meter program causing serious threats to health;\ndiscussed scientific studies and opting out: Christopher Rabe, Alameda.\nExpressed concern over RF emitting from the Smart Meters; suggested a moratorium\non installations: Shelby Sheeham, Alameda.\nExpressed concern over having to pay to opt out of the Smart Meter program: Lisa\nZapata, Alameda.\nExpressed concern over AMP not listening to the requests of Council and the\ncommunity: Gaby Dolphin, Alameda.\nExpressed concern over the safety of Smart Meters and the cost of opt out feature:\nHeather Curtis, Alameda.\nExpressed concern over fire and safety of Smart Meters: Nancy Gordon, Alameda.\nThe AMP General Manager stated due to the concerns expressed by the public, the\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n19\nDecember 5, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-12-05.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-12-05", "page": 20, "text": "sunset provision will be going before the PUB, as well as a low income provision; the\nemissions associated with the meters meet all standards.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether a moratorium was adopted in other cities regarding\nSmart Meters.\nThe AMP General Manager stated that he is not familiar with other cities adopting\nmoratoriums.\nMayor Spencer inquired what the low income discount will be, to which the AMP\nGeneral Manager responded the low income discount is 25%; noted the eligibility\nrequirements were updated to be in line with the Bay Area.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether the discount is already available.\nThe AMP General Manager responded the matter is going before the PUB on Monday.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired whether the City WiFi omits the same frequency as the\nSmart Meters.\nThe AMP General Manager responded that he cannot speak to the WiFi omission.\nThe Assistant City Attorney addressed the jurisdictional authority of Council; stated the\nPUB supersedes the Council.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether Council could give feedback without giving direction.\nThe Assistant City Attorney responded Council could weigh in as individual members,\nbut not direct PUB to take action.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether there is a way for Council to receive the agenda in\nadvance and provide feedback without going to the PUB meetings.\nThe Assistant City Attorney responded in the affirmative; stated the PUB agendas are\npublic.\nCouncilmember Matarrese inquired whether Council could make a request regarding\nthe scientific information regarding Smart Meters as part of the referral.\nThe Assistant City Attorney responded Council could request information informally as\nindividuals, not as a body.\nThe City Manager stated the Council and every citizen can request the information;\nonce received, the information should be made public.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated the risks need to be evaluated based on science.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n20\nDecember 5, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-12-05.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-12-05", "page": 21, "text": "The City Attorney stated the Council cannot request the information as a body.\nMayor Spencer stated that she would like copies of the information.\nVice Mayor Vella inquired whether information can be requested relative to the City's\nliability exposure.\nThe Assistant City Attorney responded said information can be provided in closed\nsession; for the PUB to be invited into closed session, there would need to be a real\nthreat of litigation.\nThe City Attorney stated Council would have authority if there is a claim or litigation,\nVice Mayor Vella inquired who does the risk assessment.\nThe City Attorney responded there is a determination of risk for any decision that is\nmade.\nVice Mayor Vella inquired who assesses the legal claims being made and at what point\ndoes the issue go before Council; inquired what the lead up is to the litigation being\nfiled.\nThe Assistant City Attorney responded if the lawsuit is filed, the City Attorney's Office\nwould have the PUB meet with Council in closed session; noted the City Manager can\nrelay information to PUB.\nThe City Attorney stated no municipal body has the ability to determine the health risk;\nthere are agency's that assess the health risks; the health assessments done have not\nshown that there is a problem to justify a claim.\nThe Assistant City Attorney stated the body charged with whether there are health risks\nis the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) who sets omissions standards; the\nSmart Meters are well below the standards set by the FCC.\nVice Mayor Vella inquired whether if that is the reason the City Attorney's Office\nbelieves there is no legal liability, to which the Assistant City Attorney responded in the\naffirmative.\nVice Mayor Vella inquired whether Council would be included in analysis if the\nstandards change.\nThe Assistant City Attorney responded if a lawsuit is filed, staff would meet with Council\nto receive direction; stated the issue is constantly being studied and there is no scientific\nbacked proof that there is risk.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n21\nDecember 5, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-12-05.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-12-05", "page": 22, "text": "Vice Mayor Vella inquired what is available online if the public or Council has a request.\nThe AMP General Manager responded under the Energy Review section online, there is\na Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) section that is fairly detailed.\nVice Mayor Vella inquired whether Council could request information that AMP has\nrelied on to help inform Council's policies decisions which are within the Council's\njurisdiction.\nThe AMP General Manager responded in the affirmative.\nVice Mayor Vella inquired whether the PUB has done anything about the concerns\nregarding multi-family buildings.\nThe AMP General Manager responded AMP does not differentiate between multi-family\nbuildings and single family homes.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft requested the information used to make the PUB\ndecisions be shared.\nVice Mayor Vella inquired how the public could contact PUB members.\nThe AMP General Manager responded anything that comes in goes to the individual\nPUB members.\nVice Mayor Vella inquired whether the PUB members can be set up with City emails, to\nwhich the AMP General Manager responded in the affirmative.\nMayor Spencer suggested AMP find out which other cities have a moratorium; inquired\nwhether AMP has discussed a moratorium or the health concerns.\nThe AMP General Manager responded not to his knowledge.\nMayor Spencer stated a petition can be started by the public regarding the matter;\ninquired whether something can be added to the Smart Meters to reduce the risk.\nThe AMP General Manager responded that he can look into the request.\nMayor Spencer stated that she would like to hear about anything that can reduce the\nexposure.\n(17-741) Consider Creating a Police and Crime Citizens Oversight Advisory Committee.\n(Mayor Spencer)\nMayor Spencer made brief comments regarding the referral.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n22\nDecember 5, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-12-05.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-12-05", "page": 23, "text": "Expressed concern over the Police Department's License Plate Readers (LPRs) being\naccessed by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), which does not seem\nconsistent with being a Sanctuary City: Gaby Dolphin, Alameda.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated that he does not believe the City is big enough to\nwarrant an oversight committee; the Council is immediately accessible to the public; the\nCouncil holds the City Manager accountable; requested staff to respond to the LPR\ndatabase being used by ICE.\nThe Police Chief stated ICE is one of the 28 or 29 agencies that is part of the Northern\nCalifornia Regional Intelligence Center (NCRIC); the LPR policy addresses the data\ngoing to NCRIC; data is purged every six months; LPRs do not photograph the\noccupants of the vehicle; information on the license plate has to be accessed through\nthe Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV); the way the readers operate should not be a\nproblem; noted four LPRs are mounted on four patrol cars.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated that he does not support an oversight committee; the\nCouncil is the oversight committee; issues can be discussed with the City Manager; that\nhe would not want to relinquish his Councilmember role of dealing with said issues.\nCouncilmember Oddie briefly discussed the LPR scenario; stated the City is really not\nproviding any information that federal agencies cannot already access; stated the\nmatter will be discussed in more detail at another time; read from an email Council\nreceived regarding the matter; stated the Police Department is responsible for oversight;\nthe City Manager reports directly to Council; the City is small enough to react quickly;\ndiscussed racial profiling and a recent neighborhood meeting; stated that he has not\nseen data showing there is a profiling issue; he is not sure the committee is needed at\nthis point.\nVice Mayor Vella stated the LPRs could capture patterns and habits; her concern is\nagencies will use the City's data to track patterns and habits; the Sanctuary City\nresolution addresses actively deciding whether or not to enable ICE; she does not have\nenough information on the issue; stated the City did have a Police Commission at one\npoint in the early 1900s, which was in the City Charter and decided upon by the voters;\ndiscussed the historic information and suggested it be reviewed prior to forming a\ncommittee.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated the City has an outstanding Police Department;\ndiscussed the current police climate; stated that she does not see a need for the\ncommittee.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether the public can anonymously report issues, to which the\nPolice Chief responded in the affirmative.\nIn response to Mayor Spencer inquiry how the public can do so, the Police Chief stated\nonline, via letter, or on a complaint form; stated all anonymous complaints are\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n23\nDecember 5, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-12-05.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-12-05", "page": 24, "text": "investigated.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether online and the forms can indicate anonymous filing is\nallowable, to which the Police Chief responded said information is already included.\nMayor Spencer requested staff to get the word out that anonymous reporting is allowed.\nThe Police Chief noted third party complaints can also be filed.\nMayor Spencer stated the data can be reviewed in the future.\nThe City Manager noted data would be presented at an upcoming workshop.\nCOUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS\n(17-742) Consideration of Mayor's Nomination to the Planning Board. Not heard.\n(17-743) Stopwaste Topic Brief for November 2017. (Councilmember Oddie)\nCouncilmember Oddie stated that he provided the monthly update to share the\ninformation.\nADJOURNMENT\nThere being no further business, Mayor Spencer adjourned the meeting at 12:42 a.m.\nRespectfully submitted,\nLara Weisiger\nCity Clerk\nThe agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Sunshine Ordinance.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n24\nDecember 5, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-12-05.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-12-05", "page": 25, "text": "MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL JOINT MEETING OF\nTHE CITY COUNCIL AND SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO\nTHE COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION (SACIC)\nTUESDAY--DECEMBER 5, 2017--6:59 P.M.\nMayor Spencer convened the meeting at 7:04 p.m. and led the Pledge of Allegiance.\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.\nVice Mayor/Commissioner Vella seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous\nvoice vote - 5. [Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk preceding the\nparagraph number.]\n(*17-711 CC/17-14 SACIC) Minutes of the Special Joint City Council and SACIC\nMeeting Held on September 19, 2017. Approved.\n(*17-712 CC/17-15 SACIC) Recommendation to Accept the Fourth Quarter Financial\nReport for the Period Ending June 30, 2017. Accepted.\nADJOURNMENT\nThere being no further business, Mayor Spencer adjourned the meeting at 7:05 p.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 of the Alameda City Council\nAnd Successor Agency to the Community\nImprovement Commission\nDecember 5, 2017\n1", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-12-05.pdf"}