{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2018-02-20", "page": 1, "text": "MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING\nTUESDAY- - FEBRUARY 20, 2018- 7:00 P.M.\nMayor Spencer convened the meeting at 7:06 p.m. and led the Pledge of Allegiance.\nROLL CALL -\nPresent:\nCouncilmembers Ezzy Ashcraft, Matarrese, Oddie,\nVella, and Mayor Spencer - 5.\nAbsent:\nNone.\nAGENDA CHANGES\nNone.\nPROCLAMATIONS, SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY AND ANNOUNCEMENTS\n(18-081) Proclamation Declaring February 2018 as Teen Dating Violence Prevention\nand Awareness Month.\nMayor Spencer read the proclamation and presented it to Linda Ahmad, Valerie Nicolas\nand Kale Jenks, Daniel Rader, Elizabeth Dodge, and April McCarver, Alameda Family\nServices.\nMs. McCarver, Ms. Dodge and Mr. Raider made brief comments.\n(18-082) Proclamation Declaring February 19, 2018 as Day of Remembrance.\nMayor Spencer read the proclamation and presented it to Mas Takano, Kent Taketa,\nJudy Furuichi, John Towata, and Ken Narahara.\nA gentleman introduced those accepting and made brief comments.\nMr. Towata made brief comments.\n(18-083) Mayor Spencer did the daily reading for the Season for Nonviolence on\ncommunication.\nORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA\n(18-084) Nancy Schegel, Alameda, stated Centre Court has ongoing trouble with green\nwaste pickup; expressed concern with parking in red zones outside the Centre Court\ngate near at Earhart School; suggested pylons be installed.\n(18-085) Mitch Dunn, Alameda Maker Farm, outlined activities to come into compliance\nwith the City's regulations; discussed information that was not correct in a recent news\nreport; inquired about a drone policy.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n1\nFebruary 20, 2018", "path": "CityCouncil/2018-02-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2018-02-20", "page": 2, "text": "(18-086) Paul Foreman, Alameda, discussed Mixed Use (MX) zoning; urged Council to\namend the ordinance to provide an enforceable, objective standard.\n(18-087) Gaby Dolphin, Alameda, announced the Alameda League of Women Voters is\nholding a meeting tomorrow on campaign finance; discussed the Friends of Wadi\nFoquin event at the Library called \"Home Away from Home: Little Palestine by the Bay.'\nCONSENT CALENDAR\nMayor Spencer announced that the Legislative Agenda [paragraph no. 18-091 was\nremoved from the Consent Calendar for discussion.\nCouncilmember Matarrese recused himself from the resolution for Landscaping and\nLighting District 84-2 [paragraph no. 18-094].\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft moved approval of the remainder of the Consent\nCalendar.\nCouncilmember Oddie seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote -\n5. [Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk preceding the paragraph\nnumber.]\n(*18-088) Minutes of the Regular City Council Meeting Held on January 16, 2018 and\nthe Special Meeting Held on January 30, 2018. Approved.\n(*18-089) Ratified bills in the amount of $4,389,460.03.\n(*18-090) Recommendation to Authorize the City Manager to Execute a Second\nAmendment to an Agreement with Macks Craic Inc. (dba Mack5) to Add the Amount of\n$40,000 for a Total Agreement Amount of $146,470 for Construction Management\nServices for Cross Alameda Trail - Jean Sweeney Open Space Park. Accepted.\n(18-091) Recommendation to Approve the 2018 Legislative Agenda for the City of\nAlameda.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated that he would like to consider adding the following: 1)\naddressing income disparity under affordable housing as a way to assist with the high\ncost of housing in Alameda; currently, there is Council direction on raising the minimum\nwage, which aligns with his request to initiate action with lobbyists, the Association of\nBay Area Governments (ABAG) and the League of California Cities (LCC) for tax\ndeductions for rent paid by people under a certain income level; 2) cannabis use under\npublic safety; there is a misplacement of cannabis being on Schedule 1 along with\nsubstances like LSD and a glaring lack of scientific study; he would like to request the\nNational Institute on Health (NIH) conduct studies to characterize the substance, as well\nas its potential uses and side effects; the results should be listed on the City's legislative\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n2\nFebruary 20, 2018", "path": "CityCouncil/2018-02-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2018-02-20", "page": 3, "text": "plan and passed on to ABAG and the LCC through to the City's representative.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated the renter's credit has been doubled.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated Senator Glazer introduced a new bill to have the renter's\ncredit doubled.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she is happy to raise the issue with the LCC\nat Council's discretion.\nMayor Spencer inquired if the ask is to modify and add specific language to the current\n2018 Legislative Agenda.\nCouncilmember Matarrese responded in the affirmative; stated Alameda has lobbyists\nthat know pros and cons; he would like an anecdote on cannabis incorporated into the\n2018 Legislative Agenda.\nMayor Spencer stated Council supported her referral she brought regarding minimum\nwage; the referral is now with staff and is pending.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated his request would help the issue.\nThe City Manager stated the minimum wage item is due to return to Council on April\n17th.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether Councilmember Matarrese has specific language he\nwould like to add under affordable housing for income disparity.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated he would like to add, \"...including but not limited to,\ngetting tax deductions for rent paid below a certain income level.\"\nThe City Manager inquired whether \" and support legislation\" should also be added, to\nwhich Councilmember Matarrese responded in the affirmative.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether Council would like any specific language added to the\n2018 Legislative Agenda.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated the matter can be reviewed.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether the item can be reviewed and staff can come back to\nCouncil with modifications.\nThe City Manager responded the item can be placed on Consent with a redline version.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated that he concurs with Councilmember Matarrese; he would\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n3\nFebruary 20, 2018", "path": "CityCouncil/2018-02-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2018-02-20", "page": 4, "text": "like the heading to read \"health\" instead of \"public safety and homeland security.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated a new heading can be made.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated that he is concerned about the LCC sentencing laws.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether the concern is regarding the 2018 Legislative Agenda,\nto which Councilmember Oddie stated the item is the last bullet on the 2018 Legislative\nAgenda.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether Councilmember Oddie's request is to strike the last\nbullet, to which Councilmember Oddie responded that he would like to review options;\nstated that he would like to add something to encourage others to be supportive of\nenvironmental legislation; inquired what would occur if some of the items conflict with\neach other.\nThe City Manager responded if there is a conflict, the matter would be brought to\nCouncil; stated Regional Measure 3 will also be brought to Council for public input.\nVice Mayor Vella stated Senate Bill (SB) 1182, the Glazer Bill, barely raises the tax\ndeduction.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated the tax deduction doubles but it was so low to\nbegin with.\nVice Mayor Vella stated it is only a small step since the tax deduction being so low; she\nconcurs with Councilmember Oddie on changing the heading to \"health;\" she would like\nsomething added regarding supporting legislation that will fund lead testing and lead\npoisoning testing.\nThe City Manager inquired whether Vice Mayor Vella would want her request added\nunder the environment section, to which Vice Mayor Vella responded in the affirmative.\nMayor Spencer stated that she would like to add encouraging the State to come up with\na solution to the banking involving cannabis and to consider advocating to remove\ncannabis as a Schedule 1 drug to protect Statewide legalization and decriminalization of\ncannabis.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated that he would like the justifiable data to back up\nremoving cannabis as a Schedule 1 drug.\nMayor Spencer concurred; stated the government should be conducting more research\nin regards to the health benefits of cannabis and reducing opioid use; stated increasing\nthe minimum wage is more than affordable housing and maybe should be added to\nanother area; as a U.S. Mayor, she is part of an effort to remove illegal guns from the\nstreets and would like to add language to advocate for gun control.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n4\nFebruary 20, 2018", "path": "CityCouncil/2018-02-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2018-02-20", "page": 5, "text": "The City Manager inquired whether Mayor Spencer's request is to work with legislation\nto prohibit assault rifles.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated guns falling into the wrong hands needs to be\naddressed.\nMayor Spencer stated that she would review the language the U.S. Mayor's signed and\nget back to staff before the matter returns to Council.\n(*18-092) Recommendation to Approve the First Amendment for Three Additional Years\nto Agreement with Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck LLP, in the Amount Not to Exceed\n$270,000, to Pursue the City's State and Regional Advocacy Agenda. Accepted.\n(*18-093) Recommendation to Award a Contract in the Amount of $2,809,650, Including\nContingency, to Ranger Pipeline, Inc. for Construction of Cyclic 14 Easement Sewer\nRehabilitation Project, No. P.W. 10-17-44. Accepted.\n(18-094) Resolution No. 15346, \"Appointing an Engineer-of-Work and an Attorney-of-\nRecord for Island City Landscaping and Lighting District 84-2.\" Adopted.\n[Note: Councilmember Matarrese recused himself, so the resolution was adopted by the\nfollowing vote: Ayes: Councilmembers Ezzy Ashcraft, Oddie, Vella and Mayor Spencer\n- 4. Absent: Councilmember Matarrese - 1.]\n(*18-095) Resolution No. 15347, \"Appointing an Engineer-of-Work and an Attorney-of-\nRecord for Maintenance Assessment District 01-1 (Marina Cove). Adopted.\n(*18-096) Resolution No. 15348, \"Approving a Third Amendment to a Sublease and\nAuthorizing the City Manager to Execute Documents Necessary to Implement the\nTerms of a Third Amendment to a Sublease with SBA 2012 TC Assets, a Delaware\nLimited Liability Company, to Include Two Additional Five-Year Terms With an Annual\n3% Consumer Price Index (CPI) Increase for Use of a Portion of Building 624 Located\nat 625 West Ranger Avenue at Alameda Point.\" Adopted. [In accordance with the\nCalifornia Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), this project is Categorically Exempt under\nthe CEQA Guidelines Section 15301(c) - Existing Facilities.]\n(*18-097) Resolution No. 15349, \"Authorizing the City Manager to Apply to the State\nof\nCalifornia Department of Parks and Recreation, Division of Boating and Waterways for\na\nGrant to Renovate the Encinal Boat Launch Facility Under the Harbor and Watercraft\nRevolving Fund.\" Adopted.\nREGULAR AGENDA ITEMS\n(18-098) SUMMARY: Consideration of whether to put before the voters on the June 5,\n2018 ballot a $95 million General Obligation Bond measure, which would be assessed\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n5\nFebruary 20, 2018", "path": "CityCouncil/2018-02-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2018-02-20", "page": 6, "text": "at $23 per $100,000 of value on all properties in the City of Alameda.\nAdoption of Resolution Determining that the Public Interest and Necessity Demand the\nMaking of Infrastructure Improvements and Their Financing through the Issuance of\nGeneral Obligation Bonds. Not adopted;\n(18-098A) Adoption of Resolution Amending the General Fund Operating Budget for\nFiscal Year 2017-18 for the Cost of Submitting the Measure to the Voters. Not adopted;\nand\n(18-098B) Introduction of Ordinance Calling a Special Election and Ordering the\nSubmission of a Proposition Incurring Bonded Debt for the Purpose of Financing Clean\nWater, Street Infrastructure and Disaster/Emergency Preparedness Improvements\nThroughout the Geographic Boundaries of the City to the Qualified Voters of the City of\nAlameda at the Special Municipal Election to be Held on June 5, 2018. Not introduced.\nThe City Manager made brief comments.\nMayor Spencer requested clarification on whether Council is being asked to vote yes on\nthe matter tonight; inquired whether Council would come up with a list of eligible\nprojects prior to putting the matter to the voters.\nThe City Manager responded the ordinance contains a general list of projects based on\ncommunity input under Section 2; stated staff is asking Council to review the Section 2\nlist and either confirm, revise or say no to the list.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether the matter is a first reading and will return to Council at\nthe next meeting for a second reading to meet the deadline for the June ballot.\nThe City Manager responded in the affirmative.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether changes would affect being able to have the first\nreading.\nThe City Manager responded tonight would be the night to make the necessary\nchanges and still qualify as the first reading.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether only non-substantial changes can be made, to which\nthe City Manager responded in the affirmative.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether Council deciding to go with three different items\ninstead of the items on the list counts as a first reading.\nThe City Manager responded the first reading only applies if there are non-substantial\nchanges.\nThe Public Works Director; Catherine Lew, Lew Edwards Group; Miranda Everitt,\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n6\nFebruary 20, 2018", "path": "CityCouncil/2018-02-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2018-02-20", "page": 7, "text": "Fairbank, Maslin, Maulllin Metz & Associates; Craig Hill, NHA Advisors; gave a Power\nPoint presentation.\nMayor Spencer inquired what the top three priorities are for Alamedans according to the\nengagement survey.\nThe Public Works Director responded the top three priorities are traffic,\npotholes/sidewalks and streets; the bottom three are historic buildings, affordable\nhousing and trees.\nVice Mayor Vella inquired whether the reference to clean drinking water is specific to\nAlameda Point.\nThe Public Works Director responded in the affirmative.\nVice Mayor Vella inquired about the total cost of the project.\nThe Public Works Director responded $21 million.\nVice Mayor Vella inquired whether the project violates the Fiscal Neutrality Policy.\nThe Assistant City Attorney responded in the negative; stated the Fiscal Neutrality\nPolicy is intended to protect the General Fund; the funds do not comingle with the\nGeneral Fund; stated staff has other examples of Grant funding being used without\nviolating the Fiscal Neutrality Policy.\nVice Mayor Vella inquired whether Bond funding has ever been used.\nThe Assistant City Attorney responded in the negative.\nVice Mayor Vella inquired whether there are other examples where challenges have\nbeen made regarding the issue.\nThe Assistant City Attorney responded that he is unaware of the Fiscal Neutrality\nPolicies of other cities; the measure is the first time Alameda would be bonding for\nindebtedness.\nVice Mayor Vella inquired whether staff has researched other cities that have had Fiscal\nNeutrality Policies and whether they were able to use bond monies in said areas.\nThe Assistant City Attorney responded in the negative; stated Alameda's Fiscal\nNeutrality Policy is unique to Alameda.\nVice Mayor Vella inquired whether the money will be part of a 5% rent increase relative\nto the rent ordinance.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n7\nFebruary 20, 2018", "path": "CityCouncil/2018-02-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2018-02-20", "page": 8, "text": "Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated she does not understand the question.\nVice Mayor Vella clarified would the bond money assessment be transferable towards\nthe 5% rent increase to the tenant.\nThe Assistant City Attorney responded the property owners will be required to pay the\nfee.\nThe Community Development Director stated the maximum rent increase is set at 5%; if\nrent is raised above 5%, there is a mandatory hearing in front of the Rent Review\nAdvisory Committee (RRAC); the cost of the bond measure assessment can be passed\nthrough to tenants; the RRAC would determine the validity of the reason behind the\nincrease if it is above 5%.\nVice Mayor Vella inquired how much has been spent to date on the consultants,\nscientific polls and mailers.\nThe Assistant City Manager responded under $50,000.\nVice Mayor Vella inquired whether the total is for everything.\nThe Assistant City Manager responded that she would have to research the cost; stated\na poll was done in 2017 and again recently.\nVice Mayor Vella inquired how many mailers were sent out.\nThe Public Information Officer responded two mailers were sent out at $7,000 per\nmailer.\nVice Mayor Vella inquired what the constraints are on spending the money after the\nbond is issued.\nThe Public Works Director responded things change with time; stated staff will ensure\nthat City Council has the flexibility to select projects that are consistent with the original\npurposes of the bond.\nVice Mayor Vella inquired whether the Bond Oversight Committee is subject to the\nsame conflict of interest regulations that govern any other board or commission.\nThe Assistant City Attorney responded the Committee would be subject to the Form 700\nconflict of interest laws.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired whether the $293 million is an all-encompassing list of\nall the infrastructure needs, to which the Public Works Director responded in the\naffirmative.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n8\nFebruary 20, 2018", "path": "CityCouncil/2018-02-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2018-02-20", "page": 9, "text": "Councilmember Oddie inquired whether the entire $293 million is unmet or are other\nfunds available.\nThe Public Works Director responded the list is above and beyond current and\nprojected funding sources.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired whether there is a difference between the June and\nNovember elections.\nMs. Lew responded the threshold is the same for the June and November elections;\nstated her firm's recommendation is to sequence the proposals.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired whether today is the last possible day to make the\ndecision, to which the Assistant City Attorney responded in the affirmative.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired how much of the $293 million is included in existing\nfunding sources and existing plans, and whether the amount is above and beyond\neverything that is planned.\nThe Public Works Director responded the cost is above and beyond.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired whether the $14.4 million for water system replacement\ncosts, which were discussed at a previous meeting, are included in the $21 million that\nVice Mayor Vella referenced during her clarifying questions.\nThe Base Reuse Director responded costs have been updated based on a recent\nengineering estimate; stated the cost is $21 million.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired whether the funds can be mixed with Base Reuse\nfunds.\nThe Public Works Director responded projects can have different funding sources.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired whether there will be reimbursements as developers\nbuild out.\nThe Public Works Director responded as currently written, the ordinance would permit\nreimbursements; stated the reimbursements could happen from Alameda Point or from\nother grants.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired whether defining the projects after the election is a legal\nrequirement or a best practice; stated some projects should be listed in the voting guide.\nThe Public Works Director requested clarification on the question.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired whether voters will know what they are voting on.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n9\nFebruary 20, 2018", "path": "CityCouncil/2018-02-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2018-02-20", "page": 10, "text": "The Public Works Director responded there are several opportunities to inform voters\nwhat they are voting on: the Council vote on project selection, the infrastructure needs\nlist containing the words of the ballot measure and the ordinance.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired whether the list can be specific.\nThe Assistant City Attorney responded Council can set the parameters; stated the\nordinance is set up to allow flexibility.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated that he would prefer to set priorities now instead of after\ngoing to the ballot.\nMs. Lew stated the specificity would require going back to the voters in future years to\nmake an adjustment and would require a 2/3 vote.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired who will pay for the campaign.\nMs. Lew stated it would not be appropriate for staff to address advocacy matters.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired how the $93 million for the bonding capacity was\nreached.\nThe Public Works Director responded staff is responding to the citizen's requests.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired whether the request for the ballot arguments to not\ninclude titles is a legal consideration or a political decision.\nMs. Lew responded her advice is to allow the community viewpoints to be the prevailing\nvoices on the issue; stated the request is only a suggestion.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether there is a way to adopt project\nguidelines before going to the voters; and whether language can be written with more\nspecificity and with the flexibility for small deviations.\nThe Public Works Director responded the guidelines can be adopted before the vote;\nstated having the guidelines could possibly sway the vote.\nThe Assistant City Manager stated the guidelines are outlined in the staff report.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the consultant has had the community\nsubmit a ballot argument before.\nMs. Lew responded with her prior clients, the board signs unanimously or allows the\ncommunity to submit a ballot argument; stated with the amount of community\ninvolvement, she felt it best to recommend the community submit the ballot argument.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n10\nFebruary 20, 2018", "path": "CityCouncil/2018-02-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2018-02-20", "page": 11, "text": "Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired when the language in the resolution refers to the\nproject, is it referring to the list of areas that were polled.\nThe Public Works Director responded in the affirmative; stated the language refers to\nthe $95 million of projects listed in the expenditure list.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired how the finding can be made that $95 million will\npay for the cost of the project when the expenditure plan lists $293 million of unmet\ninfrastructure needs.\nThe Public Works Director responded the cost of the project is $95 million of\ninfrastructure needs that will be addressed through the infrastructure bond.\nThe City Manager stated the first sentence in the section states: \"you have to determine\nthat the estimated cost of the project will require an expenditure greater than the\namount allowed by the annual levy.'\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she is concerned with the last sentence\nregarding the $95 million.\nBrian Quint, Bond Counsel, stated the resolution is the initial requirement to place the\nbonds on the ballot; the specificity is set forth in the ordinance.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated project guidelines will not be established until after\nthe measure is passed.\nMr. Quint stated based on community input, the focus will be on the four priorities, but\nallow for flexibility.\nIn response to Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft's inquiry, the City Clerk stated every\nelection that is a general municipal is in November of even numbered years; any other\nelection is called a special election, even if it is consolidated with other elections like the\nJune primary.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired how the maximum interest rate of 12% per\nannum was figured.\nMr. Quint responded the rate is the statutory maximum.\nVice Mayor Vella inquired why the item is being placed on the June ballot and not the\nNovember ballot.\nMs. Lew responded existing State law indicates that in order to take advantage of the\nsimple majority threshold for general purpose measures, the measures must be during\na regularly scheduled municipal election.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n11\nFebruary 20, 2018", "path": "CityCouncil/2018-02-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2018-02-20", "page": 12, "text": "Vice Mayor Vella inquired whether there is still a consideration of placing another\nrevenue generating measure on the November ballot.\nThe City Manager responded that would be a Council decision.\nVice Mayor Vella inquired whether there is a plan to place something before the Council\nto decide on a sales tax measure within the year, to which the City Manager responded\nin the affirmative.\nCouncilmember Matarrese inquired whether there will be an explanation of the range,\nand whether the average of $23 per $100,000 would be listed in the 75 word ballot\nsummary.\nMr. Hill responded in the affirmative; stated voters will receive supplemental\ndocumentation.\nCouncilmember Matarrese inquired whether the supplemental information for voters will\ninclude guidelines for spending the $95 million.\nMr. Hill responded in the affirmative.\nCouncilmember Matarrese inquired whether a project has to be in the Capital\nImprovement Project (CIP) fund, to which the Assistant City Attorney responded in the\naffirmative.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired whether there is a cap and a floor for each category, to\nwhich the Assistant City Attorney inquired whether the question is regarding the tax\nrights statement.\nCouncilmember Oddie responded his question refers to the staff report.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated that he read from the ordinance not the staff report.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether the bonds will be repaid in 36 years based on the\nstatement regarding the $6 million annually generated to repay the bonds.\nMr. Quint responded based on the current interest rates and expected increases in\nassessed value over time, the estimate is the bonds will be paid off in 36 years.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether a survey question addressed repaying the bonds in 36\nyears.\nMs. Everitt responded the opinion poll included the cost for each homeowner per year\nfor 36 years.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n12\nFebruary 20, 2018", "path": "CityCouncil/2018-02-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2018-02-20", "page": 13, "text": "Mayor Spencer stated the opinion poll mentioned homeowner; inquired whether the cost\nis to all property owners; to which the City Manager responded in the affirmative.\nMayor Spencer stated the cost will not be to strictly homeowners.\nMs. Everitt noted the poll only included registered voters.\nMayor Spencer inquired what percentage of homeowners approved the language.\nMs. Everitt responded 28% found the language a very convincing reason to say no.\nIn response to Mayor Spencer's inquiry regarding the percentages, Ms. Everitt stated\nthe hypothetical ballot question tested and presented to Council meets the current\nstatutory guidelines for setting forth the cost to taxpayers.\nIn response to Mayor Spencer's further inquiry, Ms. Everitt stated the full 75 word ballot\nquestion was read, which included the duration of 36 years and the cost of $23 per\n$100,000 of assessed valuation, which received a response of 70%.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether a question informed the taxpayer they will be paying\nover 36 years.\nThe City Manager responded a new State law has requirements regarding what the\nballot question has to include.\nMr. Quint stated the new State law requires listing how much will be collected annually\nand how long repayment will take; the problem is there is a maximum of 75 words for\nthe ballot question.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether a specific question addressed paying for police and\nfire facilities.\nMs. Lew responded on the basis of the community feedback, her firm advised that\nemergency disaster preparedness be included in the measure.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether disaster preparedness in the presentation pertains to\nflooding, not police and fire.\nMs. Lew responded in 2015, police and fire needs ranked the fourth highest testing\nelement in an open ended question.\nMayor Spencer stated that she is looking for specific questions that state the bond\nmoney would be spent on specific items.\nMs. Lew stated the body of research over time was utilized to craft a measure that\neffectively captures the priorities of the public.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n13\nFebruary 20, 2018", "path": "CityCouncil/2018-02-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2018-02-20", "page": 14, "text": "Mayor Spencer inquired whether the recent poll included such questions.\nMs. Lew responded disaster preparedness is one of the top four categories that her firm\nis recommending be included in the bond funds.\nMs. Everitt stated 2/3 percent stated upgrading public facilities to address earthquake\nsafety is important.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether specific questions asked the people polled whether\nthey would pay bond money for specific projects.\nMs. Everitt responded there were 25 different priorities; stated the top ones are listed in\nthe presentation.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether the poll connected paying the bond money with the\nsubject, to which Ms. Everitt responded in the affirmative.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether the poll explained that the ballot measure means\nvoters would have to pay money, to which Ms. Everitt responded in the affirmative.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether the questions in the poll correspond with the numbers\nin the exhibits regarding costs.\nThe Public Works Director responded the numbers are different due to an engineering\nfirm updating the storm drain master plan estimates and incorporating some of the sea\nlevel rise analysis within the estimate.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether the language in Section 2 of the ordinance refers to\nreplacing or repairing Fire Stations 2 and 5.\nThe Fire Chief responded the language refers to replacing Fire Stations 2 and 5.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether it is to replace or update the stations.\nThe Fire Chief responded the infrastructure needs to be replaced.\nMayor Spencer inquired where is the language about Fire Stations 2 and 5replacement\nand cost.\nThe Fire Chief responded the cost is approximately $12.5 million per facility.\nThe City Manager stated the exhibit lists $15 million.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether Council will be allowed to vote on\nproject guidelines.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n14\nFebruary 20, 2018", "path": "CityCouncil/2018-02-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2018-02-20", "page": 15, "text": "The City Manager responded Council will be allowed to vote when the need arises.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether the word replace can be added in front of Fire Stations\n2 and 5.\nThe City Manager responded if an analysis is done and the stations do not need to be\nreplaced, the matter would need to return to voters.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether the language can state to repair and/or replace.\nThe City Manager responded Council can make the change if desired.\n***\n(18-099) Vice Mayor Vella stated a vote needs to be taken on whether other items later\nin the agenda will be heard so that the public can be aware.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated if the current meeting continues past 11:00 p.m.,\nadditional regular meetings would have to be added.\nMayor Spencer stated a vote is needed to consider the Golf Course item [paragraph no.\n18-101], the Cannabis item [paragraph no. 18-102 and the referrals [paragraph no. 18-\n103].\nMayor Spencer moved approval of hearing the Golf Course and Cannabis items.\nCouncilmember Matarrese seconded the motion which FAILED by the following voice\nvote: Ayes: Mayor Spencer and Councilmember Matarrese - 2. Noes: Councilmember\nEzzy Ashcraft and Councilmember Oddie and Vice Mayor Vella - 3.\nVice Mayor Vella moved approval of only hearing the Golf Course item.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated hearing the Golf Course item will make the meeting go\npast 11:00 p.m.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she will agree to the motion with the caveat\nthat the meeting does not go past 11:00 p.m. and shortening the speaker time to less\nthan 3 minutes.\nMayor Spencer seconded the motion, which FAILED by the following voice vote: Ayes:\nMayor Spencer, Councilmember Matarrese and Vice Mayor Vella - 3. Noes:\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft and Councilmember Oddie - 2.\n***\n***\nMayor Spencer calls a recess at 9:49 p.m. and reconvened the meeting at 9:56 p.m.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n15\nFebruary 20, 2018", "path": "CityCouncil/2018-02-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2018-02-20", "page": 16, "text": "Mayor Spencer inquired if a decision is made tonight, who gets to sign the ballot\nargument.\nThe City Clerk responded if Council is interested in signing the ballot argument, the\ndecision has to be made tonight; stated if Council is not interested in signing the ballot\nargument, nothing needs to be done tonight.\nMayor Spencer inquired where the resolution language states the requirement.\nThe City Clerk responded the ordinance allows for the direct arguments and the\nrebuttal.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether the language states the community members and not\nCouncil.\nThe City Clerk responded if Council wants to write the ballot argument rather than the\ncommunity members, a decision would need to be made tonight.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired if there are multiple ballot arguments submitted is there\na random drawing.\nThe City Clerk responded there is an order in the Elections Code that gives priority to\nelected officials.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired whether signing without a title means they are signing\nas community members.\nThe City Clerk responded in the affirmative; stated a bonafide organization would qualify\nabove not using the Councilmember title.\nMayor Spencer inquired where the ordinance states Councilmembers would be able to\nsubmit the ballot question not using titles.\nThe City Manager responded Section 19 of the ordinance.\nMayor Spencer inquired where the language is regarding having community members\nsubmit the ballot argument.\nThe Assistant City Attorney responded Section 19.\nMayor Spencer stated the language does not say community members.\nThe Assistant City Manager stated language can be added.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n16\nFebruary 20, 2018", "path": "CityCouncil/2018-02-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2018-02-20", "page": 17, "text": "Mayor Spencer stated there was a high level of community interest on the rent issue;\ninquired why staff did not recommend that Councilmembers not participate in that ballot\nquestion; inquired why staff came up with the current recommendation.\nThe City Manager responded the recommendation is from Ms. Lew's firm.\nMayor Spencer inquired why the recommendation is being supported by staff and why\nthe rent issue is different.\nThe City Manager responded staff concurred with the recommendation.\nMayor Spencer stated the rent issue involved 11/2 years of community input.\nThe City Manager stated the support from the community on the current issue is 70 to\n88%; staff is agreeing with the advice that the community should be offered the chance,\nas well as Councilmembers.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether staff has ever come to Council and requested they not\nuse their titles.\nThe City Clerk responded that she would need to research the matter.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether Councilmembers were allowed to use their titles for\nthe ballot question on the rent issue, to which the City Clerk responded in the\naffirmative.\nThe City Auditor and City Treasurer made brief comments.\nExpressed concerns with interest rates going up; stated the City needs new\ninfrastructure and safe water at Alameda Point: Michael McDonough, Chamber of\nCommerce.\nExpressed support for the bond measure, which will not pay for all infrastructure needs:\nPat Potter, BikeWalk Alameda.\nStated that he would not support a measure that does not have a list of projects;\nquestioned why East Bay Municipal Utility District is not paying for water: Jim Streylow,\nAlameda.\nExpressed support for the measure; stated the resolution is in the best interest of all\nAlamedans: Damien Mason, Alameda Backyard Growers and Community Action for a\nSustainable Alameda (CASA).\nUrged Council to place the measure on the ballot; discussed water problems at\nAlameda Point: Doug Biggs, Alameda Point Collaborative and Alameda resident.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n17\nFebruary 20, 2018", "path": "CityCouncil/2018-02-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2018-02-20", "page": 18, "text": "Discussed infrastructure needs of the disabled and the importance of improving\naccessibility: Beth Kenny, Commission on Disability.\nStated it is important for Alamedans to vote on the item; infrastructure upgrades are\nimportant to the City: Deb Knowles, Downtown Alameda Business Association (DABA).\nStated fixing the storm water and pumping system is critical to Alameda; urged Council\nto support the item: Ruth Abbie, CASA.\nSuggesting wedding the term climate change to infrastructure in the budget: Gaby\nDolphin, Alameda.\nStated that he is in full support of the measure, which is an opportunity for citizens to\ninvest in the place they live; urged proceeding tonight: Jonah Hendrickson, Alameda\nPoint Redevelopers.\nExpressed concern over the vagueness and Alameda Point fiscal neutrality: John Knox\nWhite, Alameda.\nMayor Spencer expressed concerns with fiscal neutrality; stated the language has to be\nclear and transparent to the voters; the City's Climate Action Plan should be added to\nthe body of the language; the word repair and/or replace should be added to the Fire\nStation section; the categories need to be prioritized and include the percentages; the\nvoters should know where the money is going; she does not support the 75 words as\nwritten; the body should address the water at Alameda Point, sea level rise and flooding\nas part of the City's Climate Action Plan; requested more specificity regarding what the\nvoters will be voting for.\nVice Mayor Vella stated people currently purchasing homes in Alameda are way above\nthe averages listed; expressed concerns with costs being passed on to renters, both\ncommercial and residential; stated it is misleading to say the water crisis at Alameda\nPoint was due to infrastructure and not a valve not being turned off; she is concerned\nwith the fiscal neutrality policy; the language should be clear about what the funds are\ngoing towards; she does not agree with not allowing Councilmembers to use titles; she\nsupports percentages for each category.\nMayor Spencer concurred with Vice Mayor Vella regarding Councilmembers using titles.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated that he agrees with the request for infrastructure needs;\nhe feels rushed on the issue; he is concerned with how the priorities will be chosen; the\ntaxpayers should not have to pay for infrastructure needs at Alameda Point; the bond\nwill also end up being paid for by the tenants; he concurs with statements made\nregarding Councilmembers using titles.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated it does not matter if her name is on the ballot\nargument; the infrastructure needs in Alameda are critical; she would like to see the\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n18\nFebruary 20, 2018", "path": "CityCouncil/2018-02-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2018-02-20", "page": 19, "text": "funds paid back by developers, not at the expense of residents; urged Council to allow\nvoters to vote on the issue; stated that she would like specificity for the categories;\nputting off the infrastructure needs is delaying a crisis.\nThe City Manager stated fiscal neutrality language can be added to the ordinance;\nlanguage about the Climate Action Plan can be added to Section 2; the definition of\ninfrastructure and capital project and the percentages of the categories can also be\nadded; repair and/or replace can be added for Fire Stations 2 and 5, as well as\nlanguage identifying the waterlines at Alameda Point and the Police substation on the\nWest End.\nCouncilmember Matarrese noted that he is willing to go past 11:00 p.m.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated the City Clerk clarified one more meeting can be\nadded.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated the 75 word ballot question is fine; suggested\nremoving the qualifier that states: \"The forgoing improvements are referred to herein as\nthe \"Project\" and include, but are not limited to projects identified in City's capital plans;\"\n\"but not limited to\" should be stricken because the funds should only go towards\ninfrastructure and capital plans listed in currently approved City projects; the Climate\nAction Plan and the Transportation Plan being only capital improvements associated\nwith the plans should be in large letters; the Assistant City Attorney's analysis regarding\nfiscal neutrality is correct.\n***\n(18-100) Councilmember Matarrese moved approval of continuing the meeting past\n11:00 p.m.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft seconded the motion.\nUnder discussion, Mayor Spencer stated that she does not support the motion, but\nwould consider a time certain and adding one more meeting.\nThe City Clerk stated the Sunshine Ordinance states more regular meetings have to be\nadded; currently, there are 22 regular meetings per year, the number would need to be\nincreased.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired whether it would be one meeting every month.\nThe City Clerk responded the Sunshine Ordinance does not state every month; stated it\nstates Council has to increase the regular meetings; the vote has never been taken\nbefore.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether the current meeting can be suspended.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n19\nFebruary 20, 2018", "path": "CityCouncil/2018-02-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2018-02-20", "page": 20, "text": "20\nFebruary 20, 2018", "path": "CityCouncil/2018-02-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2018-02-20", "page": 21, "text": "None.\nORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA\nNone.\nCOUNCIL REFERRALS\n(18-103) Update on Tracking of Council Direction through the Referral Process.\n(18-104) Consider Directing Staff to Provide Information on the Citywide Dockless Bike\nSharing Program and Return to Council with Additional Safety Requirements. Not\nheard. (Mayor Spencer and Vice Mayor Vella) [Not heard on December 19, 2017;\nJanuary 2 or 16, 2018, February 6, 2018 or February 20, 2018.]\n(18-105) Consider Banning Motorized Commercial Vehicles, Including Robotic\nCommercial Vehicles, from Sidewalks and Commercial Drone Aircraft Used for\nDeliveries. Not heard. (Councilmember Matarrese) [Not heard on January 2 or 16,\n2018, February 6, 2018 or February 20, 2018.]\nCOUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS\nConsideration of Mayor's Nomination for Appointment to the Public Art Commission. Not\nheard\nADJOURNMENT\nThere being no motion to continue the meeting past 11:00 p.m., Mayor Spencer\nadjourned the meeting at 11:01 p.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\n21\nFebruary 20, 2018", "path": "CityCouncil/2018-02-20.pdf"}