{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2018-05-15", "page": 1, "text": "MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING\nTUESDAY- - -MAY 15, 2018- 7:00 P.M.\nMayor Spencer convened the meeting at 7:13 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\n(18-275) Mayor Spencer announced the Alameda Point Transpiration Demand\nManagement item [paragraph no. 18-294 was withdrawn from the agenda and the\nImpact Fee Hearing [paragraph no. 18-296 was continued to June 19, 2018.\nPROCLAMATIONS, SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY AND ANNOUNCEMENTS\n(18-276) The Acting City Manager invited the public to a West Alameda Business\nAssociation West End Community Forum, co-hosted by the City, on Thursday, May 24th.\n(18-277) Proclamation Declaring May 2018 as Older American Month.\nMayor Spencer read the proclamation and presented it to Paul Hauser, Mastick\nAdvisory Board, and the Recreation Manager.\nMr. Hauser and the Recreation Manager made brief comments.\n(18-278) Proclamation Declaring May 2018 as Jewish American History Month.\nMayor Spencer read the proclamation and presented it to Rabbi Chester and Genevieve\nPastor-Cohen, Temple Israel, and Rabbi Meir Schmotkin, Chabad of Alameda.\nRabbi Chester, Rabbi Schmotkin, and Ms. Pastor-Cohen made brief comments.\nExpressed concern that people conflate Judaism, a religion, and Zionism, which is a\npolitical ideology: Howard Harawitz, Alameda.\nExpressed support for the significant changes made to the original proclamation; stated\nthe City should aspire to elevate freedom and human dignity to all in the community:\nPaula Rainey, Alameda.\n(18-279) Proclamation Declaring May 15, 2018 as Kate Pryor and David Lee Day.\nMayor Spencer read the proclamation and presented it to Kate Pryor and David Lee.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nMay 15, 2018\n1", "path": "CityCouncil/2018-05-15.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2018-05-15", "page": 2, "text": "Ms. Pryor and Mr. Lee made brief comments.\n(18-280) Proclamation Declaring June 2018 as Alameda Water Sports Month.\nMayor Spencer read the proclamation and presented it to Fred Rutledge, Encinal Yacht\nClub, John Arndt and John Platt, Summer Sailstice, and Kamy Richards, Pineapple\nSails.\nMr. Rutledge, Mr. Arndt, and Mr. Platt made brief comments.\nORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA\n(18-281) Kathy Moehring, Alameda, stated that she is disheartened about citizens\nhaving bad behavior.\n(18-282) Paul Foreman, Alameda Citizens Task Force, urged Council to petition the\ngrand jury regarding Councilmembers Oddie and Vella.\n(18-283) Andy Huntoon, Alameda, stated that he is disappointed about the waste of\nenergy and funds; Council does not abide by transparency; suggested equipping the\nChambers with a screen to project the faces of speakers; urged enhanced public input.\n(18-284) Angie Watson-Hajjem, ECHO Housing, thanked Council and staff for their\nsupport and for recommending full funding for ECHO.\n(18-285) Jenya Cassidy, Alameda, stated that she appreciates the Council; expressed\ngratitude to Vice Mayor Vella and Councilmember Oddie for their support on rent\nissues.\nCONSENT CALENDAR\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated that he would recuse himself from the Island\nLandscaping and Lighting District 84-2 resolution [paragraph no. 18-292].\nCouncilmember Oddie moved approval of the Consent Calendar.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice\nvote - 5. [Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk preceding the\nparagraph number.]\n(*18-286) Minutes of the Special City Council Meeting Held on April 16, 2018; the\nSpecial City Council Meetings, the Joint City Council and Successor Agency to the\nCommunity Improvement Commission Meeting and Regular City Council Meeting Held\non April 17, 2018. Approved.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nMay 15, 2018\n2", "path": "CityCouncil/2018-05-15.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2018-05-15", "page": 3, "text": "(*18-287) Ratified bills in the amount of $4,911,579.29.\n(*18-288) Recommendation to Approve the Execution of a Reciprocal Tax Information\nSharing Agreement between the City of Alameda and the Franchise Tax Board of the\nState of California. Accepted.\n(*18-289) Recommendation to Set June 19, 2018 for a Public Hearing to Consider\nCollection of Delinquent Business License Taxes and Delinquent Integrated Waste\nManagement Accounts Via the Property Tax Bills. Accepted.\n(*18-290) Recommendation to Accept the Work of MCK Services, Inc. for Repair and\nResurfacing of Certain Streets, Phase 36, No. P.W. 04-17-24. Accepted.\n(*18-291) Recommendation to Amend the Contract with MCK Services, Inc. to Extend\nthe Term and Increase Compensation by $5,300,000, Including Contingency, for a Total\nCumulative Contract Amount of $20,378,600.41 for Repair and Resurfacing of Certain\nStreets, Phase 37, No. P.W. 01-18-01. Accepted; and\n(*18-291A) Resolution No. 15378, \"Amending the Measure B and BB Fund Budgets for\nFiscal Year 2017-2018 and Fiscal Year 2018-2019. Adopted.\n(*18-292) Resolution No. 15379, \"Preliminarily Approving the Annual Report Declaring\nthe City's Intention to Order the Levy and Collection of Assessments and Providing for\nNotice of Public Hearing on June 19, 2018 - Island City Landscaping and Lighting\nDistrict 84-2 (Various Locations). Adopted.\n[Note: Councilmember Matarrese recused himself. The matter carried by the following\nvote: Ayes: Councilmembers Ezzy Ashcraft, Oddie, Vella and Mayor Spencer - 4.\nAbsent: Councilmember Matarrese - 1.]\n(*18-293) Resolution No. 15380, \"Preliminarily Approving the Annual Report Declaring\nthe City's Intention to Order the Levy and Collection of Assessments and Providing for\nNotice of Public Hearing on June 19, 2018 - Maintenance Assessment District 01-01\n(Marina Cove).' Adopted.\n(18-294) Summary Title: Approve Actions to Implement the Alameda Point\nTransportation Demand Management (TDM) Plan\nAdoption of Resolution Authorizing the City of Alameda to Ratify the TDM Fee Amount\nfor Existing Tenants in Alameda Point;\n(18-294A) Recommendation to Allow a Pass Through of the TDM Fees from Existing\nTenants in Alameda Point to the Alameda Transportation Management Association\n(TMA); and\n(18-294B) Recommendation to Allow a Pass Through of the Special Taxes Generated\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nMay 15, 2018\n3", "path": "CityCouncil/2018-05-15.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2018-05-15", "page": 4, "text": "for Transportation Purposes from Property Owners within Community Facilities District\n17-1 (CFD 17-1) at Alameda Point to the Alameda TMA. Not heard.\n(*18-295) Resolution No. 15381, \"Authorizing the Acting City Manager to Submit a\nRequest to the Metropolitan Transportation Commission for the Allocation of $80,000 in\nFiscal Year 2018/2019 for the Cross Alameda Trail Project between Main Street and\nConstitution Way per Transportation Development Act Article 3 for Pedestrian/Bicycle\nProject Funding and to Execute All Necessary Documents.' Adopted.\nREGULAR AGENDA ITEMS\n(18-296) Public Hearing to Consider a Recommendation to Approve Willdan Financial's\nCity of Alameda Park and Recreation Facilities Impact Fee Update and Nexus Study;\nand Introduction of Ordinance Amending Alameda Municipal Code Chapter XXVII,\nSection 27-3 (Citywide Development Fees) to Re-Adopt Pre-Existing Park and\nRecreation Facilities Impact Fee. Not heard.\n(18-297) Public Hearing to Consider Adoption of the Fiscal Year (FY) 2018-19\nCommunity Development Block Grant (CDBG)/HOME Partnership Investment Program\nAction Plan and Authorize the Acting City Manager to Negotiate and Execute Related\nDocuments, Agreements, and Modifications at Funding Levels Approved by Congress.\nThe CDBG Management Analyst gave a Power Point presentation.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired why the community needs assessment is still in\ndraft form, to which the CDBG Management Analyst responded the needs assessment\nwill be brought back to the Council in June for final approval.\nIn response to Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft's inquiry regarding carry forward funds,\nthe CDBG Management Analyst stated the Midway bathroom trailer is a larger project\nand will take about 15 weeks.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated the Action Plan addresses the primary objective to\ncreate economic opportunities; inquired whether there are any metrics for affordable\nhousing priority.\nThe CDBG Management Analyst responded there are clear metrics for social services,\nbut affordable housing can be measured by what can be accomplished in a given year\nand relies on multiple organizations to leverage funds.\nThanked Council for continued funding for Medicare counseling at Mastick; stated the\nfunding helps with legal services for elder abuse, health law, and can help expand\neviction defense services for seniors: Dan Ashbrook, Legal Assistance for Seniors.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nMay 15, 2018\n4", "path": "CityCouncil/2018-05-15.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2018-05-15", "page": 5, "text": "Urged support of the recommendations; stated the funding allows her organization to\nprovide services for referrals, including restraining orders, etc.: Erin Scott, Family\nViolence Law Center.\nStated the 211 phone line connects people to critical health and human services and\nhas been operating for 11 years; thanked the Council for its past support; stated live text\nand chat features will be implemented this summer; urged support be continued as the\n211 line plays an important role in disaster preparedness and response: Alison DeJung,\nEden I&R.\nThanked Council for continuing to supporting operating funds; stated the funds go\ntoward the homeless intake center and the Midway bathroom trailer project; invited the\nCouncil and community to a fundraiser: Miriam Delagrange, Building Futures.\nVice Mayor Vella stated that she is on the Board for Alameda Family Services and\nwould be recusing herself from voting on that portion of the Action Plan.\nMayor Spencer thanked the Social Services Human Relations Board (SSHRB); stated\nthe SSHRB and other organizations are critical to the community and it is important that\nthey continue to serve.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft concurred with Mayor Spencer; stated there is a fine line\nbetween homelessness and having a roof over your head; the level of need in the\ncommunity cannot be addressed without the help of all agencies.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft moved approval of adopting the Fiscal Year 2018-19\nCommunity Development Block Grant/HOME Partnership Investment Program Action\nPlan and authorizing the Acting City Manager to negotiate and execute related\ndocuments, agreements, and modifications at funding levels approved by Congress.\nCouncilmember Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice\nvote - 5. [Note: Vice Mayor Vella recused herself from the Alameda Family Services\nportion of the plan.]\n(18-298) Public Hearing to Consider Introduction of Ordinance Approving a Disposition\nand Development Agreement (DDA) (and Related Documents) between the City of\nAlameda and MidPen Housing Corporation, Alameda Point Collaborative, Building\nFutures with Women and Children, and Operation Dignity for the Rebuilding of the\nExisting Supportive Housing Development at Alameda Point. Introduced; and\n(18-298A) Introduction of Ordinance Approving a Development Agreement (DA)\nbetween the City of Alameda and MidPen Housing Corporation, Alameda Point\nCollaborative, Building Futures with Women and Children, and Operation Dignity for the\nRebuilding of the Existing Supportive Housing Development at Alameda Point.\nIntroduced.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nMay 15, 2018\n5", "path": "CityCouncil/2018-05-15.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2018-05-15", "page": 6, "text": "The Redevelopment Project Manager gave a Power Point presentation.\nThanked the Acting Assistant City Manager and the Redevelopment Project Manager\nfor a collaborative effort with MidPen; stated approval of the agreement will help move\nforward to create the community that has been planned for five years: Keith McCoy,\nAlameda Point Collaborative.\nStated the agreement reflects the City's and collaborating partners' goals and intentions\nto create new, high quality affordable housing; it is a big win-win and she is thrilled to\nreach the milestone; she is ready and excited for the work ahead; urged support; stated\nthat she looks forward to more progress: Abby Goldware, MidPen Housing.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated the project is exciting and well-planned; she is\nproud of Alameda for using the former Naval Air Station (NAS) to accommodate\nformerly homeless; thanked City staff and other agencies; urged moving forward as fast\nas possible because the sooner the project gets going, the better.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated the community ultimately judges elected officials on how\nthey treat the most vulnerable people; he is glad the Council and City is able to do\nsomething to take care of the people; the project is a tremendous opportunity; that he is\nproud to support the agreement and looks forward to getting it moving.\nCouncilmember Matarrese moved introduction of the ordinances approving the DA and\nDDA.\nCouncilmember Oddie seconded the motion.\nUnder discussion, Vice Mayor Vella stated that she plans to support the agreement for\nthe same reasons; it is the best and highest use of the Alameda Point property; she is\nhappy to see it moving forward; thanked everyone for the hard work; stated the project\nis a tremendous step in right direction.\nMayor Spencer thanked Council for increasing the number of units and making it work;\nstated the increase was a good percentage.\nOn the call for the question, the motion carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.\n(18-299) Recommendation to Approve a Two-Year Pilot Project to Invest in a Ultra-\nHigh-Speed Broadband Network to Attract and Foster High-Tech Research and\nDevelopment Companies Initially Located at Alameda Point.\nThe Information Technology (IT) Director gave a Power Point presentation.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nMay 15, 2018\n6", "path": "CityCouncil/2018-05-15.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2018-05-15", "page": 7, "text": "Councilmember Oddie stated the project should have been considered a strategic goal;\ninquired why a vendor was chosen without an RFP process.\nThe IT Director responded the answer will be addressed in other slides of her\npresentation.\nIn response to Councilmember Oddie's inquiry, the IT Director stated the pilot program\nis for businesses to connect to research and development (R&D) super computers and\nis not an internet service provider.\nThe IT Director continued the presentation.\nMayor Spencer inquired why the City has to pay for the service if it is so valuable to\nbusinesses, to which the IT Director responded traditionally, cities CENIC work with, an\nindividual research businesses have not approached CENIC.\nMayor Spencer inquired what are the benefits to Alameda and whether another city is\npaying for for-profit businesses to use CENIC.\nThe IT Director responded some of the benefits to the City include fostering success of\nexisting R&D businesses, attracting R&D businesses to the City, and providing\neducational access.\nIn response to Councilmember Oddie's inquiry regarding other businesses, such as\nBladium not being able to connect to CENIC, the IT Director stated the program is a\nresearch network.\nVice Mayor Vella inquired whether there are any other funds besides the $5,000 paid by\neach R&D to join and whether they are precluded from choosing a provider.\nThe IT Director responded CENIC created a point-to-point design; stated the cost is\n$150,386 from the IT funding and $65,700 split between the Base Reuse and Fleet\nIndustrial Supply Center (FISC) funds; other funding sources will be obtained if the pilot\nprogram is successful.\nMayor Spencer inquired how many companies are interested in joining, to which the IT\nDirector responded eight eligible companies expressed interest.\nIn response Mayor Spencer's inquiry regarding which businesses are willing to pay the\none-time $5,000, the IT Director stated the purpose of the pilot program is to determine\nthe businesses that have an interest.\nVice Mayor Vella inquired how the City determines which businesses qualify as R&D, to\nwhich the IT Director responded CENIC decides which businesses qualify.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nMay 15, 2018\n7", "path": "CityCouncil/2018-05-15.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2018-05-15", "page": 8, "text": "In response to Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft's inquiry regarding Comcast, the IT\nDirector stated AT&T is not interested in setting up a point-to-point network.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether CENIC competes with Comcast, to\nwhich the IT Director responded in the negative.\nThe Acting City Manager stated the pilot program is an economic development initiative\nto bring something unique and broaden opportunities at Alameda Point; the concept is\nnot without risk, which is why a pilot program was proposed and a fee to join has been\nincluded; the educational and R&D components are compatible with Alameda Point.\nMayor Spencer stated that she is concerned the program is for for-profit businesses,\nwhich are not being asked to pay; non-profit businesses could benefit from the program,\nespecially if the City is paying for it; inquired whether there would be any additional\ncapital costs.\nThe IT Director responded staff would come back to Council if there are additional\ncosts.\nIn response to Mayor Spencer's inquiry, the IT Director stated measuring the success of\nthe program would include evaluating the increase in contracts, etc.\nMayor Spencer stated if business profits go up, the company should have to pay a\npercentage of the cost.\nIn response to Vice Mayor Vella's inquiry, the IT Director stated there will be no\ntrenching during the pilot program; it will be a point-to-point network; the two-year pilot\nprogram is intended to help retain existing businesses.\nThe Acting City Manager stated the pilot program would also attract new businesses to\nSite B.\nVice Mayor Vella inquired how an above-ground connection at Alameda Point would\nwork.\nThe IT Director responded the system would be a wireless access point at the Network\nOperations Center and is self-contained in design.\nIn response to Councilmember Oddie's inquiry, the Acting Assistant City Manager\nstated Alameda Point would be no worse off than it is now; the pilot program would help\nattract certain types of companies; marketing for other uses will not stop, but it is worth\ntrying to help attract more R&D companies.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated CENIC is a way to talk to other researchers and\nexchange ideas; replacing jobs at Alameda Point is important; the types of companies\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nMay 15, 2018\n8", "path": "CityCouncil/2018-05-15.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2018-05-15", "page": 9, "text": "that would benefit from CENIC are the ones that would help close the gap of income\ndisparity; CENIC is an extraordinary opportunity for the type of businesses that the pilot\nprogram would attract, such as university related businesses which do not have access\nto research in biotech resource libraries; the pilot program is worth the gamble and\nmakes Alameda unique; offering access to CENIC will attract R&D; he fully supports the\nrecommendation.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated professional, well-paid tech jobs depend on their\nfunding stream; a lot of companies are funded by venture capital; CENIC is an exciting\nopportunity to make Alameda Point what it is intended to be; she loves the opportunities\nthat would be available for Alameda Unified School District and College of Alameda\nstudents; the City spends money on a lot of different projects and this one is worth\npursuing; she hopes the Council will support the program.\nIn response to Mayor Spencer's inquiry regarding free WiFi, the IT Director stated the\nproject is not impacted by free WiFi, which staff will be researching.\nVice Mayor Vella stated there are definitely positives to the pilot program; it is not her\nintent for General Fund money to be used; she is concerned the door was closed to\nother groups and organizations because an RFP process was not done; in general, it is\na policy decision; she is prepared to support the program, but with a caveat that people\nwho benefit should cover costs in coming years.\nStated that she is retired from IT; urged Council to give very serious consideration to the\nproject in light of the opportunities at Alameda Point: Karen Boutilier, Alameda.\nCouncilmember Oddie concurred with his colleagues on the ends, but his issue is with\nthe means; expressed concern over an RFP process not being done; stated the\nprogram is limited to for-profit R&D companies; he understands the importance of the\nprogram, but finds it problematic there is another no-bid contract, similar to the Gig Car\nShare pilot program, which had no Council input; there should have been a transparent\nand fair bidding process.\nMayor Spencer concurred with Councilmember Oddie; stated it is important that such\nprojects come to Council; she cannot help but think if CENIC is so important to the\ncompanies, they should have been able to come up with the funding instead of the City\npaying $200,000; it is critical to think about whether the program is where money should\nbe spent; it is not a priority and may result in having to cut services; she is not able to\nsupport the program.\nCouncilmember Matarrese moved approval of the recommendation to approve a two\nyear pilot program.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft seconded the motion, which carried by the following\nvoice vote: Ayes: Councilmembers Ezzy Ashcraft, Matarrese Oddie and Vella -\n4.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nMay 15, 2018\n9", "path": "CityCouncil/2018-05-15.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2018-05-15", "page": 10, "text": "Noes: Mayor Spencer - 1.\nMayor Spencer called a recess at 9:14 p.m. and reconvened the meeting at 9:24 p.m.\n(18-300) Resolution No. 15382, \"Rescinding Resolutions 12567, 13031, 13304, and\n14656 which Established the Rules of Order Governing the Proceedings and Order of\nBusiness of City Council Meetings and Adopting New Rules of Order Governing City\nCouncil Meetings.\" Adopted; and\n(18-300A) Introduction of Ordinance Amending the Alameda Municipal Code by\nDeleting Section 2-91.13.f of the Sunshine Ordinance Pertaining to Meeting\nAdjournment. Introduced.\nThe City Clerk gave a brief presentation.\nIn response to Mayor Spencer's inquiry, the City Clerk stated the Open Government\nCommission (OGC) left the speaker time to three minutes per agenda item, with no\nceding time since the Council could vote to suspend the rules and reduce the time.\nIn response to Mayor Spencer's inquiry, Councilmember Oddie stated in past meetings,\nthere was confusion when an item was discussed in closed session, but speakers came\nto speak during the open session.\nThe City Clerk noted if there are multiple meetings on one night, a speaker can only\nspeak once regarding an item.\nIn response to Mayor Spencer's inquiry about the public comment time limits,\nCouncilmember Oddie stated the proposed change is just one option.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated the ultimate take-away is to try to increase\ntransparency in government by making the meetings move along more expeditiously;\nstated rules can be suspended.\nThe City Clerk noted a supermajority is needed to suspend the rules.\nIn response to Mayor Spencer's inquiry, the City Clerk stated every public speaker is\nallowed three minutes, unless there is a supermajority to override it; the Council\nsubcommittee decided to reduce the speaker limit if there are more speakers.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated the Rules are ultimately the Council's decision; limiting\nspeakers is not an easy vote; having something trigger the limit automatically seems to\nbe a better option.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nMay 15, 2018\n10", "path": "CityCouncil/2018-05-15.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2018-05-15", "page": 11, "text": "Mayor Spencer stated the current Council has not gone down to one minute; inquired\nhow the minority view would be addressed, such as if there are 48 speakers for one\nside, and only two on the other.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft responded the reason for the speaker limits was\nprimarily because meetings were going very late; the limits are not a method to weigh\nfor or against, it is just to streamline the meetings.\nVice Mayor Vella stated that she is concerned about restricting the time; Council cannot\ndetract from one person because other people want to talk on the topic; if the concern is\nabout time management, suggested having an estimated start time for items instead of\nstating the amount of time for each item.\nMayor Spencer stated the problem with estimating a start time is the item cannot be\nheard ahead of that time because people may not come until the time stated.\nVice Mayor Vella stated the time spent on each item should be composite time; there\nshould be feedback in terms of time check; names of speakers could be put in order on\na screen so each speaker knows when their time is nearing and to avoid frustration for\nfolks who have been waiting; having an overall time check could be really helpful.\nThe City Clerk continued the presentation.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated the Council time limits would be a good exercise\nin discipline for Council.\nMayor Spencer stated it is also an exercise in reducing free speech and limiting public\ncomment; it seems like the goal is to not have public meetings if the public is not\nallowed to express their comments or if they are limited to one minute.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated the time amounts for the public can be addressed when\nthe discussion reaches that point; regarding the time limits for Council, other cities have\nlimits and perhaps each member should be more concise with questions and\ncomments.\nIn response to Mayor Spencer's inquiry, Councilmember Oddie stated the City of\nOakland Council has a 10 minute limit which includes questions and comments; the limit\ncan be flexible depending on the issue; for topics such as rent control, the limit does not\nhave to be 10 minutes.\nMayor Spencer stated for a vote to reducing the time, asking for four votes instead of\njust three makes a difference.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated requested the presentation be finished before Council\naddresses what is wanted.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nMay 15, 2018\n11", "path": "CityCouncil/2018-05-15.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2018-05-15", "page": 12, "text": "The City Clerk continued presentation.\nIn response to Vice Mayor Vella's inquiry, the City Clerk stated the rules of order note\nthat Alameda's Charter requires three votes to pass action because it departs from\nRosenberg's Rules which allows for two votes; continued presentation.\nStated the OGC subcommittee took a step back to look at the rules of order for\nmeetings from a public perspective and make it as easy as possible to understand; the\nfocus was more on Council's conduct than on public conduct: Irene Dieter, Open\nGovernment Commission.\nIn response to Mayor Spencer's inquiry, Ms. Dieter stated the OGC proposal for Council\nto speak for three minutes, three times was to allow for deliberations; under the new\nformat, a motion would be put forward right away to enable a back-and-forth dialogue\nfrom the get-go, stop long-winded commentary and move items along.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether clarifying questions were included in the three\nminutes, to which Ms. Dieter responded in the negative, stated the OGC subcommittee\ndid not address clarifying questions and was just addressing once a motion is on the\nfloor.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft thanked the OGC subcommittee members.\nMayor Spencer thanked the OGC for doing a good job; stated that she does not\nsupport the Council subcommittees' changes, but would like to try OGC\nrecommendation; she has a problem limiting public comment to one minute; she likes\nhaving flexibility.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she appreciated the OGC looking at the\nmatter from the public side; the Council subcommittee was looking at the matter from\nboth sides; Vice Mayor Vella's suggestion to list speakers could streamline the speaker\ntime.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated that he wants to make sure Council makes the\nmeetings sensible and reasonable in terms of time; Council was not following the\nexisting rules; he has difficulty putting a two-minute time limit on people accepting\nproclamations; speakers should be allowed only three minutes; the current rule on non-\nagenda or other matters under jurisdiction of Council should be maintained; he supports\nending the practice of ceding time; the rules can be changed; currently, deliberations\nare supposed to be restricted to three minutes, which Council has routinely violated;\nCouncil has two weeks to review the agenda packet, which is enough time to ask\nclarifying questions; suspension of the rules can be flexible; the most valuable thing\nboth subcommittees brought forward is Rosenberg's Rules of Order.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nMay 15, 2018\n12", "path": "CityCouncil/2018-05-15.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2018-05-15", "page": 13, "text": "Vice Mayor Vella stated that she does not have a problem with suspension of rules;\nlimiting the amount of time proclamation recipient groups are allowed to speak is not a\nbad thing; regarding public comment, Alameda gives a lot of time for public comment,\nmore so than other cities; reducing the time two minutes is fine but one minute is a\ndrastic change; she agrees with ending ceding time; the language of paragraph 4\nregarding public comment on motions should be struck because it is confusing; she is\nfine with deliberations; she would like the latest time to be extended to 11:30 p.m. to\ngive an extra cushion; she would like a list of speaker names displayed, which would\nhelp keep track of time.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated that he supports the proposal by the subcommittee; doing\nthe proclamations at 6:45 p.m. is a good idea; he hears the concern regarding timing;\nsuggested reducing the time to 90 seconds instead of just one minute and allowing\nthree votes to suspend the particular rule; three votes could also suspend the rules\nregarding Council comments; expressed support for the 11:00 p.m. time.\nMayor Spencer proposed going down the list to see the majority.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated there is a good framework; she would like to keep\nthe suspension of the rules consistent; expressed support for the latest time being 11:00\np.m.\nMayor Spencer stated that she disagrees with a supermajority vote to suspend the\nrules; three is fine; regarding the proclamations, she will try to read part and start early\nto save time; she is concerned with limiting recipient groups to two minutes; the\nproclamations are meaningful to people receiving them so she cannot limit them; for\npublic comment on non-agenda items, if there are more than five speakers, she works\nto accommodate speakers within the 15 minutes; she likes a two or three minute public\ncomment limit, but anything less than 90 seconds is not appropriate; she does not think\nclarifying questions should count against the nine minutes; clarifying questions educate\nthe community; the public appreciates Council asking clarifying questions; she prefers\nthe latest time to end at 11:00 p.m. instead of 11:30 p.m.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated according to Rosenberg's rules, public comment is\nnot permitted on motions because the Chair has already closed public comment; the\npoint he was trying to make is people should be able to speak on the matter later.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated public comment at the end of the meeting is the\ncontinuation of comments on non-agenda items.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated that he agrees with the current resolution that states\npublic comments are on items not on the agenda or any items under the jurisdiction of\nthe Council.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nMay 15, 2018\n13", "path": "CityCouncil/2018-05-15.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2018-05-15", "page": 14, "text": "The City Attorney stated non-agenda comments allows speakers to talk about any item\nand the Council just has to sit silently and listen.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated that he would like to listen to what people have on\ntheir mind even if it is not on the agenda; he is also willing to listen to criticism if\nsomething comes up or if he has made a mistake, so he could undo it.\nThe City Attorney stated concerned citizens can email or call any of the\nCouncilmembers without using time reserved for agenda items; the intent of the new\nrules of order is to be more efficient with getting the City's business done.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated until someone does a time analysis to see where time\nis actually being spent, he will continue to listen to public comment on any issues\nwhether or not they are agendized.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated that he is fine with people coming to speak during the\npublic comment at the end of the meeting because perhaps they watched the meeting\nfrom home and decided they had something to say; if an audience member is still\npresent at the end of the meeting and wants to speak during oral communications\nsection, he is happy to hear anything they have to say.\nMayor Spencer went down the list of rules; inquired whether Council would support the\nsupermajority to suspend the rules.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated that he is flexible to change the supermajority to three\nvotes during the trial period.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated both the OGC and Council subcommittees agreed on\nthe supermajority; he would like to try that method; Council could change it if it does not\nwork.\nMayor Spencer stated that she does not support a supermajority vote; she prefers a\nvote of three.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft concurred with Councilmember Matarrese; stated she\nwould like to stick with the supermajority during the trial period.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated he is fine with the supermajority.\nIn response to Mayor Spencer's inquiry regarding Special Orders and Proclamations,\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated she sees the time limit as a scheduling issue.\nMayor Spencer stated if the 15 minute limit is imposed, staff may have to say no to\nsome recipients; the four proclamations tonight went over 15 minutes.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nMay 15, 2018\n14", "path": "CityCouncil/2018-05-15.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2018-05-15", "page": 15, "text": "Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated the proclamations should be scheduled\naccordingly; if people cannot be accommodated at a specific meeting, it could be moved\nto the next meeting.\nThe Acting City Manager noted sometimes there is no choice because of the specific\nmonths or events related to the proclamations.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated that he is fine with the 15 minute hard limit but does\nnot want a buzzer going off when an award is being accepted; suggested if four\nproclamations arise, the Mayor could request to suspend the rules to accommodate the\nproclamations and the Council will all agree; stated it is easy to try it out to see if it\nworks.\nThe City Clerk noted the four proclamations tonight took 26 minutes.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated part of the solution is preparing the recipients so\nthey are aware how many other groups will be receiving a proclamation.\nMayor Spencer stated that she does not want to limit recipients to two minutes when\nthey are accepting a proclamation; the proclamations are meaningful to the recipients\nand limiting their time may not give enough for them to tell their story.\nVice Mayor Vella stated there is a way to handle everything being raised; it is not the\nMayor's job to let recipients know how many proclamations there will be; staff could do\nso; staff could request that presenters or recipients have statements prepared and\nrequest they limit statements to a number of minutes; if additional minutes are needed,\ninformation could be conveyed by the group ahead of time; Council would be able to\nsuspend the rule; addressing the time limit in this manner seems to be better than\nhaving a hardline cap.\nIn response to Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft's inquiry, Vice Mayor Vella stated the\nsentence that states recipient groups are limited to two minutes could be omitted and\ninstead say staff will work with recipients ahead of the meeting.\nCouncilmember Oddie suggested the language be changed to \"recipient groups should\nendeavor to speak for a maximum of two minutes\" and not say they will be timed.\nMayor Spencer stated she that would not support the suggestion; she does not think\nthere should be a hard rule; limiting recipients defeats the purpose of proclamations; it is\na good-will gesture; she does not want recipients to feel rushed; recipients should be\nable to say what they would like when accepting the proclamation.\nThe Acting City Manager stated instead of placing the onus on the recipient, the\nmeeting could be started earlier to accommodate more than three proclamations, which\ncould be memorialized.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nMay 15, 2018\n15", "path": "CityCouncil/2018-05-15.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2018-05-15", "page": 16, "text": "***\n(18-301) Mayor Spencer stated a motion is needed to consider the referral on crime\n[paragraph no. 18-305].\nCouncilmember Matarrese moved approval of considering the item.\nMayor Spencer seconded the motion, which failed by the following voice vote: Ayes:\nCouncilmember Matarrese and Mayor Spencer - 2. Noes: Councilmembers Ezzy\nAshcraft, Oddie and Vella - 3.\nMayor Spencer stated the OGC had a good suggestion to not read the entire\nproclamation; having flexibility is key; being able to suspend the rule is helpful.\nVice Mayor Vella suggested adding language that states staff will work with the groups\nahead of time so Council will know to make adjustments to the agenda.\nMayor Spencer stated that she and staff already work together on the timing of each\nagenda item; adding language about staff working with the recipient groups is not\nnecessary.\nCouncilmember Matarrese concurred with Vice Mayor Vella's suggestion; stated it goes\nalong with the 15 minute hard limit and removes the need for the two-minute time limit.\nCouncilmembers Ezzy Ashcraft and Oddie also concurred with Vice Mayor Vella's\nlanguage amendment.\nMayor Spencer stated it seems Council does not want her to work with the recipient\ngroups as she has been doing.\nVice Mayor Vella stated Mayor Spencer could still work with them; her amended\nlanguage can include \"the Mayor or staff\".\nIn response to the City Clerk's inquiry, Mayor Spencer stated the language should\ninclude \"the Mayor and staff will prepare recipients\n\"\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated the language should include \"staff and/or the Mayor\"\nin case there are situations where there are other draws on time for either the staff or\nthe Mayor.\nIn response to Mayor Spencer's inquiry regarding the public comment 15 minute limit,\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated instead of trying to tailor a rule to a specific\ncircumstance, the suspension of rules could apply; Council cannot anticipate everything\nthat will occur; if the situation warrants it, there can be a vote to suspend the rules.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nMay 15, 2018\n16", "path": "CityCouncil/2018-05-15.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2018-05-15", "page": 17, "text": "Council concurred with Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated the OGC was viewing the public speaker limit\nfrom the public's perspective, and so was the Council; she would be willing to omit the\none minute limit with the ability to be able to fall back on the suspension of rules;\nsuggested having two tiers: three minutes is the default limit, but above a certain\nnumber of speakers, the time is reduced.\nVice Mayor Vella stated one impetus for this was meetings going very late; the amount\nof time given to speakers and the ceding of time sets Alameda apart from other\njurisdictions.\nIn response to Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft's inquiry, Vice Mayor Vella stated the City\nof Oakland limits speakers to two minutes across the board.\nVice Mayor Vella suggested trying a two-minute time limit, rather than a tiered method,\nto see if it expedites things; stated if there are meetings where the rule needs to be\nsuspended either way, it can be done.\nMayor Spencer stated that she does not like the idea of starting at two minutes; she\nprefers the OGC suggestion of starting at three and reducing if necessary.\nCouncilmember Matarrese concurred with Mayor Spencer.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated that he likes the tier method with removing the one minute\nlimit; suggested having a three minute limit for the first six people, and once it goes to\nseven, it will be two minutes.\nVice Mayor Vella stated she would support the suggestion in the alternative of not\nhaving a reduced time; sometimes Council waits hours before being able to deliberate.\nMayor Spencer stated that she always asks the Council if they want to reduce speaker\ntime when there are a large number of speakers, which allows flexibility.\nCouncilmember Oddie state it is hard vote to limit time; creating a trigger is an easier\nsolution.\nIn response to Mayor Spencer's inquiry on how the tier number of speakers was\ndecided, Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated the subcommittee did the math: six\nspeakers would be 18 to 21 minutes; the staff presentation time and time for each\nCouncilmember has to be factored in; the goal is to move items along.\nVice Mayor Vella stated that she likes the idea of a tiered method so speakers can\nprepare their statements accordingly.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nMay 15, 2018\n17", "path": "CityCouncil/2018-05-15.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2018-05-15", "page": 18, "text": "Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she would support three minutes for the first\ntier of people, then two minutes for the second tier.\nIn response to Vice Mayor Vella's inquiry, Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated three\nminutes for the first six speakers, then two minutes for seven speakers and above.\nVice Mayor Vella stated: \"limit to one minute for items with 13 or more speakers\" would\nbe stricken.\nMayor Spencer stated there are times when speakers turn in slips at the last minute; if a\nspeaker happens to be number seven, they will only get two minutes.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated that is precisely the reason for bright line rules.\nMayor Spencer and Councilmember Matarrese expressed that they do not support the\ntiered method.\nThe Council agreed that there are no changes to the Consent portion of the rules.\nMayor Spencer stated the deliberations portion should not include clarifying questions;\nthe Council subcommittee suggestion has clarifying questions coming out of the nine\nminutes given for deliberations; inquired how the time will be tracked for Council\ndeliberations.\nThe City Clerk responded there will be five clocks to track the time.\nMayor Spencer stated that she does not support the nine minute total for Council\ndeliberations.\nThe Council agreed that there were no changes to the Counting votes.\nCouncilmembers Ezzy Ashcraft, Oddie, and Matarrese agreed to the 11:00 p.m. end\ntime.\nVice Mayor Vella stated that she prefers 11:30 p.m.\nMayor Spencer stated she does not support it.\nCouncilmember Oddie moved adoption of the resolution with the changes agreed to by\nthe Council.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft seconded the motion.\nUnder discussion, Councilmember Matarrese stated the fourth Whereas of the\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nMay 15, 2018\n18", "path": "CityCouncil/2018-05-15.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2018-05-15", "page": 19, "text": "resolution states there are exceptions to Rosenberg's Rules of Order; further stated\nthere were also additions; would like the suspension of rules already in Rosenberg be\nlinked in the resolution; clarified the reference should be to the City Council, and not\nMembers, as in Rosenberg.\nOn the call for the question, the motion carried by the following voice votes: Ayes:\nCouncilmembers Ezzy Ashcraft, Matarrese, Oddie and Vella - 4. Noes: Mayor Spencer\n- 1.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft moved introduction of the ordinance amending the\nAlameda Municipal Code by deleting Section 2-91.13.f of the Sunshine Ordinance\npertaining to meeting adjournment.\nCouncilmember Matarrese seconded the motion.\nUnder discussion, Mayor Spencer clarified the change would eliminate having to have\nthe 10:30 p.m. vote to hear further items and have a vote to continue past 11:00 p.m.\nOn the call for the question, the motion carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.\nCITY MANAGER COMMUNICATIONS\nNone.\nORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA\n(18-302) Paula Rainey, Alameda, urged Council to consider the December 5, 2017\nSister City referral regarding Wadi Foquin.\nCOUNCIL REFERRALS\n(18-303) Update on Tracking of Council Direction through the Referral Process.\n(18-304) Consider Directing Staff to Provide Background Information on the Crab Cove\nProperty Prior to Any Council Actions on the Property. Not heard. (Mayor Spencer)\n(18-305) Consider Directing Staff to Prioritize Efforts to Increase Safety and Reduce\nCrime. Not heard. (Mayor Spencer)\nCOUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS\n(18-306) Consideration of Mayor's Nomination for Appointment to the Planning Board\nand Recreation and Parks Commission.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nMay 15, 2018\n19", "path": "CityCouncil/2018-05-15.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2018-05-15", "page": 20, "text": "Mayor Spencer nominated Chris Pondok and Ruben Tilos for appointment to the\nRecreation and Parks Commission.\nADJOURNMENT\nThere being no further business, Mayor Spencer adjourned the meeting at 10:54 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\nMay 15, 2018\n20", "path": "CityCouncil/2018-05-15.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2018-05-15", "page": 21, "text": "MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING\nTUESDAY-MAY 15, 2018- -5:00 P.M.\nMayor Spencer convened the meeting at 5:05 p.m.\nRoll Call -\nPresent:\nCouncilmembers Ezzy Ashcraft, Matarrese, Oddie, Vella and\nMayor Spencer - 5.\nAbsent:\nNone.\nPublic Comment\nStated the report showed the vast majority of the City Manager's allegations were false;\nVice Mayor Vella was not found to have done anything wrong; disagreed with the\ninvestigation which found Councilmember Oddie interfered with the Fire Chief hiring\nprocess; urged the Charter be amended to allow elected officials the freedom to\nexercise their first amendment right to express opinions on important issues without fear\nof reprisal: Dennis Popalardo.\nInquired whether the Councilmembers know their priorities; expressed support for\ndismissal of the employee; discussed the rent issue: Steve Schiesser, Alameda.\nEncouraged negotiations continue with the City Manager to reach a settlement; stated\nthe tape should be released: Karen Miller, Alameda.\nStated the difficult dynamic between the Council and the City Manager is unfortunate;\ndiscussed working as a team for the progress of everyone in Alameda; stated the City\nCouncil and leadership should behave as good examples; she stands in strong support\nof Vice Mayor Vella and Councilmember Oddie: Cynthia Bonta, Alameda.\nStated that she is upset that the City Manager has betrayed the trust of the electorate\nand the Council; elected officials have to remain silent under fire; she is proud the\nCouncil declared Alameda a Sanctuary City; the City Manager should not continue in\nAlameda: Catherine Pauling, Alameda.\nStated supporting Jill Keimach as the City Manager is to stand with a City Hall that is\nrun on a professional basis; political influence should not determine hiring of key\npositions; the Charter provision did not occur in a vacuum and occurred when there was\na crisis; the taping is understandable: Former Councilmember Tony Daysog, Alameda.\nExpressed concern over potential litigation; encouraged Council to negotiate and\nmediate the issue and get the issue behind the City: William Norton, Alameda.\nSpecial Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nMay 15, 2018\n1", "path": "CityCouncil/2018-05-15.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2018-05-15", "page": 22, "text": "Expressed his support for Vice Mayor Vella and Councilmember Oddie standing up for\nwhat they believe in: Doyle Saylor, Alameda.\nStated that she supports mediation and releasing the tape: Catherine Bierwith,\nAlameda.\nExpressed support for Councilmembers Vella and Oddie; outlined their\naccomplishments: Laura Woodard, Alameda Renters Coalition.\nStated that he finds the City Manager's actions unacceptable, specifically the recording\nof a private meeting; urged the City to find new leadership: David Mitchell, Alameda.\nDiscussed the rent issue; stated Councilmembers stood up for housing rights;\nexpressed support for Vice Mayor Vella and Councilmember Oddie; stated the City\nManager needs to be removed from her position: Lester Dixon, Alameda.\nMayor Spencer announced the City Manager has not requested a public session and\nhas waived her right to a public session.\nThe meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider:\n(18-270) Conference with Real Property Negotiators (Government Code section\n54956.8); Property: Northwest Territories, Alameda Point; City Negotiators: Elizabeth D.\nWarmerdam, Acting City Manager and Jennifer Ott, Director of Base Reuse &\nTransportation Planning; Potential Tenant: East Bay Regional Park District; Issue Under\nNegotiation: Real Property Negotiations Price and Terms of Payment. Not heard.\n(18-271) Conference with Legal Counsel - Anticipated Litigation; Significant exposure to\nlitigation pursuant to subdivisions (d) (2) and (e) (1) of Government Code Section\n54956.9; Number of cases: One (As Defendant - City Exposure to Legal Action). Not\nheard.\n(18-272)\nPublic\nEmployee\nPerformance\nEvaluation;\nPublic\nEmployee\nDismissal/Release; Pursuant to California Government Code Section 54957;\nEmployee/Position: Jill Keimach, City Manager\n(18-273) Conference with Legal Counsel - Anticipated Litigation; Significant exposure to\nlitigation pursuant to subdivisions (d)(2) and e(2) of California Government Code\nSection 54956.9 relating to the allegations made in City Manager Jill Keimach's October\n2, 2017 letter; Number of cases: Three (As Defendant - City Exposure to Legal Action).\nNot heard.\n***\nSpecial Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nMay 15, 2018\n2", "path": "CityCouncil/2018-05-15.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2018-05-15", "page": 23, "text": "Mayor Spencer called a recess at 6:21 p.m. and reconvened the meeting at 6:31 p.m.\nand called a recess at 6:40 p.m. and reconvened at 6:53 p.m.\nFollowing the Closed Session, the meeting was reconvened and the City Clerk\nannounced a settlement agreement was approved by the following voice vote: Ayes:\nCouncilmembers Ezzy Ashcraft, Matarrese and Oddie - 3. Noes: Vice Mayor Vella and\nMayor Spencer - 2; Mayor Spencer read a joint statement.\nAdjournment\nThere being no further business, Mayor Spencer adjourned the meeting at 6:59 p.m.\nRespectfully submitted,\nLara Weisiger\nCity Clerk\nThe agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Sunshine Ordinance.\nSpecial Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nMay 15, 2018\n3", "path": "CityCouncil/2018-05-15.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2018-05-15", "page": 24, "text": "MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL\nTUESDAY- - MAY 15, 2018- -6:59 P.M.\nAGENDA ITEM\n(18-274) Public Employee Performance Evaluation; Public Employee Dismissal/Release\nPursuant to California Government Code Section 54957. Employee/Position: Jill Keimach, City\nManager (Contingent upon the employee's request for a public session). Not heard.\nLara Weisiger\nCity Clerk\nSpecial Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nMay 15, 2018", "path": "CityCouncil/2018-05-15.pdf"}