{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2018-09-04", "page": 1, "text": "MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING\nTUESDAY--SEPTEMBER - 4, 2018- -5:30 P.M.\nMayor Spencer convened the meeting at 5:30 p.m.\nRoll Call -\nPresent:\nCouncilmembers Ezzy Ashcraft, Matarrese, Oddie, Vella and\nMayor Spencer - 5.\nAbsent:\nNone.\nThe meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider:\n(18-456) Conference with Real Property Negotiators (Government Code section\n54956.8); Property: Northwest Territories, Alameda Point; City Negotiator: David L.\nRudat, Interim City Manager and Jennifer Ott, Director of Base Reuse & Transportation\nPlanning; Potential Tenant: East Bay Regional Park District; Issue Under Negotiation:\nReal Property Negotiations Price and Terms of Payment\n(18-457) Conference with Labor Negotiators (Government Code section 54957.6); CITY\nNegotiators: David L. Rudat, Interim City Manager, Elizabeth D. Warmerdam, Assistant\nCity Manager and Nancy Bronstein, Human Resources Director; Employee\nOrganizations: International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local 1245 (IBEW),\nElectric Utility Professional Association of Alameda (EUPA), Alameda City Employees\nAssociation (ACEA), Alameda Police Officers Association Non-Sworn Unit (PANS), and\nAlameda Management and Confidential Employees Association (MCEA) and\nInternational Association of Firefighter, Local 689 (IAFF); Under Negotiation: Salaries\nand Terms of Employment\nFollowing the Closed Session, the meeting was reconvened and the City Clerk\nannounced that regarding Real Property, the Council authorized members to discuss\nspecific terms with the Park District in an effort to complete the agreement, which\ncarried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Councilmembers Ezzy Ashcraft, Matarrese,\nOddie and Vella - 4; Noes: Mayor Spencer - 1; and authorized the liaison\nsubcommittee members to reach out to Park District liaison subcommittee members\nand the Interim City Manager to reach out to the Park District General Manager for the\nsame purpose, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5; and regarding Labor,\ndirection was given to staff.\nAdjournment\nThere being no further business, Mayor Spencer adjourned the meeting at 6:54 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\nSeptember 4, 2018", "path": "CityCouncil/2018-09-04.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2018-09-04", "page": 2, "text": "MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL JOINT MEETING OF THE\nCITY COUNCIL AND SUCCESSOR AGENCY\nTO THE COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION (SACIC)\nESDAY--SEPTEMBER 4, 2018- -6:58 P.M.\nMayor/Chair Spencer convened the meeting at 7:05 p.m.\nROLL CALL -\nPresent:\nCouncilmembers/Commissioners\nEzzy\nAshcraft,\nMatarrese, Oddie, Vella and Mayor/Chair Spencer -\n5.\nAbsent:\nNone.\nCONSENT CALENDAR\nCouncilmember/Commissioner Matarrese moved approval of the Consent Calendar.\nCouncilmember/Commissioner Oddie seconded the motion, which carried by\nunanimous voice vote - 5. [Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk\npreceding the paragraph number.]\n(*18-456 CC/18-008 SACIC) Recommendation to Accept the Second Quarter Financial\nReport for the Period Ending December 31, 2017. Accepted.\n(*18-457 CC/18-009 SACIC) Recommendation to Accept the Third Quarter Financial\nReport for the Period Ending March 31, 2018. Accepted.\nADJOURNMENT\nThere being no further business, Mayor/Chair Spencer adjourned the meeting at 7:07\np.m.\nRespectfully submitted,\nLara Weisiger\nCity Clerk and Secretary, SACIC\nThe agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Sunshine Ordinance.\nSpecial Joint Meeting\nAlameda City Council and Successor Agency\nto the Community Improvement Commission\nSeptember 4, 2018", "path": "CityCouncil/2018-09-04.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2018-09-04", "page": 3, "text": "MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING\nTUESDAY--SEPTEMBER - 4, 2018- 7:00 P.M.\nMayor Spencer convened the meeting at 7:07 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(18-460) Mayor Spencer announced that the Ferry matter [paragraph no. 18-480 would\nbe heard second on the regular agenda and the zoning ordinance hearing [paragraph\nno. 18-485 would be heard before the Museum item [paragraph no. 18-486].\nPROCLAMATIONS, SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY AND ANNOUNCEMENTS\n(18-461) Mayor Spencer welcomed the new Interim City Manager.\nThe Interim City Manager announced the Fire Chief was elected as the incoming\nPresident-Elect of the California Fire Chiefs Association.\n(18-462) Proclamation Declaring September 2018 as National Hispanic Month.\nContinued to September 18. 2018.\n(18-463) Proclamation Declaring September 15, 2018 as Coastal Cleanup Day.\nMichael Charnofsky, East Bay Regional Park District (EBRPD), made brief comments.\nMayor Spencer read the proclamation and presented it to Mr. Charnofsky.\n(18-464) Proclamation Declaring September 4, 2018 as Jennifer Ott Day.\nMayor Spencer read the proclamation and presented it to Jennifer Ott, Base Reuse\nDirector.\nMs. Ott made brief comments.\nThe Councilmembers, Assistant City Manager and Interim City Manager made brief\ncomments.\nORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA\n(18-465) Jay Ingram, Alameda, submitted information; discussed the Del Monte project.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n1\nSeptember 4, 2018", "path": "CityCouncil/2018-09-04.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2018-09-04", "page": 4, "text": "(18-466) Steve Slauson, Alameda, stated that he is running for Assembly; discussed\nsecurity concerns and burglaries.\n(18-467) George Apostolopoulos, California Municipal Finance Authority (CMFA) Open\nProperty Assessed Clean Energy (PACE), discussed the PACE funding program; urged\nthe City to implement the program.\nIn response to Mayor Spencer's inquiry, the Assistant City Manager stated the matter\nwould come back as part of the first steps under Climate Action Plan early next year.\n(18-468) Phil Redd, Alameda, expressed concern over the proposed sales tax and\ndiscussed expanding cannabis businesses.\nCouncilmember Oddie requested personal attacks be avoided.\nCONSENT CALENDAR\nMayor Spencer announced the litigation report [paragraph no. 18-474], resolution on Bill\n3036 [paragraph no. 18-476 and resolution on Bill 3250 [paragraph no. 18-477 were\nremoved from the Consent Calendar for discussion.\nCouncilmember Matarrese moved approval of the remainder of the Consent Calendar.\nVice Mayor Vella seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.\n[Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk preceding the paragraph\nnumber.]\n(*18-469) Minutes of the Special and Regular City Council Meetings Held on July 10,\n2018. Approved.\n(*18-470) Ratified bills in the amount of $13,534,714.66.\n(*18-471) Recommendation to Accept the Quarterly Sales Tax Report for the Reporting\nPeriod Ending June 30, 2018 (Funds Collected During the Period January 1, 2018 to\nMarch 31, 2018). Accepted.\n(*18-472) Recommendation to Authorize the Interim City Manager to Execute a Second\nAmendment to Agreement with Digital Maps for Three Years, for an Amount Not to\nExceed $36,000 per Year, for a Total Five-Year Expenditure Not to Exceed $180,000,\nfor Government Data Mapping. Accepted.\n(*18-473) Recommendation to Accept the Annual Report on the Alameda Landing\nTransportation Demand Management (TDM) Program and Approve City Staff\nRecommendations for Program Improvements. Accepted.\n(18-474) Recommendation to Accept the Report on Litigation and Liability Claims\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n2\nSeptember 4, 2018", "path": "CityCouncil/2018-09-04.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2018-09-04", "page": 5, "text": "Settlements; and Make Available Any Documents Which Have Become Disclosable to\nthe Public for the Period January 1, 2018 to June 30, 2018.\nIn response to Mayor Spencer's inquiry regarding insurance covering the settlement\npayment to the prior City Manager, the Assistant City Attorney stated a claim has been\nsubmitted; if approved, the City would receive approximately $400,000.\nCouncilmember Matarrese moved approval of the staff recommendation.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft seconded the motion, which carried by the following\nvoice vote: Ayes: Councilmembers Ezzy Ashcraft, Matarrese, Oddie and Mayor\nSpencer - 4. Noes: Vice Mayor Vella - 1.\n(*18-475) Resolution No. 15423, \"Amending the Sewer Enterprise Fund Operating and\nCapital Budget for Fiscal Year 2018-19.\" Adopted; and\n(*18-475A) Recommendation to Award a One-Year Contract, with the Option for Four\nOne-Year Extensions, for an Amount Not to Exceed $5,391,277, Including Contingency,\nfor a Total Five-Year Expenditure Not to Exceed $25,505,838.67, Not Including\nContingency, to McGuire and Hester for Cyclic Sewer Replacement Project, Phase 15,\nNo. PW 03-18-10. Accepted.\n(18-476) Resolution No. 15424, \"Supporting United States Senate Congressional Bill S.\n3036, the Keep Families Together Act, to Limit the Separation of Families at or Near\nPoints of Entry.\" Adopted.\nCouncilmember Oddie noted the matter was brought forward as a referral.\nCouncilmember Oddie moved adoption of the resolution.\nCouncilmember Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice\nvote - 5.\n(18-477) Resolution No. 15425, \"Supporting United States Senate Congressional Bill S.\n3250, the Rent Relief Act of 2018, to Amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to\nAllow for a Credit Against Tax for Rent Paid on the Personal Residence of the\nTaxpayer.\" Adopted.\nUrged Council to adopt the resolution: Toni Grimm, Alameda.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft moved adoption of the resolution.\nCouncilmember Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice\nvote - 5.\n(*18-478) Ordinance No. 3222, \"Approving a Lease with Small Size Big Mind, Inc. for\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n3\nSeptember 4, 2018", "path": "CityCouncil/2018-09-04.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2018-09-04", "page": 6, "text": "Two Years with a One-Year Option for Building 35, a 2,764-Square-Foot Building\nLocated at 2450 Pan Am Way in the Main Street Neighborhood at Alameda Point.\"\nFinally passed.\nREGULAR AGENDA ITEMS\n(18-479) Resolution No. 15426, \"Appointing Jennifer Wit as a Member of the Historical\nAdvisory Board.' Adopted;\n(18-479A) Resolution Appointing Marsha Broquedis as a Member of the Planning\nBoard. Not adopted; and\n(18-479B) Resolution No. 15427; \"Appointing Asheshh Saheba as a Member of the\nPlanning Board.' Adopted.\nCouncilmember Oddie moved adoption of the resolution appointing Jennifer Wit.\nCouncilmember Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice\nvote - 5.\nCouncilmember Matarrese moved adoption of the resolution appointing Marsha\nBroquedis.\nMayor Spencer seconded the motion, which failed by the following voice vote: Ayes:\nCouncilmember Matarrese and Mayor Spencer - 2. Abstentions: Councilmembers\nEzzy Ashcraft, Oddie and Vella - 3.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft moved adoption of the resolution appointing Asheshh\nSaheba.\nCouncilmember Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice\nvote - 5.\nThe City Clerk administered the Oath of Office and presented certificates of\nappointment to Ms. Wit and Mr. Saheba.\n(18-480) Resolution No. 15428, \"Approving the Updated Seaplane Lagoon Ferry\nTerminal Plan Resulting in the Procurement of the Ferry Terminal Float and\nConstruction of the Remaining Water and Landside Improvements.\" Adopted.\nThe Base Reuse Director discussed the item.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether Regional Measure 3 (RM3) impending\nlawsuit would affect the procurement of the float.\nThe Base Reuse Director responded that she had been assured there was no validity to\nthe lawsuit.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n4\nSeptember 4, 2018", "path": "CityCouncil/2018-09-04.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2018-09-04", "page": 7, "text": "Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft requested confirmation that the lawsuit would not affect\nprocurement.\nThe Base Reuse Director confirmed there would be no affect.\nIn response to Councilmember Oddie's request for further clarification, the Base Reuse\nDirector provided further explanation.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired who would be responsible for budget overages, to which\nthe Base Reuse Director responded potential responsible parties.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired the purpose of including Harbor Bay in the presentation.\nThe Base Reuse Director responded Harbor Bay was included due to topics discussed\nat Water Emergency Transit Authority (WETA).\nVice Mayor Vella stated construction costs for the developer have doubled; inquired\nwhether costs for construction can be better projected in the future.\nThe Base Reuse Director responded projects throughout the region are experiencing\nconstruction increases; stated steps can be made to help close the funding gap.\nVice Mayor Vella inquired if the parking lot would be paid or free parking and who would\nmake the decision.\nThe Base Reuse Director responded Council would decide; stated the idea is to have\npaid parking.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether City money is being used for the project, to which the\nBase Reuse Director responded in the affirmative.\nMayor Spencer inquired the maximum amount the City would pay.\nThe Base Reuse Director responded the City has only authorized $2 million.\nMayor Spencer inquired where the funding would come from if the costs rise.\nThe Base Reuse Director responded that she does not know; stated multiple different\nfunding sources could be utilized.\nMayor Spencer inquired about the $10 million contribution from the Developer, Alameda\nPoint Partners (APP), for the terminal and requested information about how affordable\nhousing would be funded at Alameda Point.\nThe Base Reuse Director responded both projects are not funded and are potentially at\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n5\nSeptember 4, 2018", "path": "CityCouncil/2018-09-04.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2018-09-04", "page": 8, "text": "risk.\nMayor Spencer stated that she would not be in favor of the item; her priority is\naffordable housing.\nCouncilmember Matarrese moved approval of the staff recommendation [adoption of\nthe resolution], so that the ferry terminal can go forward.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft seconded the motion.\nUnder discussion, Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated affordable housing and water\ntransit are not mutually exclusive propositions; both can be accomplished.\nVice Mayor Vella stated a considerable amount of staff time has been devoted to the\nmatter; there is a time element associated with this item as well as a cost element\nassociated; stated that the City asking WETA for money is significant.\nOn the call for the question, the motion carried by the following voice vote: Ayes:\nCouncilmembers Ezzy Ashcraft, Matarrese, Oddie and Vella - 4. Noes: Mayor Spencer\n- 1.\n(18-481) Public Hearing to Consider Introduction of Ordinance Approving the Encinal\nTerminals Master Plan and Density Bonus Application (PLN16-0117) for the\nRedevelopment of the Encinal Terminals Properties Located at 1521 Buena Vista\nAvenue (APN 072-0382-001, -002, and 72-0383-03). Continued to September 18, 2018.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director gave a Power Point presentation and\nprovided clarifying amendments.\nIn response to Councilmember Oddie's inquiry, the Assistant Community Development\nDirector outlined the stipulations and requirements related to developing Encinal\nTerminals.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired about the minimum fine for a vote in opposition, to\nwhich the Assistant Community Development Director responded $5.9 million minimum\nif the City were to lose in court.\nMayor Spencer inquired if there was only one way on and off the area.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded there are two ways; stated\nthere is emergency access in three locations; the central spine is the area for day-to-\nday automobile drivers.\nMayor Spencer inquired if there are two lanes on each side.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded there is one lane on each\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n6\nSeptember 4, 2018", "path": "CityCouncil/2018-09-04.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2018-09-04", "page": 9, "text": "side.\nIn response to Mayor Spencer's inquiry, the Assistant Community Development Director\nstated the thought is more lanes would not be needed because it is a cul-de-sac.\nCouncilmember Matarrese requested clarification about the proposed amendment\nlanguage, to which the Assistant Community Development Director stated the text will\nbe additional.\nVice Mayor Vella inquired how long the parcel is.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded fifteen hundred feet.\nVice Mayor Vella inquired how many blocks that would be, to which the Assistant\nCommunity Development Director responded three to four blocks.\nMike O'Hara, Tim Lewis Communities (TLC), gave a Power Point presentation.\nMayor Spencer inquired about having two-lanes each way.\nMr. O'Hara responded that he agrees with the Assistant Community Development\nDirector's comments; less lanes can increase safety; the plan is sufficient for\nautomobiles; he would not want to support four lanes.\nMayor Spencer inquired why the project should be considered when another project\ninvolving TLC has stalled.\nMr. O'Hara responded the current item creates a plan upon which future buildings and\ndevelopment plans will be placed; stated a number of things have affected the ability to\ncomplete the other project.\nMayor Spencer inquired if Tidelands would be considered for overflow parking.\nMr. O'Hara responded each podium building would set aside public parking; using\nTidelands could be considered pending any conflict with City's long-term plans.\nIn response to Mayor Spencer's inquiry, Mr. O'Hara stated that TLC like to be partners\nwith the City on the Tidelands.\nCouncilmember Matarrese requested clarification on the use of Tidelands property as a\nparking lot for residents of the development.\nMr. O'Hara responded that his understanding is Tidelands would be used for public\noverflow parking; stated that he does not want to conflict with any of the City's long-term\nplans; he is willing to work with the City on short-term needs.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n7\nSeptember 4, 2018", "path": "CityCouncil/2018-09-04.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2018-09-04", "page": 10, "text": "Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired if on-site parking was provided for the Littlejohn\nPlaza senior housing; if the space is fully occupied; and if the parking is adequate for\nthe amount of residents.\nMr. O'Hara responded parking is provided; stated that he is unsure about the\noccupancy and could not verify how many residents have an automobile or if parking is\nadequate.\nUrged the Council to vote no on the project; outlined concerns submitted in a letter: Paul\nForeman, Alameda Citizens Task Force.\nStated the Plan should be returned to the Planning Board; expressed concern over the\nentrance road; expressed support for moving the road: Dorothy Freeman, Alameda.\nStated the Bay Area Council is concerned about the housing shortage and is\nencouraged by the increase in projects, but more housing is needed: Rachele\nTrigueros, Bay Area Council.\nUrged the Council to approve the project: Kari Thompson, Chamber of Commerce.\nStated the City has an obligation to approve the project, which the applicant can build\nby right; expressed concern over the land swap not being approved; outlined the fiscal\nbenefit: Michael McDonough, Chamber of Commerce.\nStated the Carpenters Union opposes the project; expressed concern over the\ndeveloper not committing to labor; urged skilled labor be required: Daniel Gregg,\nCarpenters.\nExpressed concern over the project not being ready; suggested it be sent back to the\nPlanning Board: Vince Sugrue, Sheet Metal Workers' Local 104 and Building Trades\nCouncil of Alameda County.\nStated the project should have been approved long ago; the Council voted against the\nland swap vote, which resulted in a less exciting project: Laura Thomas, Renewed Hope\nHousing Advocates.\nDiscussed housing and work force costs: Tim Frank, Center for Sustainable\nNeighborhoods.\nExpressed support for the project, which is not as ideal as the land swap project: Tina\nBlane, Alameda.\nStated TLC has spoken to labor; parts of the project will be done by union workers;\nurged approval: Jennifer Grossman, TLC.\nDiscussed the Housing Accountability Act and density bonus application, which the City\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n8\nSeptember 4, 2018", "path": "CityCouncil/2018-09-04.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2018-09-04", "page": 11, "text": "calculated correctly; stated TLC supports the amendments being in the lease: Alicia\nGuerra, TLC.\nIn response to Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft's inquiry regarding labor agreements, Ms.\nGuerra stated the project was approved by right prior to Senate Bill 35; there is not a\nlabor agreement, which could be addressed in lease discussions.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired about the result of efforts to reach union\nagreements, if any.\nMs. Guerra responded that no agreement exists but multiple conversations have\noccurred; the project is ultimately a residential, mixed-use project.\nIn response to Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft's request for confirmation of there being\nno labor agreement in place, Ms. Guerra stated there have been discussions; without a\nlease document in place, no agreement can be made; TLC is open to a labor\nagreement.\nMayor Spencer stated that she would like to continue with the additional public\nspeakers.\nStated the City has backed itself into a corner; the road should be aligned with the\nentrance road; the Clement Avenue extension is a critical part of the Cross Alameda\nTrail; housing is needed: Brian McGuire, Alameda.\nExpressed concern over access during an emergency: Carol Gottstein, Alameda.\nDiscussed a collapse at the Brooklyn Basin project; urged Council to vote no until the\ndeveloper comes back with a labor agreement: David Ross, Alameda.\nMayor Spencer inquired if there is a way to ensure the safety of the 589 units.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded that he does not believe the\nCity has the discretion to impose said stipulation on private land; if the City were to\nimpose the safety stipulation on private land and it causes a financial infeasibility for the\ndeveloper, the City could potentially be in conflict.\nVice Mayor Vella inquired about the road design and egress.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded the reasoning behind the\ndesign is for both access and safety.\nVice Mayor Vella stated that she is concerned about how the traffic would interact with\npedestrians and cyclists; requested information on the Cross Alameda Trail (CAT) and\nClement Avenue.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n9\nSeptember 4, 2018", "path": "CityCouncil/2018-09-04.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2018-09-04", "page": 12, "text": "The Assistant Community Development Director responded the Cross Alameda Trail\nruns from Alameda Point to the Fruitvale Bridge; stated the Clement Avenue extension\nruns through the Del Monte development project; there will be a separated cycle track,\nwith a signalized crossing at Clement Avenue for Encinal Terminals.\nVice Mayor Vella inquired about trash pickup and other related items for the project site.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded said items will happen off of\nthe road; stated the main road depicted for discussion is the central access point.\nIn response to Vice Mayor Vella's inquiry about the proposed amendments and if\nlanguage could be included to require a Project Labor Agreement (PLA) with the\nBuilding Construction Trades Council of Alameda County, the Assistant Community\nDevelopment Director stated TLC has nine to ten years left on its lease and will not\nwant to invest; a reference could be added to the agreement; the amendment's purpose\nis not to pre-determine, but to lay out, the requirements the City Council will be looking\nfor when lease amendments are brought forward.\nVice Mayor Vella inquired if the proposed amendment would apply to future land\nexchanges or swaps.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded if TLC, or any other future\nowner of the land, wants to come forward and discuss the terms, negotiation would\nbegin again.\nVice Mayor Vella inquired whether the proposed amendment would apply to a future\nCouncil, to which the Assistant Community Development Director responded it could.\nVice Mayor Vella inquired if language could be added to the proposed amendment\nclarifying that Council does not want Tidelands land to be used for one big parking lot.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded in the affirmative; stated\nTidelands land cannot be used for residential parking.\nThe Interim City Manager inquired about the total minimum road width of the central\nspine concept including the bike access widths.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded 62 feet.\nThe Interim City Manager inquired about the minimum road width for the emergency\naccess points to the East and West sides.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded 26 feet.\nThe Interim City Manager inquired about the turning radius of the cul-de-sac.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n10\nSeptember 4, 2018", "path": "CityCouncil/2018-09-04.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2018-09-04", "page": 13, "text": "The Assistant Community Development Director responded that he does not know the\nexact figure, but knows it is wide enough for fire and garbage trucks to be able to make\nthe turn.\nThe Interim City Manager requested confirmation whether the 62 feet is unobstructed\nfrom curb to curb or if it includes delineation for bike lanes.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded there would be delineators\nfor bike lanes; stated the amendment the Planning Board recommended includes a 62\nfoot public right of way that has not been designed yet; the concept includes one car\nlane in either direction, bike lanes, and a sidewalk on either side to give pedestrians,\nbicyclists, and cars access.\nCouncilmember Matarrese requested the Council deliberation be without deliberation\nbetween City Manager and City Staff.\nThe Interim City Manager stated that he is asking questions to help Council sort out the\naccess-ways or minimum standards, which are all exceeded by the Fire Code.\nMayor Spencer stated that she appreciates the Interim City Manager's input; requested\nconfirmation from remaining Councilmembers if the Interim City Manager could\ncontinue.\nCouncilmembers Oddie and Vella expressed support.\nThe Interim City Manager stated that he only wanted to clarify.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether the street widths are wide enough to accommodate\nboat towing.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded the streets would\naccommodate Fire vehicles equipped with extending stabilizing arms; stated the street\nwould absolutely accommodate boat towing; there are many subsequent approvals; the\nmain purpose of the amendment is for Council to decide whether or not to move the\nstreet to the center.\nIn response to Mayor Spencer's inquiry if the matter will come back to Council once\napproved, the Assistant Community Development Director responded the sub-division\nmap will come back and establish the right of way.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired the City's discretion related to the health and safety of\nstructures while being built; referenced Mr. Ross's public comment regarding Brooklyn\nBasin.\nThe Assistant City Attorney responded the health and safety impacts have to be based\non objective written standards that are in effect at the time that the project application is\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n11\nSeptember 4, 2018", "path": "CityCouncil/2018-09-04.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2018-09-04", "page": 14, "text": "deemed complete.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired whether someone would need enough skills to build and\ncertify the project.\nThe Assistant City Attorney responded that she does not think the City would not have\nsaid objective standards in effect at the time the application was deemed complete.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated the Site A project has a lot of infrastructure and a PLA,\nbut was able to close the deal, having 25% affordable housing versus 15%; stated the\narguments being made for Encinal Terminals project stipulations do not hold a lot of\nwater with him when Alameda Point was able to accomplish more with more challenges.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director stated the difference between the\nproposed project and Site A is that the City owned the land being transferred, rather\nthan a private property owner who wants to develop its land based off the City's zoning\nrequirements.\nCouncilmember Oddie requested clarification on the comments made related to housing\nconstraints.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director stated a financial constraint can make\nthe project infeasible.\nMayor Spencer inquired about the possibility of sending the matter back to the Planning\nBoard to review the street width.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded sending the item back to\nthe Planning Board is an option, but the specific request being made would be reviewed\nat the City staff level; stated the question to Council is whether there should be four or\ntwo lanes; the wider road, makes less land available for residential, resulting in taller\nbuildings.\nVice Mayor Vella inquired if the road areas near the Tidelands can be made larger.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded the final decision about the\nwidth of the road can be through the subdivision map.\nMayor Spencer inquired about the possibility of sending the item back to the Planning\nBoard to review of safety.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded it is possible; stated\nanother option would be to have the Council specify items for sub-division map\napproval.\nMayor Spencer requested confirmation that a decision does not need to be made and\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n12\nSeptember 4, 2018", "path": "CityCouncil/2018-09-04.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2018-09-04", "page": 15, "text": "the item can come back to the Council after the Planning Board.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director confirmed doing so is possible.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired about the width of the roads for Alameda\nMarina, to which the Assistant Community Development Director responded two lanes.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired if the roads are wider than 64 feet.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded that he cannot recall; stated\nthey are very similar; the designs are built for trucks.\nVice Mayor Vella stated Alameda Marina has more access points than Encinal\nTerminals.\nMayor Spencer moved approval of sending the matter back to the Planning Board to\naddress issues enumerated for the safety of residents and people driving on the roads.\nVice Mayor Vella seconded the motion.\nUnder discussion, Councilmember Matarrese stated the Council is two steps ahead of\nthe decision on street widths; the proposed street meets the minimum width\nrequirements; the street could be wider, but said decision would be made when the site\nplan comes forward; the Council has not decided whether or not to support a spine road\nas recommended by Planning Board; the first order of business is to make a decision\nabout the spine road; the second order of business would be to review the amendment,\nmaking stronger, binding language that ties the Tidelands activity to Fortman Marina;\nincentive should be included in the form of a true mixed-use project, not a residential\nproject, in order to move the project forward; he is amenable to accepting the plan set\nforth.\nMayor Spencer stated in all fairness to the developer, the difference between Site A and\nthis project is that the Site A developer did not have to buy the land like this developer.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated Site A has a negative value of $1 million per acre,\nwith $88 million of needed infrastructure extending past Site A; comparison us unfair.\nCouncilmember Oddie clarified the Site A developer did buy the land and was offered\ninfrastructure credits.\nVice Mayor Vella stated there is a great need for housing; inquired how the City could\nensure housing would actually be built.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded it is very, very hard for the\nCity to ensure that housing gets built since the City is not funding any portion of the\nproject; private investors are funding the project; the best way to try to increase the\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n13\nSeptember 4, 2018", "path": "CityCouncil/2018-09-04.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2018-09-04", "page": 16, "text": "chances of private investors being attracted to a project is to reduce the project cost; the\nCity's tendency is to increase the cost due to multiple requests; the City tries to get the\nas many public benefits as possible without over-burdening the project so that private\ninvestment becomes hard; only private investors can guarantee that the housing portion\nof the project would move forward; the amendments and Master Plan show the City\nwants the project to move forward and wants private investors to invest in infrastructure\nbecause the Tidelands land is not as useful to the City unless they do; the amendments\nclarify the objective of Phase 1 including the Tidelands; Fortman Way is integrated with\nthe project; there are no barriers between the two districts.\nCouncilmember Matarrese indicated that he would like to make a motion.\nMayor Spencer stated there is already a motion on the table.\nVice Mayor Vella inquired if the Planning Board has considered potential issues with the\nroad and how it might interact with the broader plan.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded whether to move the road\nto the center was the main issue discussed at the Planning Board; staff recommended\nmoving the road to the middle.\nVice Mayor Vella inquired whether the Council could conditionally approve the plan.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded in the negative; stated the\nMaster Plan cannot be conditionally approved; the last four pages of the Master Plan\ncontain descriptions of approvals that required before the Developer can pull a building\npermit.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated if the Council votes no, nothing will be built;\nsending the item back to the Planning Board would only be a delay tactic; she is in favor\nof PLAs but recognizes that both parties must work together in good faith; she is\nconcerned if further delays are created, nothing will be built.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired how long the delay would be if the item is sent back to\nthe Planning Board then returns to Council for approval.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded the item could return back\nto Council by November.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired if there would be any legal implications in delaying\napproval.\nThe City Attorney responded it is impossible to confirm; stated the City does not want to\nencourage legal action; without further work on the actual design and layout, there is\nlittle the Planning Board can review and does begin to look like a delay of the project;\nurged caution in requesting further Planning Board review.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n14\nSeptember 4, 2018", "path": "CityCouncil/2018-09-04.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2018-09-04", "page": 17, "text": "Mayor Spencer stated that she believes the Planning Board President thought more\ntime was needed to address the project; the details of the design are important and\nshould be provided to the Council for consideration; she prefers to have the Planning\nBoard review the issues of street width, safety and overall design of the road.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated the Council's task is approving the Master Plan;\ndetails and requirements follow once the Master Plan is approved; he is not in favor of\nsending the item back to the Planning Board; he supports sending the amendment\nlanguage back to City Staff so that the first phase requirements for the developer to\nwork with the City are truly binding.\nVice Mayor Vella inquired which amendment provision should be altered.\nCouncilmember Matarrese responded page 67, Phasing Requirements.\nVice Mayor Vella inquired whether Councilmember Matarrese has specific desired\nlanguage, to which Councilmember Matarrese responded in the negative; stated that he\nwould like staff to come up with language for Council to review.\nVice Mayor Vella stated that she would like to add: \"Project Labor Agreement with the\nBuilding Trades Council of Alameda County\" on page 65; changes have been made to\nprevious projects; she would like language in the agreement that allows Council to\nmake changes.\nCouncilmember Oddie concurred with Vice Mayor Vella's comments; stated card check\nneutrality should be explicit along with building trades; inquired whether Councilmember\nMatarrese has general language or direction to provide.\nCouncilmember Matarrese responded the first phase should require the road and\nworking with the City on the development of the Tidelands in conjunction with Fortman\nMarina.\nVice Mayor Vella inquired if the Tidelands lease also ties in with Fortman Marina.\nCouncilmember Matarrese responded in the affirmative.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired if the language would be strengthened by changing the\nadjectives to verbs to read: \"coordinate and integrate maritime commercial use of the\nEncinal Terminals and the adjacent Fortman Marina Tidelands;' requested confirmation\nthat there is nothing the Council can do once the Master Plan is approved.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded the intent is to solidify that\nthe City will not approve any infrastructure plans until it is known that the Council\nrequests have been coordinated and that the City has two Tidelands sites: Encinal and\nFortman that can be used in a coordinated fashion.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n15\nSeptember 4, 2018", "path": "CityCouncil/2018-09-04.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2018-09-04", "page": 18, "text": "Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether there could be a break, to which Mayor\nSpencer responded it would not be appropriate.\nVice Mayor Vella stated that she does not want to delay for the sake of delaying,\npossibly creating a liability for the City; however, there has been a lot of discussion\nrelated to the item's priorities.\nMayor Spencer stated by sending the item back to Planning Board, the Council would\nhave time to do it right.\nCouncilmember Matarrese requested the City Clerk to read the motion again.\nThe City Clerk read the motion.\nOn the call for the question, the motion failed by the following voice vote: Ayes: Mayor\nSpencer - 1. Noes: Councilmembers: Ezzy Ashcraft and Matarrese - 2. Abstentions:\nCouncilmembers Oddie and Vella - 2.\nVice Mayor Vella suggested Councilmember Matarrese create the motion.\nCouncilmember Matarrese moved approval of directing staff to incorporate the\namendments, with the comments from the Council in mind, to bring back at the next\nCouncil meeting on the Consent Calendar.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft requested clarification of the motion.\nCouncilmember Matarrese responded the motion is to have the amendment edited and\nbrought back to Council at the next meeting on the Consent Calendar for the\namendment to be read and approved.\nThe Assistant City Manager stated it would be difficult to get the item on the next\nCouncil agenda because it will be posted on Thursday.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated Council could sit at the dais to write new, proposed\nlanguage; the language can be prepared tomorrow to make the deadline.\nMayor Spencer stated staff needs more time to research the issue.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired if the language can be written now.\nThe City Attorney suggested the matter be continued to the next meeting.\nThe City Clerk stated if the item is continued, staff could upload the new language.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n16\nSeptember 4, 2018", "path": "CityCouncil/2018-09-04.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2018-09-04", "page": 19, "text": "Mayor Spencer inquired when the new language would need to be uploaded in order to\ncomply with the Sunshine Ordinance.\nThe City Attorney responded continuation would address the timing issue raised by the\nAssistant City Manager.\nThe City Clerk noted the item would not be open for public discussion because the\npublic discussion portion has already occurred.\nCouncilmember Matarrese moved approval of Council directing staff to make the edits\nto the Master Plan and continuing the item to the next Regular Agenda [September 18,\n2018].\nCouncilmember Oddie seconded the motion.\nUnder discussion, Vice Mayor Vella stated part of the concern is the quality of the\nproject, which should, meet the standards Council has set forth, and that the\namendments reflect said standards.\nCouncilmember Oddie concurred with Vice Mayor Vella; stated the City gets 589 units;\nconcurred with Mr. McGuire's statement about having a better project had the item been\napproved last December; stated that he is willing to see this item move forward and\nhave the amendments come back.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated moving forward with the minimum of delay shows\nthe Council majority places a high value on adding badly needed housing, improving the\nshoreline, and opening public access along the waterfront; that she is prepared to\nsupport the motion.\nOn the call for the question, the motion carried by the following voice vote: Ayes:\nCouncilmembers Ezzy Ashcraft, Matarrese, Oddie and Vella - 4. No: Mayor Spencer -\n1.\n***\nMayor Spencer called a recess at 10:27 p.m. and reconvened the meeting at 10:38 p.m.\n(18-482) Summary Title: Take Action to Acquire Union Pacific Property via Eminent\nDomain for the Jean Sweeney Open Space Park Project\nResolution No. 15429, \"Determining that the Public Interest and Necessity Require the\nAcquisition of Certain Real Property Interests for a Public Project and Directing the\nFiling of Eminent Domain Proceedings for the Jean Sweeney Open Space Park\nProject.\" Adopted.\nThe Base Reuse Director gave a brief presentation.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n17\nSeptember 4, 2018", "path": "CityCouncil/2018-09-04.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2018-09-04", "page": 20, "text": "Expressed concern over any delay causing issues with park access; urged a deposit be\nplaced in the State fund to allow work to begin: Dorothy Freeman, Jean Sweeney Open\nSpace Park Fund.\nThe Base Reuse Director stated a budget resolution is not presented tonight; the matter\ncould come back.\nIn response to Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft's inquiry, the Recreation and Parks\nDirector stated access is not needed immediately; temporary fencing could cost\n$30,000 to $50,000.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether there is sufficient staff resources to\nproceed with Eminent Domain now, to which the Recreation and Parks Director\nresponded in the affirmative.\nExpressed concern over delay and community access being hindered; urged action be\ntaken now: Jim Sweeney, Jean Sweeney Open Space Park Fund.\nStated the Food Bank cannot plan improvements until plans are known; urged the\nparcels be acquired: William Wolverton, Alameda Food Bank.\nStated the current Food Bank trailer is beat and planning cannot be done until the land\nis acquired: Cindy Houts, Alameda Food Bank.\nStated a couple of neighborhood streets will not have access; Council should provide\ndirection on the remaining parcels having access: Brian McGuire, Bike Walk Alameda.\nCouncilmember Oddie moved approval of the item [adoption of the resolution], adding\nseeking the order for pre-judgement possession and directing staff to bring back a\nbudget resolution within the next two meetings.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft seconded the motion.\nUnder discussion, Mayor Spencer inquired if Mr. McGuire's statement about access\nwould be included in the motion.\nCouncilmember Oddie clarified his motion is to bring back a budget resolution in the\nnext two council meetings.\nThe Assistant City Manager noted the discussion is over $1 million.\nVice Mayor Vella expressed concern over public good related to the parcels in question;\nstated the funds could be used for needed affordable housing; she is prepared to move\nforward, but would not be in favor of adding additional parcels.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n18\nSeptember 4, 2018", "path": "CityCouncil/2018-09-04.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2018-09-04", "page": 21, "text": "On the call for the question, the motion carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.\n(18-483) Mayor Spencer stated a motion is needed to suspend the rules to consider\nremaining items: Tilden Way Eminent Domain [paragraph no. 18-484], the public\nhearing amending the Zoning Ordinance [paragraph no. 18-485], the Alameda Museum\nitem [paragraph no. 18-486], and the Rent Annual Report [paragraph no. 18-487].\nVice Mayor Vella moved approval of considering the remaining items.\nCouncilmember Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice\nvote - 5.\n(18-484) Summary Title: Take Action to Acquire Union Pacific Property via Eminent\nDomain for the Cross Alameda Trail Clement Avenue East Extension/Tilden Way\nProject\nResolution No. 15430, \"Determining that the Public Interest and Necessity Require the\nAcquisition of Certain Real Property Interests for a Public Project and Directing the\nFiling of Eminent Domain Proceedings for the Cross Alameda Trail Clement Avenue\nEast Extension/Tilden Way Project and Seek an Order for Prejudgment Possession.'\nAdopted.\nThe Base Reuse Director gave a brief presentation.\nIn response to Councilmember Matarrese's inquiry regarding price, the Base Reuse\nDirector stated the City is seeking an order of immediate possession; a funding\nagreement has already been approved appropriating $1.685 million.\nVice Mayor Vella moved approval [adoption of the resolution].\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice\nvote - 5.\n(18-485) Public Hearing to Consider Introduction of Ordinance Amending Alameda\nMunicipal Code Chapter XXX (Zoning Ordinance) regarding the Residential Private and\nCommon Open Space Requirements to Allow Greater Variety of Residential Open\nSpace Types and Amenities. Introduced.\nThe Planning Services Manager provided a revised ordinance.\nMayor Spencer expressed concern about eliminating private outdoor space, inquired if\nthere is a way to ensure that public space is maintained.\nThe Planning Services Manager provided responded any proposed plan would have to\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n19\nSeptember 4, 2018", "path": "CityCouncil/2018-09-04.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2018-09-04", "page": 22, "text": "have some element of private open space.\nMayor Spencer inquired how the City could ensure that public common areas would be\nmaintained.\nThe Planning Services Manager responded the Municipal Code includes maintenance\nrequirements for new developments that include landscaping or open space.\nMayor Spencer inquired if additional language can be included to ensure that areas are\nmaintained properly, to which the Planning Services Manager responded in the\naffirmative.\nIn response to Councilmember Oddie's concern about language related to affordable\nhousing balcony requirements, the Planning Services Manager stated a previous\nHousing Authority project review lead to the discovery of inadequacies in the current\nordinance.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated language restricting personal outdoor open space for\naffordable housing does not seem equitable.\nMayor Spencer concurred with Councilmember Oddie; stated community open space\nareas should be well maintained if private open space is no longer available.\nThe Planning Services Manager stated a previous Housing Authority project was able to\nhave 58 balconies and patios, balanced with a community room, a playground plus\nother common amenities.\nVice Mayor Vella stated it seems like a question of enforcement; the question is what\nhappens when landscape maintenance or access to open space is not adequate;\ninquired whether the issue could be raised with the Housing Authority with a way for the\nCity to follow up if issues continue.\nThe Planning Services Manager responded in the affirmative; stated the City has\nlandscape maintenance agreements that are guaranteed by bonds for some projects.\nMayor Spencer inquired if a requirement could be in place for all projects.\nThe Planning Services Manager responded in the affirmative; stated the proposed\nlanguage was produced via Design Review, which is a public process.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft expressed support for the recommendation.\nExpressed support; noted the regulations could be used for other projects throughout\nthe City: Danielle Thoe, Alameda Housing Authority.\nMayor Spencer stated that she has driven by projects in the City and some are not\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n20\nSeptember 4, 2018", "path": "CityCouncil/2018-09-04.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2018-09-04", "page": 23, "text": "are homeless is an extravagance; there are ways of creating affordable-by-design\nhousing; consumers can make their decision where to apply; putting more affordable-\nby-design options in developments is paramount; people who are housing insecure are\nnot worried about whether or not they have a balcony.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated his issue is with new developments; everyone should\nhave personal open space as an amenity, which is an equity issue; people who live in\nmulti-family housing should not be discriminated against.\nCouncilmember Matarrese moved approval of the staff recommendation and\nintroduction of the ordinance.\nVice Mayor Vella seconded the motion.\nUnder discussion, Mayor Spencer requested a friendly amendment to add language\nand conditions requiring projects to have a maintenance clause and bond for common\nareas.\nCouncilmember Matarrese accepted the friendly amendment to add in a long-term\nmaintenance agreement.\nThe Planning Services Manager clarified, the Council is requesting to add conditions\nregarding long-term maintenance of the open space areas as part of the Design Review\napproval for the open space plans.\nOn the call for the question, the motion carried by the following voice vote: Ayes:\nCouncilmembers Ezzy Ashcraft, Matarrese, Vella and Mayor Spencer - 4. Abstention:\nCouncilmember Oddie - 1.\n(18-486) Recommendation to Receive a Report on the Alameda Museum Archival\nActivities on Behalf of the City; and Authorize the Interim City Manager to Execute a\nFive-Year Agreement with the Alameda Museum in an Amount Not to Exceed $42,600\nAnnually for a Five Year Total Expenditure of $213,000, for Archival Services of City of\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n21\nSeptember 4, 2018", "path": "CityCouncil/2018-09-04.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2018-09-04", "page": 24, "text": "Alameda Records.\nThe Recreation and Parks Director made brief comments and gave a Power Point\npresentation.\nAdam Gillitt, Alameda Museum, provided information; gave a Power Point presentation.\n***\nVice Mayor Vella left the dais at 11:22 p.m. and returned at 11:24 p.m.\nMayor Spencer moved approval of the staff recommendation.\nVice Mayor Vella seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.\n(18-487) Recommendation to Accept the Annual Report for the Rent Stabilization\nProgram.\nThe Community Development Director made brief comments.\nThe Rent Stabilization Program Director gave a Power Point presentation.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated the presentation addressed the burden on smaller\nlandlords to pay relocation fees not being more important than the needs of the tenant;\nthe landlord community is putting together an assistance fund that perhaps smaller\nlandlords could use.\nThe Rent Stabilization Program Director stated that he has heard about said effort,\nwhich is a good idea; a recommendation has been made in the past about certain\nfinancial breaks for smaller landlords; he is not in favor of a two tiered system.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft requested clarification on the percentage of landlords\nincluded in the information reported; discussed the need for better data collection.\nThe Rent Stabilization Program Director stated the most recent fee study allows\ndemographic data to be voluntarily reported.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired how good the data is if it is voluntarily produced.\nThe Rent Stabilization Program Director responded the data is very limited; stated that\nhe is trying to come up with ways to get more robust data, including a comprehensive\ndatabase.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated there is a goal to expand the range of translated\nmaterials, inquired what five languages are currently provided.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n22\nSeptember 4, 2018", "path": "CityCouncil/2018-09-04.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2018-09-04", "page": 25, "text": "The Rent Stabilization Program Director responded the list is broken down in the report.\nVice Mayor Vella inquired whether staff knows how many evicted tenants had to host\nfundraisers, and if said data is being tracked.\nThe Rent Stabilization Program Director responded the data is only tracked if it is\nrelayed to the Rent Review Advisory Committee (RRAC).\nVice Mayor Vella stated relocation fees are not enough in some cases, which is causing\nthe fundraisers to occur to make up the difference; requested confirmation that there is\nno way to track this information.\nThe Rent Stabilization Program Director responded in the affirmative.\nVice Mayor Vella inquired if she could forward fundraising postings to the Rent\nStabilization Program Director.\nThe Rent Stabilization Program Director responded there can be follow up on the\ninformation provided to ensure the tenant has been made aware of their rights and\noptions available.\nVice Mayor Vella expressed concern over the relocation benefit being insufficient versus\nactual costs; stated data regarding fundraisers occurring is valuable; that she is in favor\nof amending the Sunshine Ordinance for RRAC proceedings; inquired if the disclosures\nfor different people appearing that serve on the RRAC have been properly updated.\nCouncilmember Oddie discussed terminations of tenancies; inquired if there were any\nduplications.\nThe Rent Stabilization Program Director responded in the negative.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated that he believes the number of evictions over the two year\nperiod were \"no-cause evictions\" because tenants were drug dealers or prostitutes is\nzero.\nStated the RRAC is working as well as possible, but the system cannot provide good\nresults; expressed concerns with the 5% increase: Eric Strimling, Alameda Renters\nCoalition (ARC).\nDiscussed statistics; expressed concern over a board member working with tenants and\nhaving confidentiality agreements: Catherine Pauling, ARC.\nStated the report does not show relocation fees being a burden for small landlords; the\ndesignation seems arbitrary; expressed concern over the relocation fee being\ninsufficient: Toni Grimm, Alameda.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n23\nSeptember 4, 2018", "path": "CityCouncil/2018-09-04.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2018-09-04", "page": 26, "text": "Councilmember Matarrese stated the gathering of information is like running in place;\nCouncil should be informed with broader information; some statistics are good, but he\nwould like to see the information coupled with Business License annual reporting.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired if any cases are handled outside the RRAC.\nThe Assistant City Attorney responded part of the process is to have staff trained in\nmediation; stated landlords and tenants participate in mediation facilitated by staff that\nwill sometimes result in a case being settled prior to the RRAC meeting.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired how many mediations occur and if outside parties\nfacilitate mediation.\nThe Assistant City Attorney responded there are not outside mediations; stated RRAC\nmeetings are typically broken up into two pieces: first is mediation, and the second is a\nquasi-judiciary hearing where the RRAC hears testimony and makes a\nrecommendation; the landlord and the tenant are encouraged to engage in mediation\nbefore the process begins to facilitate an agreement.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired if the number of mediations is known.\nThe Assistant City Attorney responded the number was reported in the data.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired how many cases do not come to the RRAC because the\nCity never receives notice.\nThe Assistant City Attorney responded notice if filed for mediation that does happen;\nstated the ability to resolve the matter with a court action goes to a full hearing.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired if said instance occurs with or without a notice.\nThe Community Development Director responded under the ordinance the landlord is\nrequired to notify the Housing Authority if the rent increase is higher than 5%; the\nHousing Authority received 188 notices of rent increases above 5%, and of those, 62%,\nor 85 cases, were settled with the assistance of staff.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired if mediation is occurring outside of the RRAC process\nbefore someone files a notice.\nThe Community Development Director responded the program would not know said\ninformation.\nThe Assistant City Attorney stated the Housing Authority would welcome any\ninformation regarding outside mediation occurring before the RRAC process; that he\nwould be follow up with the public speaker.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n24\nSeptember 4, 2018", "path": "CityCouncil/2018-09-04.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2018-09-04", "page": 27, "text": "Councilmember Oddie stated a confidentiality agreements would prevent tenants from\ntelling the RRAC; he is concerned about the large decrease in number of rent\nincreases.\nVice Mayor Vella questioned if the City could track when someone goes to a RRAC\nmember involved in a settlement outside the RRAC proceedings; suggested the annual,\ncumulative rent increase causing effective evictions be brought to the RRAC's attention\nand included in the information provided in the future.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she hopes changes can be made to the\nordinance following the election in November; one of the main changes to be made is\nnoting the actual relocation expenses versus the relocation assistance funds provided to\ntenants; that she is troubled by the allegations made against a particular RRAC member\nand would like to again renew her call to get rid of the RRAC altogether; resources can\nbe used better by staff.\nIn response to Councilmember Oddie's inquiry regarding Councilmembers and RRAC\nmembers appropriate roles, the City Attorney stated her office is looking into the matter\nin question.\nThe Assistant City Attorney stated regular ongoing and onboarding meetings are\nincluded as part of the training provided to the RRAC members.\nThe Community Development Director noted the Council had clearly directed staff to\nlook into possibly revising relocation benefits.\nMayor Spencer moved approval of accepting the annual report.\nCouncilmember Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice\nvote - 5.\nCITY MANAGER COMMUNICATIONS\nNone.\nORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA\nNone.\nCOUNCIL REFERRALS\nNone.\n***\nVice Mayor Vella left the meeting at 12:20 a.m.\n***\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n25\nSeptember 4, 2018", "path": "CityCouncil/2018-09-04.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2018-09-04", "page": 28, "text": "COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS\n(18-488) Councilmember Oddie expressed appreciation to the City Manager and Fire\nChief for their advocacy in the Community Paramedicine Bill, which passed on Friday\ncausing the City's pilot program to become something permanent.\nMayor Spencer mentioned that she signed a letter of support.\n(18-489) Consideration of Mayor's Nomination for Appointment to the Historical\nAdvisory Board, Planning Board, and Social Service Human Relations Board (SSHRB).\nMayor Spencer nominated Cheryl Harawitz for appointment to the SSHRB.\nADJOURNMENT\nThere being no further business, Mayor Spencer adjourned the meeting at 12:22 a.m.\nRespectfully submitted,\nLara Weisiger\nCity Clerk\nThe agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Sunshine Ordinance.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n26\nSeptember 4, 2018", "path": "CityCouncil/2018-09-04.pdf"}