{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2019-04-02", "page": 1, "text": "MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING\nTUESDAY--APRIL 2, 2019- -5:00 P.M.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft convened the meeting at 5:04 p.m. Vice Mayor Knox White led\nthe Pledge of Allegiance.\nROLL CALL -\nPresent:\nCouncilmembers Daysog, Knox White, Oddie, Vella,\nand Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft - 5.\nAbsent:\nNone.\nAGENDA ITEM\n(19-184) Recommendation to Provide Direction to Staff Regarding Various\nAmendments to the City's Rent Review, Rent Stabilization, and Limitations on Evictions\nOrdinance (No. 3148) Which May Include Amending Various Sections of Article XV of\nChapter VI Concerning Review of Rent Increases, Limitations on Evictions, Eliminating\nthe Sunset Clause, and Making Clarifying Amendments; and\n(19-184A) Public Hearing to Consider an \"Ellis Act\" Policy and Resolution No. 15517\n\"Adopting a Policy Concerning the Requirements, Procedures, Restrictions and\nMitigations Concerning the Withdrawal of Residential Rental Units from Rent or Lease\n(Ellis Act Policy).\" Adopted.\nThe Base Reuse and Community Development Director gave a Power Point\npresentation.\nCouncilmember Daysog inquired whether staff has met with landlord stakeholders in the\nweeks leading up to the meeting\nThe Base Reuse and Community Development Director responded in the negative;\nstated based on Council's decision on the item, staff will reach out to stakeholders.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired how Accessory Dwelling Units (ADU's) will be treated.\nThe Base Reuse and Community Development Director responded ADU's can be an\nindependent unit on a property or within the primary home; stated a permitted ADU is\ntreated as a single family home if the homeowner lives in the main house; if the ADU is\nnot permitted, it is treated as two units to encourage legalization of the ADU; discussed\nthe single family home classification.\nIn response to Councilmember Oddie's inquiry, the Base Reuse and Community\nDevelopment Director stated all rental units are subject to the City's termination\nlimitations and are required to pay relocation benefits.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired what protections are available for residents of Cardinal\nSpecial Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n1\nApril 2, 2019", "path": "CityCouncil/2019-04-02.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2019-04-02", "page": 2, "text": "Point.\nThe Base Reuse and Community Development Director responded assisted living\nprojects in Alameda are not covered by the rent stabilization ordinance.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired what authority Council has to control rents at\nIndependence Plaza.\nThe Base Reuse and Community Development Director responded Independence\nPlaza is a senior affordable housing project owned by the Housing Authority; outlined\nOrdinance 3148 exemptions; stated the Housing Authority has committed to adopt\nregulatory agreements on its projects.\nIn response to Councilmember Oddie's inquiry, the Base Reuse and Community\nDevelopment Director responded the specific ordinance is related to the duties and\npurpose of the Rent Review Advisory Committee (RRAC); stated Council may provide\ndirection on amendments to be made and the role of RRAC may change; the language\ncan be updated if requested.\nIn response to Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft, Base Reuse and Community Development\nDirector outlined the buyout agreement process.\nThe Interim City Attorney stated a buyout typically occurs when a landlord and tenant\nreach an agreement where the tenant vacates the property for consideration.\nCouncilmember Vella inquired about the Ellis Act move-out protections for short-term\nrentals such as AirBNB.\nThe Base Reuse and Community Development Director responded when Council is\npresented with the AirBNB ordinance, it considers the number of days someone can\nrent a unit.\nCouncilmember Vella inquired when Council will be presented with the AirBNB\nordinance with Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT).\nThe Base Reuse and Community Development Director responded the items are part of\nstaff's workplan; stated the AirBNB ordinance can move simultaneously with rent\nordinance amendments to give continuity.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated the new City Attorney arrives next month and has\nexperience with these matters; it would be beneficial to have his input on the\nordinances.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft requested the City Clerk provide locations for meeting overflow; to\nwhich the City Clerk stated there is space in room 360 as well as the Elk's lodge.\nSpecial Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n2\nApril 2, 2019", "path": "CityCouncil/2019-04-02.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2019-04-02", "page": 3, "text": "Stated renters needs just cause and a cap lower than 5%; needs of seniors and\ndisabled should be considered: Jan Santos, Alameda Renters Coalition (ARC).\nStated rent increase will create more homelessness and cause families split up; her rent\nhas doubled during the last 10 years: Patty Nash, Renter.\nDiscussed her experience as a renter; expressed concern over the Rent Review\nAdvisory Committee process: Tristen Schmidt, The Village.\nUrged adoption of a cap on rents and just cause: Katya Schiesser, ARC.\nDiscussed her rental situation: Diana Cabcabin, Filipino Advocates for Justice (FAJ).\nDiscussed rent and income statistics: Alyssa Morisado, FAJ.\nExpressed support for a rent cap and just cause, and concern over students having to\nleave Alameda: PJ Tigas, FAJ/BY6.\nStated her landlord does not do repairs because he wants her family to leave: Pauline\nRoxas, FAJ.\nExpressed concern over the 5% rent increase: Sabrina Igat, FAJ.\nDiscussed the need for just cause and a rent cap: Frida Schiesser, ARC.\nStated that she has become the union representative for the National Association of\nHUD Tenants (NAHT) Urged Council to contact her if people need help: Bunny Duncan,\nNAHT.\nUrged changes be made to the ordinance to assist renters: Lester Dixon, FAJ.\nExpressed support for everyone coming out to support renters: Doyle Saylor, Renewed\nHope.\nStated renter protection is needed: Wes Swedlow, Alameda.\nUrged Council to support rent control and just cause: Austin Tam, Buena Vista United\nMethodist Church.\nStated stronger rent control is needed to prevent the displacement crisis; 5% is too high:\nZac Bowling, Alameda.\nStated her landlord would only increase rents when tenants left prior to the ordinance\nand now increases rents by 5% every year: Cheri Johansen, Alameda Progressives.\nStated just cause eviction is needed and 5% does not work; suggested the cap be\nSpecial Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n3\nApril 2, 2019", "path": "CityCouncil/2019-04-02.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2019-04-02", "page": 4, "text": "2.5%: Rob Hayes, Alameda.\nExpressed support for rent stabilization; discussed his rental situation and wages:\nKeegan Tatum, Alameda.\nStated the Council gave unions 9% raises over four years; outlined the School District\nsalary increases; stated in four years, rent could increase 20%: Al Wright, Alameda.\nCompared her rent increases to her Social Security increases: Toni Grimm, Alameda.\nStated that he is not opposed to rent control; suggested a process allow Ordinance\n3148 to sun set and create new regulations: Jay Garfinkle, Landlord.\nExpressed concern over the 5% rent cap: Steve Scheisser, Alameda.\nStated that she supports just cause eviction in the CASA Compact; a rent cap below 5%\nis needed; a rate of return for landlords should not be guaranteed: Laura Thomas,\nRenewed Hope.\nDiscussed his friend being priced out of Alameda: Bill Rowen, Alameda.\nDiscussed her rental situation: Irma Garcia-Sinclair, ARC.\nStated a lower rent cap is needed; expressed concern over the years included in the\nEllis Act: Catherine Pauling, ARC.\nStated that she has been a landlord for 30 years; she would prefer to sit down together\nand work things out; large corporations are usually the problem: Karen Bey, Alameda.\nDiscussed the rent cap and landlord expenses: Tony Charvet.\nDiscussed Ordinance 3148 and 5% not being enough for landlords: Malcom Lee.\nStated existing renters need to be protected from large rent increases and evictions\nwithout cause: Sophia DeWitt, East Bay Housing Organization.\nDiscussed Section 8, which should be continued; stated some landlords need to raise\nrents: Leslie Carter, Alameda.\nDiscussed fairness: Richard Neveln.\nExpressed support for rent control and concern over how she will pay her rent increase:\nAbeba Moldemuriam, Alameda.\nDiscussed his rental situation; urged adoption of just cause; stated 5% is too high:\nRasheed Shabazz, Alameda.\nSpecial Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n4\nApril 2, 2019", "path": "CityCouncil/2019-04-02.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2019-04-02", "page": 5, "text": "Councilmember Oddie stated housing is a basic human right; due process is needed,\nincluding just cause; the time for a hard rent cap is now; staff should return to Council\nwith analysis of a proper rent cap; Costa Hawkins exemptions should be in place to\nallow for relocation benefits; he would like to see the changes in Ordinance 3180 come\nback; proof of payment should be required when passing on 50% or more of pass-\nthrough fees; the Ellis Act year limits should be five and ten year increments for\npenalties; there should be a cap on the number of days a short tem rental such as\nAirBNB can be rented; relocation benefits should go through HUD; additional relocation\nbenefits should be awarded to seniors and those with disabilities; progress is being\nmade on the rent registry; discussed the rent cap and RRAC process; stated carve-outs\nwould not provide benefits for those in commercial rental units; ADU's allow for carve-\nouts; requested families with school-aged children have evictions delayed until the end\nof the school year.\nVice Mayor Knox White concurred with Councilmember Oddie's statements; stated the\nhearing is due; just cause should return to Council as soon as possible; staff should\nreach out to landlords to discuss items not included in the current list of allowable\nreasons for cause; rent caps become an issue for those who wish to increase rent\nhigher than the allowable cap; CPI should not be used and staff should find a way to\nensure people are not receiving unaffordable rent increases; there should be a process\nfor fair rate of return on rental property for landlords.\nCouncilmember Daysog outlined the history of rent increases for the City; showed slides\nwith data provided by a local blog; stated the City should continue with Ordinance 3148;\noutlined average rent data from the US Census and American Community Survey\n(ACS) Census Bureau.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft requested the City Clerk provide details for the remaining meeting\nagenda, to which the City Clerk outlined the process.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft called a recess at 7:01 p.m. and reconvened the meeting at 8:18\np.m.\n***\nCouncilmember Daysog stated that he would like staff to work with a technical working\ngroup consisting of landlord and renters to deal with various exhibits, to gain\nstakeholder input, and have the input relayed to Council.\nVice Mayor Knox White stated the data presented by Councilmember Daysog based on\nthe blog post is incorrect; outlined incorrect no cause eviction data; stated it is important\nto understand that no cause evictions have increased; many speakers stated they\ncannot afford their rent increases; he would like to know how many people are receiving\nincreases that are unaffordable causing them to leave town.\nSpecial Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n5\nApril 2, 2019", "path": "CityCouncil/2019-04-02.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2019-04-02", "page": 6, "text": "Councilmember Vella stated no cause evictions have increased; recommendations\nshould not be based off blog posts and should be based off data and actual analysis;\nthere are a number of big issues that staff has been tasked with looking into; 58% of\npeople in Alameda have experienced a rent increase; requested the number of people\nwho have been displaced as a result of rent increases; stated the ordinance has had\nunintended consequences; just cause should return to Council sooner rather than later,\nwith an AirBNB regulation and review; AirBNB is taking rental units off the market; 90\ndays for AirBNB is not enough of a regulation; expressed support for a 30 or 45 day cap\non AirBNBs; requested the budget costs be included in the report back; expressed\nsupport for having staff return with a rent cap; expressed concern with the RRAC and its\nprocesses; stated a registry should happen, but the data should be properly comprised;\nexpressed support for Costa Hawkins exempt properties with a constructive eviction\nrequiring relocation benefits; stated a subcommittee would be a biased and selective\nway to do analysis; requested staff speak with different people; stated a housing policy\ndoes not exists Country-wide, a system for property ownership exists; decisions should\nbe made based on community, compassion, and empathy for those who have\nexperienced housing insecurity; more housing units are needed; expressed support for\nCouncilmember Oddie and Vice Mayor Knox White's proposals.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft outlined data provided at League of Women Voters meeting;\nstated every city must do its part to aid the housing crisis; the RRAC program as\ndeveloped in the 1970's, under a different mindset and outlook; expressed support for a\nrent cap; discussed her approval of the original rent cap; stated CPI should be looked at\nas it provides hard data; expressed support for Ellis Act and the 5-year limit; stated\nrelocation benefits should follow the HUD model; stated money would be better spent\ntoward hearing officers versus the RRAC program; expressed concern with the personal\nnature of information that is provided by tenants; expressed support for removing no\ncause evictions; expressed concern over requests for repairs going unexpressed due to\nfear of retaliation by landlords; expressed support of buyouts and constructive evictions;\nstated landlords should develop a contributable fund where smaller landlords can\npetition to use the funding for potentially unaffordable costs such as relocation benefits;\nmore affordable housing must be built; splitting fees should not be counted toward the\ncost of rent.\nCouncilmember Daysog stated hard data shows Ordinance 3148 is working; Council\nshould work within the ordinance; the ordinance can be modified with renters working\nwith mom and pop landlords; the ordinance should not be replaced altogether; the data\nshows the ordinance should be kept and modified as needed, if necessary.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated the intention of the 5% rent cap was to be a cap, not the\nfloor; the formula to help buildings from having mass evictions was not successful.\nThe Base Reuse and Community Development Director recounted Council's direction.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she supports reaching out to the community, but a\nsubcommittee is not necessary.\nSpecial Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n6\nApril 2, 2019", "path": "CityCouncil/2019-04-02.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2019-04-02", "page": 7, "text": "Councilmember Oddie stated that he is happy to hear from the public, but it should not\nhinder the process.\nThe Base Reuse and Community Development Director stated it is possible to come\nback at the second meeting in May with changes; the maximum allowable rent increase\nmay have to come back in June; the goal is to bring just cause back at the second\nmeeting in May for Council action.\nVice Mayor Knox White requested a broader approach to the outreach on rent caps.\nThe Base Reuse and Community Development Director stated staff will look at the time-\nframe to come back to Council for the AirBNB ordinance; inquired if there is a desire\nfrom Council to have AirBNB come back with just cause, in which there may be a delay\nwith just cause coming back for consideration.\nCouncilmember Vella inquired when the Ellis Act portion is coming back for Council\nconsideration to which the Base Reuse and Community Development Director\nresponded the action is currently being discussed.\nCouncilmember Vella stated the AirBNB portion may return in July.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated just cause should take priority.\nThe Base Reuse and Community Development Director stated just cause will return at\nthe second meeting in May; staff will return with recommendations to the maximum\nallowable rent increase, rent increase banking, the role of RRAC versus hearing\nofficers, maximum rent caps and the impact on the budget; the item will come back as a\nstandalone ordinance; outlined the amendments provided for consideration; stated staff\nwill discuss the proposed amendments with members of the community.\nCouncilmember Vella inquired which items Councilmember Daysog specifically\nrequested be looked at; expressed concern about one Councilmember providing\ndirection to staff versus Council as a body providing direction.\nVice Mayor Knox White inquired if requests for modifications from Councilmember\nDaysog are being considered.\nCouncilmember Daysog stated that his goal is to obtain stakeholder input for people to\ngain landlord perspective.\nThe Base Reuse and Community Development Director responded the proposed\namendments have been vetted since the spring of 2017 when the ordinance was\nadopted; stated if the Council desires a review of the items within the community, staff\nwill facilitate the discussion.\nSpecial Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n7\nApril 2, 2019", "path": "CityCouncil/2019-04-02.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2019-04-02", "page": 8, "text": "Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated the items listed by Councilmember Daysog relate to Exhibit\n2 of the staff report; expressed support for leaving the items as-is and moving forward;\nstated there is not a pressing need to go back.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated passing on 50% of the rental fee should be reviewed.\nThe Base Reuse and Community Development Director stated staff's recommendation\nis to have the portion of the rent fee passed onto the tenant not be part of the rent cap;\ninquired if staff may review the items listed in Exhibit 2 to determine which might be\nmoot based on the current discussion.\nCouncilmember Vella stated the direction from the majority of Council is to have the\nstaff analysis done, but it should not hold up just cause or the rent cap conversation and\nshould be standalone ordinances.\nThe Base Reuse and Community Development Director stated Council should take\naction on just cause eviction protections and on the maximum allowable rent increase\nso staff may know what the ordinances should require.\nVie Mayor Knox White stated that he spoke with many landlord groups while\ncampaigning; outlined responses from landlords related to just cause and Measure K;\nstated the issue should return to Council as timely and soon as possible.\nThe Base Reuse and Community Development Director stated the new ordinances\nshould be checked against policy to ensure consistency and relevant changes are\nmade.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated that he will not support changes, but staff should be\nprepared to answer questions should they arise.\nThe Base Reuse and Community Development Director inquired whether Council wants\nto proceed with changes to relocation benefit formulas.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft responded the annual report for the rent program is coming in\nSeptember, and that would be the right time to consider changes.\nThe Base Reuse and Community Development Director stated the changes will be\nincorporated into the discussion in September; staff is requesting Council to adopt the\nEllis Act policy tonight.\nVice Mayor Knox White inquired who will be tracking properties affected by Ellis Act\npolicy; expressed support of the 2-year provision if proper tracking is executed.\nThe Base Reuse and Community Development Director responded there will be a\nrequirement to record that an Ellis Act termination has occurred against the title of a\nproperty, along with providing the contact information of the in-place tenant; stated the\nSpecial Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n8\nApril 2, 2019", "path": "CityCouncil/2019-04-02.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2019-04-02", "page": 9, "text": "current operation is complaint based; Ellis Act terminations will provide certainty with the\nprovision recorded on the title of the property.\nThe Interim City Attorney stated a number of forms have been created to provide to\nboth landlords and tenants to track the policy.\nCouncilmember Oddie expressed support for the 5 and 10 year provision under Ellis Act\nterminations; inquired if changes need to be made.\nThe Base Reuse and Community Development Director responded that changes are\nnot needed, the penalty is independent of the maximum allowable rent increase; stated\na rent only 5% higher than the in-place tenant can be charged if the unit is rented within\n5 years.\nCouncilmember Vella expressed support for adopting the Ellis Act policy; stated if\nchanges need to be made in the future after just cause, the issue can be agendized.\nCouncilmember Vella moved adoption of the resolution, with direction to have it\nagendized with just cause to allow amendment.\nCouncilmember Oddie seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote -\n5.\nADJOURNMENT\nThere being no further business, Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft adjourned the meeting at 8:59\np.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\n9\nApril 2, 2019", "path": "CityCouncil/2019-04-02.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2019-04-02", "page": 10, "text": "MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING\nTUESDAY- -APRIL 2, 2019- -7:00 P.M.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft convened the meeting at 7:07 p.m.\nROLL CALL -\nPresent:\nCouncilmembers Daysog, Knox White, Oddie, Vella,\nand Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft - 5.\nAbsent:\nNone.\nAGENDA CHANGES\nVice Mayor Knox White inquired about moving the cannabis matter [paragraph no. 19-\n200].\nThe Council did not move the item.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft noted the 434 Central Avenue rent case [paragraph no. 19-199]\nwas withdrawn.\nPROCLAMATIONS, SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY AND ANNOUNCEMENTS\n(19-185) Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft did a reading on the Season for Non-Violence word of the\nday on the Golden Rule.\n(19-186) Proclamation Declaring April 2019 as Parkinson's Awareness Month.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft read the proclamation and presented it to Nancy Husari, PD\nActive.\nMs. Husari made brief comments.\n(19-187) Proclamation Declaring April 8 through April 12, 2019 at National Boys and\nGirls Club Week.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft read the proclamation and presented it to Alameda Boys & Girls\nClub representatives and students.\nRepresentatives of the Boys & Girls Club made brief comments.\nORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA\n(19-188) Caroline Featherstone and Grace Huxley, Political and Proud, made an\nannouncement regarding their annual event.\n(19-189) Joanna Lau, International Chi Institute, discussed services for students,\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n1\nApril 2, 2019", "path": "CityCouncil/2019-04-02.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2019-04-02", "page": 11, "text": "including tutoring; expressed concern over City staff not meeting with existing\nbusinesses; stated tutoring is occurring within the 600 foot cannabis buffer.\n(19-190) Rosalinda Fortuna, Alameda, expressed concern over businesses not being\ninformed of the Webster Street dispensary; read a petition opposed to the dispensary.\nCONSENT CALENDAR\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft announced the ordinance for a lease with Nautilus [paragraph no.\n19-196 and the continued hotel appeal hearing [paragraph no. 19-197 were removed\nfrom the consent calendar for discussion.\nVice Mayor Knox White moved approval of the remainder of the Consent Calendar.\nCouncilmember Oddie seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote -\n5. [Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk preceding the paragraph\nnumber.]\n(*19-191) Minutes of the Special City Council Meetings Held on March 5, 2019.\nApproved.\n(*19-192) Ratified bills in the amount of $1,108,171.40.\n(*19-193) Recommendation to Authorize the Interim City Manager to Accept the Work of\nTriPointe Homes, for Tract 8131, Alameda Landing Phases I, II, and III. Accepted.\n(*19-194) Recommendation to Authorize the Interim City Manager to Award a One-Year\nContract in the Amount Not to Exceed $128,230, including Contingency, to Ninyo &\nMoore for the Cross Alameda Trail/Ralph Appezzato Memorial Parkway Improvements,\nNo. P.W. 03-18-11. Accepted.\n(*19-195) Resolution No. 15515, \"Amending the City of Alameda Emergency Operations\nPlan (EOP). Adopted.\n(19-196) Introduction of Ordinance Authorizing the Interim City Manager to Execute a\nFifteen-Year Lease with Two Five-Year Options to Extend, Substantially in the Form of\nthe Attached, with Nautilus Data Technologies, Inc., a Delaware Corporation, for\nBuilding 530, an 82,251-Square Foot Building Located at 120 West Oriskany Avenue,\nand the Adjacent Building 529, a 3,200-Square Foot Building, and Building 600, a 343-\nSquare Foot Building, at Alameda Point. Introduced.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director gave a brief presentation.\nGave a Power Point presentation: Jim Connaughton and Byron Taylor, Nautilus; Katie\nChamberlin, Anchor QEA, LLC; Jim Harvey, Moss Landing Marine Laboratories; and\nKeith Dines, NVIDIA.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n2\nApril 2, 2019", "path": "CityCouncil/2019-04-02.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2019-04-02", "page": 12, "text": "Stated the new proposal having the warm water farther from the seals is an\nimprovement; expressed concern about implementation: Mark Klein, Alameda Point\nHarbor Seal Monitor.\nDiscussed the general vision for Site B; expressed opposition to the project and its\nproposed location: Richard Bangert, Alameda.\nExpressed support for the project; stated the developer has committed to using union\nlabor: Andreas Cluver, Alameda County Building Trades.\nExpressed support for Nautilus; outlined Natel's business needs that can be provided by\nNautilus: Ben Ward, Natel Energy.\nCouncilmember Vella expressed concern about East Bay Regional Parks District\n(EBRPD) not being included in the list of reviewing entities; stated EBRPD should\nprovide input; expressed concern about Council consistency; stated a climate\nemergency was declared at the previous Council meeting; stated rising sea levels and\nwarming waters are a noted issue; approving a project that warms the water is\ninconsistent with the climate emergency; outlined Nautilus' Chief Executive Officer's\n(CEO) involvement with Clear Path; stated good construction jobs are needed;\nexpressed concern about the size of the facility and the number of jobs being created;\nstated the space is very large with a small number of good jobs; small changes can be\nharmful to the delicate ecosystem.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated every item coming to Council for review is shows\nenvironmental impacts; expressed concern about potential effects of warming water;\ndiscussed the Water Emergency Transportation Authority (WETA) facility project\nimpacts related to harbor seals; stated Site B development should not be blinded by the\nlure of profits for Alameda Municipal Power (AMP) if the project does not fit the desired\noutcome for Site B.\nVice Mayor Knox White stated the project would be in line with the climate emergency\ndeclaration; discussed data center energy usage; stated the outcome would help move\naway from negative impacts; discussed the pipe design related to warming water and a\ndiscussion with a member of the Water Control Board; stated the project is not\nincongruent and will come back to Council for final approval; expressed support for the\nproject.\nCouncilmember Daysog stated the project falls within the process outlined for Site B;\ndiscussed the process for different areas of Alameda Point; stated staff has fully\nevaluated the project; the project layers of approval and development will go through\nmany entities; Council can consider any negative impacts; the project should be\nsupported by Council; expressed support for the project.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n3\nApril 2, 2019", "path": "CityCouncil/2019-04-02.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2019-04-02", "page": 13, "text": "Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft expressed support for the project; stated new businesses coming\nto Alameda create jobs; the project supports other businesses, such as Natel; there is a\nshort window for project approval; the project is ready to cross the first threshold of\napproval.\nCouncilmember Vella expressed concern about being a guinea pig for new ideas; stated\nsome of the technology is new and unproven; inquired why there is a rush for approval\nprior to the Enterprise District tour.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded the lease has been\nshortened based on typical leases for the area; stated the option to purchase has not\nbeen offered; the lease will not hinder Site B; the Site B process can still move forward\ndue to the length of time development will take.\nJames Connaughton, Nautilus, stated Nautilus is happy to work with the City, but\nresources are finite and cannot be held for an extended period of time; another location\nmust be found if Alameda does not approve the project; the preferred location is\nAlameda; discussed the purpose of the company and the technology making a dramatic\ndent in the climate change problem.\nCouncilmember Vella stated that she is not currently in support of the item; she would\nlike to wait until after the Enterprise District tour on April 22nd: inquired if approval must\noccur or if it can happen at a future Council meeting.\nMr. Connaughton responded Nautilus is amenable to waiting a few more weeks; stated\nthe project is in alignment with the plan for Site B; Nautilus is looking forward to\ndeploying its technology within Alameda.\nCouncilmember Oddie suggested a motion be made to table the item until May 7th or\n21st\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated questioned whether a tour of Site B will answer questions\nabout the climate emergency and concerns about CEO's involvement with Clear Path;\nstated if the concerns can be addressed at the time of the tour, approval should be\ndelay; however, if the plan is to delay and still vote no, the decision should be made\nsooner rather than later.\nVice Mayor Knox White inquired if the item could be addressed at the April 22nd\nmeeting.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director stated the item cannot be approved at\na special meeting; the soonest the item can return for Council consideration is May 7th\nVice Mayor Knox White moved the item be continued to May 7th.\nCouncilmember Vella seconded the motion.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n4\nApril 2, 2019", "path": "CityCouncil/2019-04-02.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2019-04-02", "page": 14, "text": "Under discussion, Councilmember Daysog inquired whether the item requires four votes\ndue to it being a lease or if it is due to sale of property.\nThe Interim City Attorney responded the City Charter requires four votes for a long-term\nlease of City property.\nOn the call for the question, the motion carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.\n(19-197) Continued Public Hearing of Item 6-E on the March 19, 2019 City Council\nAgenda to Consider Resolution No. 15516, \"Denying the Appeal and Remanding the\nDesign Review for a 96-Room Hotel with 62 Parking Spaces at 1825 Park Street\n(PLN17-0538) for Further Consideration by the Planning Board (for Reasons\nIndependently Considered by the City Council that Were Not Raised in the Appeal).\nAdopted.\nCouncilmember Vella moved adoption of the resolution.\nCouncilmember Oddie seconded the motion, which carried by the following voice vote:\nAyes: Councilmembers Oddie, Vella and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft - 3.\nNoes:\nCouncilmembers Daysog and Knox White - 2.\n***\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft called a recess at 8:18 p.m. and reconvened the meeting at 8:59\np.m.\n***\nREGULAR AGENDA ITEMS\n(19-198) Introduction of Ordinance Amending the Alameda Municipal Code by\nEliminating the Sunset Clause (December 31, 2019) from Ordinance No. 3148 (City of\nAlameda Rent Review, Rent Stabilization, and Limitations on Evictions Ordinance).\nIntroduced.\nStated that he is not in favor of eliminating the sunset clause; urged Council to review\nthe issue and come up with different solutions: Lester Cabral, Alameda.\nStated that she is in favor of eliminating the sunset clause; the housing crisis has\nworsened; homelessness has increased over the years: Catherine Pauling, Alameda\nRenters Coalition.\nCouncilmember Vella moved approval of removing of the sunset clause.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the motion is to introduce the ordinance, to which\nCouncilmember Vella responded in the affirmative.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n5\nApril 2, 2019", "path": "CityCouncil/2019-04-02.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2019-04-02", "page": 15, "text": "Vice Mayor Knox White seconded the motion.\nUnder discussion, Councilmember Daysog expressed support for removing the sunset\nclause; stated rental stock will decrease in the future; restrictions are too harsh and will\nforce small landlords out of Alameda.\nOn the call for the question, the motion carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.\n(19-199) Recommendation to Review the Rent Review Advisory Committee (RRAC)\nCase regarding the Rent Increase at 434 Central Avenue, Apartment 111, and Issue a\nNon-Binding Decision. Withdrawn.\n(19-200) SUMMARY: Consider Four Cannabis Related Ordinances (as directed by the\nCity Council on February 19, 2019) and Provide Direction on Phasing Cannabis Permits\nas Follows: Two Ordinances (A and B) to Repeal the Existing Cannabis Regulations;\nfollowing a Public Hearing, Two Ordinances (C and D) to Adopt the Same or Similar\nRegulations; and Consider Phasing the Number of Dispensary/Delivery Permits through\nthe Request for Proposals Process\nRecommendation to Consider Introduction of Ordinance (A) to Repeal in Its Entirety\nOrdinance No. 3227 Concerning Cannabis Regulations in Alameda Municipal Code\nArticle XVI (Cannabis Businesses) of Chapter VI (Businesses, Occupations and\nIndustries) that, Among Other Things, Establishes the Number of Retail Cannabis\nDispensaries to be Open to the Public (including Delivery), Disperses Their Operations,\nCreates a Buffer Zone from Sensitive Uses, and Permits the Sale of Non-Medicinal\nCannabis;\n(19-200A) Introduction of Ordinance (B) to Repeal in Its Entirety Ordinance No. 3228\nConcerning Land Use Requirements in the Zoning Ordinance of Alameda Municipal\nCode Section 30-10 (Cannabis) that, Among Other Things, Permits Retail Cannabis\nDispensaries in Certain Zoning Districts Subject to a Conditional Use Permit and\nPermits the Sale of Non-Medicinal Cannabis in Certain Zoning Districts;\n(19-200B) Public Hearing to Consider Introduction of Ordinance (C) Concerning\nCannabis Regulations in Alameda Municipal Code Article XVI (Cannabis Businesses) of\nChapter VI (Businesses, Occupations and Industries) that, Among Other Things,\nEstablishes the Number of Retail Cannabis Dispensaries to be Open to the Public\n(including Delivery), Disperses Their Operations, Creates a Buffer Zone from Sensitive\nUses, and Permits the Sale of Non-Medicinal Cannabis;\n(19-200C) Introduction of Ordinance (D) Concerning Land Use Requirements in the\nZoning Ordinance of Alameda Municipal Code Section 30-10 (Cannabis) that, Among\nOther Things, Permits Retail Cannabis Dispensaries in Certain Zoning Districts Subject\nto a Conditional Use Permit and Permits the Sale of Non-Medicinal Cannabis in Certain\nZoning Districts; and\n(19-200D) Consider Phasing the Number of Dispensary/Delivery Permits through the\nRequest for Proposals Process.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n6\nApril 2, 2019", "path": "CityCouncil/2019-04-02.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2019-04-02", "page": 16, "text": "Councilmember Daysog recused himself and left the dais.\nThe Interim City Attorney gave a brief presentation.\nExpressed concern over cannabis consumption near the proposed dispensary on\nWebster Street; inquired how the no smoking ordinance will be enforced: Anita Ng.\nQuestioned the regulations; stated there is a 600-foot buffer zone for children centers;\nquestioned what the City has done to fulfill the good neighbor policy requirement; further\nquestioned the credibility Alameda needing 2 to 4 retail stores; inquired if there is a\nbudget for regulation, enforcement and administration; urged transparency: Joanna Lau,\nInternational Chi Institute.\nOutlined cannabis regulation options; stated The City could follow the State regulations:\nPhil Redd, Alameda.\nUrged Council to discard the item and start over; expressed support of medicinal-only\ncannabis; stated dispensaries need to be in the right locations: Don Sherratt, Alameda.\nDiscussed his online cannabis interest group, Alameda Cannabis Times and the\nsignature gathering process for the Adult Use Cannabis Act; outlined missed revenue\nand employment opportunities: Rich Moskowitz, Alameda.\nOutlined concerns raised by the Los Angeles County Health Officer and her experience\nwith working in the health industry; stated City staff needs to improve communications:\nSerena Chen, Alameda.\nStated there have been many meetings where people could express concerns over the\nlast two years; urged the ordinance be kept as is: Ryan Agabao, Alameda.\nThe Interim City Attorney outlined the ordinances and options.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired if all items can be acted upon in one motion.\nThe Interim City Attorney responded the items should be considered separately; stated\nCouncil has the discretion to combine approval, but it is not recommended.\nCouncilmember Vella inquired whether one motion could repeal and replace Ordinance\n3227 and another motion could repeal and replace Ordinance 3228.\nThe Interim City Attorney responded four motions are ideal; suggested if Council\ndesires, a motion be made to repeal both, and a separate motion reintroduce both or a\nmotion could repeal and reintroduce Ordinance 3227 and a separate motion could\nrepeal and introduce Ordinance 3228.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n7\nApril 2, 2019", "path": "CityCouncil/2019-04-02.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2019-04-02", "page": 17, "text": "Vice Mayor Knox White inquired whether anything states Council must perform four\nseparate motions; stated that he understands the reason to separate the motions.\nThe Interim City Attorney responded after Council takes action, the City Clerk will assign\nseparate numbers to each ordinance regardless of the route Council takes.\nVice Mayor Knox White stated the Open Government Commission (OGC) previously\nfound one of the ordinances had been mistitled on the agenda leading to the current\ndiscussion; stated the discrepancy was small and he does not wish to undo the work\ncompleted to-date; expressed support of repealing and replacing the ordinances without\nchanges and moving forward with a third and fourth permit; stated there is a proposal to\ndelay issuing the fourth permit 6-months after the first cannabis dispensary opens;\nproposed repealing and replacing the ordinances as-written, and directing staff to delay\nopening the fourth dispensary 6-months after the first opens or July 1, 2020, whichever\noccurs first.\nCouncilmember Vella stated concerns would appear more genuine if they were not\nabout on-site consumption; outlined reasons to include on-site consumption; stated that\nshe does not want to approve the item and criminalize on-site consumption after the\nfact; outlined the process to obtain cannabis licenses; stated the data provided in\nrelation to effects of cannabis on minors is compelling, but dispensaries will not sell to\nminors; she does not support any delays in dispensaries opening; inquired why the\ndelay proposal was created and how staff would regulate the delay.\nThe Base Reuse and Community Development Director responded the goal is to issue\nthe Request for Proposals (RFP) once Council completes the first and second readings\nof the ordinances; stated three additional permits will be issued; the third ranking\nproposal would not be able to open for business any sooner than 6-months after the first\ndispensary opens, or July 1, 2020 whichever occurs first.\nCouncilmember Vella inquired whether the process includes the current RFP applicant.\nThe Base Reuse and Community Development Director responded in the affirmative;\noutlined the process.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated expressed support for a three months delay between\noccupancy permits; stated that he prefers using the occupancy permit versus the RFP\nscore to allow dispensaries to open.\nThe Base Reuse and Community Development Director stated the date can be no\nsooner than 6-months after the first business is open and an outside date of July 1,\n2020; RFP applicants would be notified that a condition or right to pursue a permit\nwould include a condition that opening for business could not occur any sooner than 6-\nmonths after the first business is open or until July 1, 2020 to ensure certainty.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated that his preference is use the occupancy permit, not the\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n8\nApril 2, 2019", "path": "CityCouncil/2019-04-02.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2019-04-02", "page": 18, "text": "RFP ranking process; outlined the benefits to utilizing occupancy permit.\nThe Base Reuse and Community Development Director stated the outside date\nprevents stagnation.\nCouncilmember Oddie requested clarification of Vice Mayor Knox White's proposal.\nVice Mayor Knox White stated that Councilmember Oddie's proposal of using the\noccupancy permit is correct; the outside date of July 1, 2020 allows the applicant to\nmove forward.\nIn response to Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft's inquiry, Vice Mayor Knox White outlined the RFP\napplicants moving through the City and State permit process; stated the third permit\nmay be delayed by either 6-months from when the first dispensary opens, or July 1,\n2020 whichever occurs first.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated the current applicant may encounter an unforeseen delay.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft expressed support for the delay; stated the delay allows time to\nadminister the ordinance and new business model; expressed concern about the impact\non City staff; expressed concern about the definition of sensitive use and what\nconstitutes a youth center;; stated martial arts studios should be included in sensitive\nuses moving forward; finding sites for cannabis businesses is difficult; Alameda is family\nfriendly with many places for youth; proposed a friendly amendment to include private\nenterprises, such as a martial arts studio, containing the requisite number of youth\nclients to be considered a sensitive use requiring a 600-foot buffer zone; stated the\nprovision does not apply to the applicant on Webster Street; noted the City is allowing\nmedicinal and adult use.\nVice Mayor Knox White moved approval of repealing Ordinance 3227, repealing\nOrdinance 3228, reintroducing Ordinance 3227 and reintroducing Ordinance 3228\n[introduction of the four ordinances], and giving staff direction to issue the RFP for three\nadditional permits for a total of four dispensaries with an expectation that the fourth\npermit will have a 4.5 month delay of opening from the first or by July 1, 2020.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated the term \"occupancy permit\" should be added.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired if her friendly amendment proposal related to sensitive\nuse will be included.\nVice Mayor Knox White withdrew his motion.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated if Vice Mayor Knox White is willing to support her friendly\namendment, she will support his motion.\nVice Mayor Knox White stated the discussion of youth centers can occur at a future\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n9\nApril 2, 2019", "path": "CityCouncil/2019-04-02.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2019-04-02", "page": 19, "text": "date; adding martial arts studios will cause complications; he would like to look at youth\ncenters significantly differently.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether at one point martial arts centers were included in\nthe definition but later removed.\nThe Base Reuse and Community Development Director responded the ordinance never\ncharacterized martial arts studios as youth centers.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated the ordinance did list classifications where the majority of\nstudents were of a certain age range; inquired whether the same use under an Alameda\nRecreation and Parks Department (ARPD) facility would be deemed a sensitive use.\nThe Base Reuse and Community Development Director responded in the affirmative;\nstated Council decided on that carve-out at a previous meeting and changes have not\nbeen made.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated a message is being sent to the community; Council should\ntreat private enterprises that primarily serve youths the same as ARPD programs.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated that the item of sensitive use has not been agendized and\ncould cause sunshine ordinance issues if continued.\nThe Interim City Attorney stated the recommendation would be to re-notice the item if\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft's amendment is accepted in order to properly introduce the\nordinance.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated if Vice Mayor Knox White is amenable to 4.5 months\ndelay and a date of April 1, 2020, he will support the motion; the condition is related to\nthe occupancy permit, not the RFP rank.\nVice Mayor Knox White stated the occupancy permit is incorrect; it is when the business\nopens its doors.\nThe Base Reuse and Community Development Director stated a cannabis business can\noperate without a Certificate of Occupancy; the best metric is when the business is\nopen and operational.\nVice Mayor Knox White expressed concern discussing sensitive uses and youth centers\nbased on previous Council direction.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired if Vice Mayor Knox White would consider the discussion\nof sensitive use at a future date.\nVice Mayor Knox White responded that he wants the definition of youth centers to be\nsignificantly different from what exists; stated an RFP is about to be issued and the\nintent is not to delay the RFP; after the RFP is issued, the definition of youth center for\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n10\nApril 2, 2019", "path": "CityCouncil/2019-04-02.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2019-04-02", "page": 20, "text": "future dispensaries can be discussed; the item should move forward.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft expressed concern about utilizing where businesses want to\nlocate and tailoring definitions to surrounding businesses; stated a more comprehensive\ndiscussion should occur; inquired when the discussion would take place and the\nprocess.\nVice Mayor Knox White expressed concern about conversations that have no end point;\nexpressed support for moving the item forward with proper Council support; stated if\nCouncil support is not apparent, Ordinances 3227 and 3228 are null and void until\nCouncil takes action to uphold or push back on the OGC decision.\nThe Interim City Attorney stated Council action to repeal the ordinances is not critical;\nif\nCouncil does not wish to go against the OGC, it may choose to reintroduce the\nordinances without repeal, which is an acceptable option; repealing the ordinances is\nnot necessary, reintroduction will suffice.\nCouncilmember Vella stated youth centers has not been agendized and runs a risk of a\nBrown Act violation; expressed concern about continuing the discussion; expressed\nsupport for repealing and replacing the ordinances in the same motion; stated the\ndelays and deadlines overcomplicate the issue; expressed support for Councilmember\nOddie's proposed outside date of April 1, 2020; expressed concern about changing\ndefinitions at a future meeting.\nVice Mayor Knox White stated that he accepts Councilmember Vella's friendly\namendment.\nVice Mayor Knox White moved approval of repealing Ordinances 3227 and 3228,\nreplacing with 3227 as written and 3228 as written [introduction of the four ordinances],\nand providing direction to staff to issue three permits for a total of four with the fourth\noperator not being allowed to open until 4.5 months after the first operator is opened or\nApril 1, 2020 whichever comes first.\nCouncilmember Oddie seconded the motion.\nUnder discussion, Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she does not believe the discussion\nis a Brown Act violation; requesting staff to consider something is within the purview of\nthe item.\nOn the call for the question the motion carries by the following voice vote: Ayes:\nCouncilmembers Oddie, Vella and Vice Mayor Knox White -3, Noes: Mayor Ezzy\nAshcraft - -1. [Absent: Councilmember Daysog -1.]\nCouncilmember Oddie requested clarification that staff has not been directed to come\nback with any items related to definitions, to which Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft responded in\nthe negative.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n11\nApril 2, 2019", "path": "CityCouncil/2019-04-02.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2019-04-02", "page": 21, "text": "Vice Mayor Knox White stated the item has been properly noticed that Council would be\ndiscussing the ordinances; anything could have been changed in the ordinances and\nthe item would have been properly noticed.\nThe Base Reuse and Community Development Director stated based on Council\ndirection, the RFP will be issued after the second reading; on or about April 22nd, the\nRFP will be released.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she also discussed the item with the Interim City\nAttorney prior to the meeting.\n(19-201) Recommendation to Approve Agreement Appointing Eric J. Levitt as City\nManager Effective April 10, 2019.\nThe City Clerk read a summary of the City Manager's salary and benefits.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft requested clarification of the summary.\nThe City Clerk stated the summary is being read out of precaution; noted the City\nManager is arriving two days earlier than anticipated.\nCouncilmember Vella moved approval of the agreement.\nVice Mayor John Knox White seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice\nvote - 5.\nCITY MANAGER COMMUNICATIONS\n(19-202) The Interim City Manager made an announcement regarding Alameda being a\nstaging area for an upcoming Bay Area sailing event, San Francisco Sail GP.\nORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA\nNone.\nCOUNCIL REFERRALS\nNone.\nCOUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS\n(19-203) Councilmember Vella made an announcement regarding a Lead Abatement\nJoint Powers Authority meeting and the League of California Cities Housing and\nEconomic Development Policy Subcommittee meeting.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n12\nApril 2, 2019", "path": "CityCouncil/2019-04-02.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2019-04-02", "page": 22, "text": "(19-204) February 2019 Topic Brief on Climate Action and Embodied Emissions.\n[Informational Only] (Councilmember Oddie)\nCouncilmember Oddie briefly discussed the topic brief.\n(19-205) Vice Mayor Knox White made an announcement regarding an Alameda\nCounty Transportation Commission (ACTC) meeting that he attended discussing\nproposed BART changes and a new proposed agency; discussed adoption of the\nlegislative work plan, including Assembly Bill AB1487 to form a regional housing\nagency.\n(19-206) Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft discussed the League of California Cities Housing and\nEconomic Development Committee meeting; stated that she met with Senator Skinner\nregarding the bill; announced that she attended the opening of Everett Commons and\nthe opening of Littlejohn Park; discussed the Census 2020 Steering Committee and an\nupcoming CASA Compact meeting.\n(19-207) Status of the Emma Hood Swim Center at Alameda High School.\nVice Mayor Knox White provided an update.\n(19-208) Review and Discuss Charter Amendment Timeline and Issues Proposed by\nthe Council Subcommittee.\nVice Mayor Knox White and Councilmember Daysog gave a brief presentation on the\nlist of items.\nIn response to Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft's inquiry, Vice Mayor Knox White stated the\ntimeline can be discussed separately or congruently with the topics; Councilmembers\nrun for office every two years and timing can be difficult; outlined the upcoming primary\nelection ballot costs and potential dates; stated the process is a rough draft for updating\nthe charter.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired if the League of Women Voters (LWV) has been notified,\nto which Vice Mayor Knox White responded in the affirmative.\nThe City Clerk noted there are prohibitions to the March 2020 election; Council pay and\nthe Auditor and Treasurer positions are among the prohibited items, which would push\nto the November 2020 election.\nCouncilmember Vella stated Section 2-9 relates to pregnancy; if placed on bed rest,\nAlameda Hospital does not have the capacity for labor and delivery; therefore, a\npregnant Councilmember would be forced to leave the Island causing an effective\nvacancy; requiring Council approval for pregnancy related items is demeaning;\nexpressed concern in relation to the Auditor and Treasurer positions not being held to\nthe same standards as Council; stated maternity leave for Councilmembers at 30\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n13\nApril 2, 2019", "path": "CityCouncil/2019-04-02.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2019-04-02", "page": 23, "text": "consecutive days requires permission, and will be required of her over the summer\nmonths; expressed concern about Section 2-14 not applying to the Auditor and\nTreasurer positions; outlined Section 7-3 as an item to be discussed as a community; if\nthe positions of Auditor and Treasurer continue to exist and receive benefits,\ninconsistent items apply to Council and not the Auditor or Treasurer; discussed Section\n8-1 regarding City Attorney hiring requirements and limitations; requested bifurcation of\nCharter items to be discussed with different interested parties; stated the process\nshould be made public; the Charter has not been updated for some time, the current\nupdate process is due.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated some items to update can be compartmentalized and\nreviewed together; expressed support for the process.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft requested the LWV be included in the subcommittee\nconversations; inquired if paid signature gatherers can be reviewed.\nThe City Clerk responded that the City Charter does trump the Elections Code, but the\nissue would need to be reviewed.\nVice Mayor Knox White stated there are restrictions that can be adopted, but some\nmethods cannot be stopped.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated it is a good time to review the City Charter; learning from\nother cities will be key; the City Attorney hiring requirements can be reviewed;\ndiscussed the Measure A process; expressed support of looking at removing the Auditor\nand Treasurer positions; stated the pregnancy provisions under the Charter need to be\nupdated; requested more refinement to the Charter updates.\nVice Mayor Knox White outlined the items to bring back to Council for discussion.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft urged the LWV involvement.\nCouncilmember Daysog expressed support for Councilmember's Oddie and Vella\nbreakdown to bifurcate topics or put them into \"bucket lists;\" suggested members of the\nLWV assist Council in finding which items to place with others.\nVice Mayor Knox White inquired how the Measure A item will be handled.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft responded that item should be placed at the top of a discussion\nlist; discussed Measure A issues related to housing.\nVice Mayor Knox White stated that he will strike any Board and Commission updates;\nCouncil pay will stay on as a discussion item; paid signature gathering will move to\nanother location, not the City Charter; outlined the general timeline.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n14\nApril 2, 2019", "path": "CityCouncil/2019-04-02.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2019-04-02", "page": 24, "text": "Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft requested Vice Mayor Knox White check-in the LWV and set-up a\nmeeting.\nVice Mayor Knox White stated that he has met with the LWV.\nCouncilmember Vella requested any meeting with the LWV be agendized so that\nCouncilmembers who wish to attend may do so; requested a staff presentation related\nto paid signature gatherers and what other cities have implemented.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated that he too would like LWV meetings agendized so that he\nmay attend.\nORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA\n(19-209) David Bradford, Alameda, discussed how he has changed moving from the\nEast End to the West End.\nADJOURNMENT\nThere being no further business, Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft adjourned the meeting at 11:03\np.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\n15\nApril 2, 2019", "path": "CityCouncil/2019-04-02.pdf"}