{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2019-05-07", "page": 1, "text": "MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL JOINT MEETING OF THE\nCITY COUNCIL AND ALAMEDA PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY (APFA)\nTUESDAY- - -MAY 7, 2019- -6:59 P.M.\nMayor/Chair\nEzzy\nAshcraft\nconvened\nthe\nmeeting\nat\n7:02\np.m.\nCouncilmember/Commissioner Daysog led the Pledge of Allegiance.\nROLL CALL -\nPresent:\nCouncilmembers/Commissioners\nDaysog,\nKnox\nWhite, Oddie, Vella and Mayor/Chair Ezzy Ashcraft -\n5.\nAbsent:\nNone.\nCONSENT CALENDAR\nCouncilmember/Commissioner Vella 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(*19-01 APFA) Minutes of the Special Alameda Public Financing Authority Meeting\nHeld on September 4, 2018. Approved.\n(*19-254 CC/19-02 APFA) SUMMARY: Authorize the City Manager to Execute an\nExtension of the Letter of Credit Related to Two Types of Revenue Bonds for Alameda\nPoint Improvement Project\nRecommendation to Authorize the City Manager to Execute an Extension of the Letter\nof Credit with the Combined Entity, Mitsubishi UFJ Financial Group (MUFG) Union\nBank, N.A., Related to the Current Outstanding $6,200,000 Alameda Public Financing\nAuthority (APFA) Variable Rate Demand Revenue Bonds (Alameda Point Improvement\nProject), 2003 Series A, and the Current Outstanding $3,200,000 APFA Taxable\nVariable Rate Demand Revenue Bonds (Alameda Point Improvement Project), 2003\nSeries B, with Updated Terms and Conditions. Accepted.\nADJOURNMENT\nThere being no further business, Mayor/Chair Ezzy Ashcraft adjourned the meeting at\n7:03 p.m.\nRespectfully submitted,\nLara Weisiger\nCity Clerk and Secretary, APFA\nThe agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Sunshine Ordinance.\nSpecial Joint Meeting\nAlameda City Council and\nAlameda Public Financing Authority\nMay 7, 2019", "path": "CityCouncil/2019-05-07.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2019-05-07", "page": 2, "text": "MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING\nTUESDAY- - -MAY 7, 2019- 7:00 - P.M.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft convened the meeting at 7:03 p.m. Councilmember Oddie led the\nPledge of Allegiance.\nROLL CALL -\nPresent:\nCouncilmembers Daysog, Knox White, Oddie, Vella,\nand Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft - 5.\nAbsent:\nNone.\nAGENDA CHANGES\nNone.\nPROCLAMATIONS, SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY AND ANNOUNCEMENTS\n(19-255) Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft announced a break would be taken every hour; thanked\nthe Interim City Attorney for his service.\n(19-256) Proclamation Declaring May 2019 as Alameda Bike-to-Work Day.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft read the proclamation and presented it to Alyx Karpowicz and\nLaura West.\nMs. West and Ms. Karpowicz made brief comments.\n(19-257) Proclamation Declaring May 9 through 19, 2019 as Affordable Housing Week.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft read the proclamation and presented it to Laura Thomas,\nRenewed Hope and East Bay Housing Organization (EBHO); Sophia DeWitt, EBHO;\nand Housing Authority staff.\nMs. Thomas and Ms. DeWitt made brief comments.\n(19-258) Proclamation Declaring May 5 through May 11, 2019 as Small Business Week.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft read the proclamation and presented it to Michael McDonough,\nChamber of Commerce; Janet Magleby Downtown Alameda Business Association; Ed\nOwens, Greater Alameda Business Association; and Linda Asbury, West Alameda\nBusiness Association.\nMs. Magleby, Ms. Asbury, Mr. Owens and Mr. McDonough made brief comments.\nSubmitted information and introduced their business; urged Council to consider small\nbusinesses and affordable housing in development plans: Joanne Martin and Eric\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nMay 7, 2019\n1", "path": "CityCouncil/2019-05-07.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2019-05-07", "page": 3, "text": "Gantos, Hot Rod Shop Inc.\nORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA\n(19-259) Toni Grimm, Alameda Renters Coalition, announced an upcoming tenants\nevent as part of Affordable Housing Week.\n(19-260) David Williams and Pauline Williams, Alameda, expressed concern over\nspeeding and traffic on Lincoln Avenue.\nCONSENT CALENDAR\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft announced that the Park Street corridor project [paragraph no. 19-\n268]; the contracts with MCK Services [paragraph nos. 19-270 and 19-271]; and the\ncannabis ordinances [paragraph no. 19-275] were removed from the Consent Calendar\nfor discussion.\nCouncilmember Oddie moved approval of the remainder of the Consent Calendar.\nVice Mayor Knox White 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(*19-261) Minutes of the Special City Council Meetings Held on April 2, 2019.\nApproved.\n(*19-262) Ratified bills in the amount of $6,287,448.\n(*19-263) Recommendation to Accept the Quarterly Sales Tax Report for the Reporting\nPeriod Ending September 30, 2018 (Funds Collected During the Period April 1, 2018 to\nJune 30, 2018). Accepted.\n(*19-264) Recommendation to Accept the Quarterly Sales Tax Report for the Reporting\nPeriod Ending December 31, 2018 (Funds Collected During the Period July 1, 2018 to\nSeptember 30, 2018). Accepted.\n(*19-265) Recommendation to Approve the State and Federal Legislative Agenda for\nthe City of Alameda. Accepted.\n(*19-266) Recommendation to Authorize Councilmember Malia Vella to be Absent for\nMore than Thirty Days Consecutively in 2019 in Compliance with Section 2-9 of the\nAlameda City Charter. Accepted.\n(*19-267) Recommendation to Authorize the City Manager to Execute a 24-Month\nAgreement with Ghirardelli Associates for Construction Management Services for the\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nMay 7, 2019\n2", "path": "CityCouncil/2019-05-07.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2019-05-07", "page": 4, "text": "Seaplane Lagoon Ferry Terminal Project at Alameda Point, in an Amount Not to Exceed\n$452,904. Accepted.\n(19-268) Recommendation to Authorize the City Manager to Execute a Contract\nAmendment with Ray's Electric for the Park Street Corridor Safety and Operations\nImprovement Project, No. P.W. 03-15-03, in an Amount Not to Exceed $99,750,\nIncluding Contingency, for a Total Expenditure under the Agreement, of $429,830.\nExpressed support for Vice Mayor Knox White's call to action and implementing the\ncomplete streets plan; urged Council to implement the complete streets plan: Denise\nTrepanier, Bike Walk Alameda.\nThe City Engineer made brief comments.\nVice Mayor Knox White stated that he spoke with Public Works staff prior to the\nmeeting; noted the original staff for the project are no longer with the Department;\nstated the issues described by Ms. Trenpanier will be addressed.\nIn response to Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft's inquiry regarding direction to staff, Vice Mayor\nKnox White stated the item does not need to come back, as long as there is agreement\nto incorporate all modes having equity when a light is triggered: car actuator or\npedestrian button.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated a report back to Council would be appreciated when the\nwork takes place.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired whether it is possible to time crosswalk signals for\npedestrians to walk non-stop over a long period of time.\nThe City Engineer responded it is possible in theory; stated the difficulty lies with the\ndistance between intersections being so great, and varying walking speeds between\nindividuals.\nCouncilmember Oddie noted a Park Street issue is related to the City of Oakland, not\nCaltrans.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated during a trip to Washington DC, she noticed a one minute\nallotment to cross streets.\nCouncilmember Vella moved approval of the staff recommendation.\nVice Mayor Knox White seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote -\n5.\n(*19-269) Recommendation to Authorize the City Manager to Execute a First\nAmendment of the Service Provider Agreement with Eastern Research Group for\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nMay 7, 2019\n3", "path": "CityCouncil/2019-05-07.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2019-05-07", "page": 5, "text": "Continued Climate Action and Resiliency Plan Services by Extending the Term Five\nMonths and Increasing the Compensation in an Amount Not to Exceed $78,542,\nIncluding Contingency, for a Total Agreement Expenditure of $378,437. Accepted; and\n(*19-269 A) Resolution No. 15526, \"Increasing the Fiscal Year 2018-19 Capital Projects\nFund Budget for the Climate Action Plan Project by $50,000 from the Tidelands Fund\".\nAdopted.\n(19-270) Recommendation to Authorize the City Manager to Execute an Agreement\nwith MCK Services, Inc. for the Repair and Resurfacing of Portions of Otis Drive and\nPacific Avenue, No. P.W. 03-15-02, in an Amount, Including Contingency, Not to\nExceed $1,392,537.60; and\n(19-270A) Resolution No. 15527, \"Amending the Fiscal Year 2018-19 Capital\nImprovement Program Budget by Defunding Revenue and Appropriations in the\nPavement Management Project 91810 by $750,000 Each and Increasing Revenue and\nAppropriations for Otis Drive and Pacific Avenue Resurfacing Project 91347 by\n$750,000 Each.' Adopted.\nCouncilmember Daysog stated that he would like to combine the current item with the\nnext item [paragraph no. 19-\nbecause both deal with road improvements in\ndifferent parts of Alameda, but he is amenable to taking them separately; questioned\nthe precise road treatment to be considered; outlined the treatment possibilities\nprovided; inquired the cost comparison against professionally and locally established\nbenchmarks.\nThe City Engineer responded an overlay is being done and a base repair for areas\nwhere the pavement has failed; stated treatment costs are in line with industry\nstandards.\nVice Mayor Knox White stated that he and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft have met with\nneighbors about ongoing concerns; expressed concern about the lack of outreach and\nthe lack of information related to updates for the area; requested staff to conduct\noutreach to the community to ensure striping concerns are addressed.\nVice Mayor Knox White moved approval of the staff recommendation and adoption of\nthe resolution, with direction that outreach occur prior to the striping documents being\nfinalized.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she and Vice Mayor Knox White met with neighbors\nafter a workshop; the City Engineer is aware of concerns and will address concerns in\nthe near future.\nCouncilmember Vella requested clarification of Vice Mayor Knox White's request.\nVice Mayor Knox White stated that a group of people have been trying to engage\naround the issue and should receive outreach.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nMay 7, 2019\n4", "path": "CityCouncil/2019-05-07.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2019-05-07", "page": 6, "text": "Councilmember Vella inquired whether the group has filed a See Click Fix request.\nVice Mayor Knox White responded the group has reached out to the full City Council; he\nand Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft met with the group; noted the group has been engaged with\nthe Public Works Department since 2015.\nCouncilmember Daysog seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote -\n5.\n(19-271) Recommendation to Authorize the City Manager to Execute a One-Year\nAgreement with MCK Services, Inc. for Repair and Resurfacing of Approximately Three\nMiles of Streets, Phase 38, No. P.W. 02-19-03, in an Amount Not to Exceed\n$4,016,266.80, Including Contingency, with the Option of Four One-Year Extensions, for\na Total Five-Year Expenditure Not to Exceed $20,900,813.73; and\n(19-271A) Resolution No. 15528, \"Amending the Fiscal Year 2018-19 Capital\nImprovement Program Budget by Defunding Revenue and Appropriations in the\nPavement Management Project 91610 (2015-17 Capital Budget) by $613,000 Each and\nIncreasing Revenue and Appropriations for Pavement Management Project 91810\n(2017-19 Capital Budget) by $613,000 Each.\" Adopted.\nExpressed support for Alameda's livable neighborhoods and safe streets initiative;\ndiscussed complete streets and daylighting: Pat Potter, Transportation Awareness\nCommittee.\nEncouraged implementation of daylighting and safe streets; expressed support for Vice\nMayor Knox White's suggestions: Jon Spangler, Alameda.\nVice Mayor Knox White acknowledged Public Works staff for efficiently implementing\nplans related to roadways; stated that he has interacted with families that have\nencountered unsafe road conditions; outlined correspondence received by Council and\nhis response; stated daylighting is one of the most effective things that can be done;\nproposed approving the contract, with the expectation that streets with expected high\nvolumes of traffic have daylighting, and parking laws will be enforced; outlined unsafe\nroad conditions and recent accidents.\nCouncilmember Vella stated that she lives at an intersection that currently has a four-\nway stop; noted the first See Click Fix item that she submitted was for daylighting; urged\ncitizens that notice faded red paint on curbs to report it via See Click Fix; expressed\nsupport for Vice Mayor Knox White's suggestion of daylighting near collectors and\narterials.\nCouncilmember Daysog stated that his questions relate to road reconstruction;\ndaylighting is an important item; requested an overview of three general road treatments\nbe provided by Public Work's staff; expressed concern over the cost per foot for overlay;\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nMay 7, 2019\n5", "path": "CityCouncil/2019-05-07.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2019-05-07", "page": 7, "text": "provided a map of upcoming repairs; inquired the rationale behind the selection of the\noverlay treatment locations.\nThe City Engineer gave a brief Power Point presentation.\nIn response to Councilmember Daysog's inquiry related to cost, the City Engineer\nstated both projects came within 10-15% of the Engineer's estimate and used a base\ncost of $5 per square foot in overlay.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired the direction needed from Council in order to prioritize\ndaylighting.\nThe City Engineer responded daylighting is something that can be completely\nindependent of the paving program and can be done systematically throughout the City.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated contracts of this size should not be on the Consent\nCalendar and should be placed on the regular agenda.\n***\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft called a recess at 8:21 p.m. and reconvened the meeting at 8:37\np.m.\n***\nCouncilmember Daysog expressed support for the toolbox concept; stated there is a\nneed for a streets infrastructure commission to vet technical questions.\nVice Mayor Knox White moved approval of the contract [and adoption of the resolution],\nwith direction to the City Manager to bring back in June a temporary toolbox that\nincludes daylighting in arterials and collectors that will follow the existing paving\nprogram up until the time a new toolbox can be put into place for 2020.\nCouncilmember Oddie seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote -\n5.\n(*19-272) Resolution No. 15529, \"Approving a Revised Executive Management\nCompensation Plan for the Period Commencing December 27, 2018 and Ending June\n30, 2022.' Adopted; and\n(*19-272 A) Resolution No. 15530, \"Amending the Executive Management Employees\nSalary Schedule to Establish the Classification of Planning, Building and Transportation\nDirector and to Delete the Director of Base Reuse Classification.\" Adopted.\n(*19-273) Resolution No. 15531, \"Amending Fiscal Year 2018-19 Base Reuse Fund\nBudget by Appropriating $538,128 from the Building Sales Proceeds for\nReimbursement for Additional Work Performed While Installing a Portion of the Joint\nTrench at Alameda Point.\" Adopted.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nMay 7, 2019\n6", "path": "CityCouncil/2019-05-07.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2019-05-07", "page": 8, "text": "(*19-273) Recommendation to Authorize the City Manager to Execute a First\nAmendment to the Alameda Animal Shelter Services Agreement (Agreement\nAmendment) with Friends of the Alameda Animal Shelter (FAAS) for Animal Shelter\nServices Extending the Term by Two Years in an Amount not to Exceed $1,779,832,\nincluding a One-Time Expenditure of $50,000 in Fiscal Year (FY) 2019-20 for Additional\nStaff Support, for a Four-Year Total Compensation Not to Exceed $3,464,800, plus an\nEscalator in 2020-21 Based on the Bay Area Consumer Price Index. Accepted; and\n(*19-273A) Introduction of Ordinance Approving a First Amendment to the Lease\nAgreement (Lease Agreement) and Authorizing the City Manager to Execute a First\nAmendment to the Lease Agreement with Friends of the Alameda Animal Shelter\n(FAAS) Extending the Term by Two Years with the Same Terms and Conditions, for the\nFacility located at 1590 Fortmann Way, Alameda, CA 94501. Introduced.\n(*19-274) Introduction of Ordinance Approving a Second Amendment to a Lease and\nAuthorizing the City Manager to Execute Documents Necessary to Implement the\nTerms of the Second Amendment to a Lease with Advanced Roofing Services, Inc. for\nTwenty-Four Months at 1450 Viking Street, Building 612, at Alameda Point. Introduced.\n(19-275) SUMMARY: Consider Final Passage of Four Cannabis Related Ordinances as\nFollows: Two Ordinances (A and B) Repeal the Existing Cannabis Regulations; and\nTwo Ordinances (C and D) Adopt the Same Regulations\n(A) Ordinance No. 3236, \"Repeal in Its Entirety Ordinance No. 3228 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.' Finally passed;\n(19-275A) (B) Ordinance No. 3237, \"Repeal in Its Entirety Ordinance No. 3227\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.\" Finally passed;\n(19-275B) (C) Ordinance No. 3238, \"Concerning Cannabis Regulations in Alameda\nMunicipal Code Article XVI (Cannabis Businesses) of Chapter VI (Businesses,\nOccupations and Industries) that, Among Other Things, Establishes the Number of\nRetail Cannabis Dispensaries to be Open to the Public (including Delivery), Disperses\nTheir Operations, Creates a Buffer Zone from Sensitive Uses, and Permits the Sale of\nNon-Medicinal Cannabis.\" Finally passed;\n(19-275C) (D) Ordinance No. 3239, \"Concerning Land Use Requirements in the Zoning\nOrdinance of Alameda Municipal Code Section 30-10 (Cannabis) that, Among Other\nThings, Permits Retail Cannabis Dispensaries in Certain Zoning Districts Subject to a\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nMay 7, 2019\n7", "path": "CityCouncil/2019-05-07.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2019-05-07", "page": 9, "text": "Conditional Use Permit and Permits the Sale of Non-Medicinal Cannabis in Certain\nZoning Districts.\" Finally passed.\nCouncilmember Daysog recused himself and left the dais.\nVice Mayor Knox White moved final passage of the ordinances.\nCouncilmember Oddie seconded the motion, which carried by the following voice vote:\nAyes: Councilmembers Knox White, Oddie and Vella - 3. Noes: Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft -\n1. [Absent: Councilmember Daysog - 1.]\n(*19-276) Ordinance No. 3240, \"Amending the Alameda Municipal Code by Amending\nVarious Provisions, Including: (1) Section 2-17 of Chapter Il (Administration); (2) Section\n1-7 of Chapter I (General); (3) Section 2-44.1 of Chapter II; (4) Section 1-5 (Penalty\nProvisions; Enforcement) of Chapter I (General); (5) Section 30-23 (Certificate of\nOccupancy) of Chapter XXX (Development Regulations); and (6) Other Related\nAmendments Concerning Code Enforcement.\" Finally passed.\nREGULAR AGENDA ITEMS\n(19-277) Recommendation to Receive a Report on the Status of the Emma Hood Swim\nCenter Repairs and Provide Direction on Options for a City Aquatic Center; and\n(19-277A) Resolution No. 15532, \"Amending the General Fund Transfers Out Budget\nfor Fiscal Year 2018-19 by $250,000 and Capital Projects Fund Transfers In and\nAppropriations by $250,000, Each, for Costs Associated with Repair of the Emma Hood\nSwim Center.\" Adopted.\nThe Interim Assistant City Manager/Recreation and Parks Director gave a Power Point\npresentation.\nCouncilmember Daysog inquired how the pool size was calculated, and how typical\nswim meet distances would be met with the proposed pool size.\nThe Interim Assistant City Manager/Recreation and Parks Director responded that a 30-\nmeter pool is not uncommon; stated different pool dimensions are used, but both\nproposed sizes are considered standard.\nCouncilmember Vella inquired whether the resolution attached to the staff report\ndictates an extension to June rather than May, to which the Interim Assistant City\nManager/Recreation and Parks Director responded in the affirmative.\nThe Interim Assistant City Manager/Recreation and Parks Director stated the high-level\nagreement will stipulate the City has full site control but will not identify a specific\nlocation.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nMay 7, 2019\n8", "path": "CityCouncil/2019-05-07.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2019-05-07", "page": 10, "text": "Councilmember Oddie inquired whether the School District's closed session meeting\nwill be held the following week, to which the Interim Assistant City Manager/Recreation\nand Parks Director responded in the affirmative.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired the topic of the closed session discussion.\nThe Interim Assistant City Manager/Recreation and Parks Director responded the topic\nis related to options for land use.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired whether price and terms of payment will be included, to\nwhich the Interim Assistant City Manager/Recreation and Parks Director responded in\nthe negative; stated the discussion will involve the available mechanisms to transfer\nland from the School District to the City.\nCouncilmember Oddie questioned whether it is worthwhile to have the Council hold the\nsame discussion; noted the Council has not given direction as a whole.\nThe Interim Assistant City Manager/Recreation and Parks Director responded the\nSchool District is looking into the available legal options and mechanisms to convey\nland to the City.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated the Council should be made aware of options.\nThe Interim Assistant City Manager/Recreation and Parks Director stated the City is not\nnegotiating location or price and terms.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired whether the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) will\nbe negotiated by the City and the School District, to which the Interim Assistant City\nManager/Recreation and Parks Director responded in the affirmative.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired about the negotiating parties.\nThe Interim Assistant City Manager/Recreation and Parks Director responded the\ncommittee will be reviewing the MOU; stated a high-level draft has been started; the\ndraft will be reviewed, discussed and approved or edited by each body; each body will\ndiscuss the MOU prior to finalization.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired whether each body will be able to review, prioritize, and\ngive negotiating authority within the MOU, to which the Interim Assistant City\nManager/Recreation and Parks Director responded in the affirmative.\nVice Mayor Knox White stated the City is not negotiating the MOU; the School District\nhas legal requirements about field sizes; the MOU discussion related to land options\nbegins tonight; MOU discussions and negotiations between the School Board and\nCouncil will be held as joint meetings before each Council meeting in June.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nMay 7, 2019\n9", "path": "CityCouncil/2019-05-07.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2019-05-07", "page": 11, "text": "Councilmember Oddie inquired whether there is a contingency plan if a June 30th\nextension is not granted.\nThe Interim Assistant City Manager/Recreation and Parks Director responded staff is\nworking as quickly as possible; stated a special meeting can be held the last week of\nMay as needed.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated a worst-case scenario should be planned.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether a response can be anticipated from County\nHealth by next week, to which the Interim Assistant City Manager/Recreation and Parks\nDirector responded in the affirmative.\nVice Mayor Knox White inquired whether a new locations will not be discussed in July,\nto which the Interim Assistant City Manager/Recreation and Parks Director responded in\nthe affirmative; stated conceptual designs will be based on each site.\nCouncilmember Vella questioned whether the decision will be made by the School\nBoard since the land is owned by the School District; expressed concern about whether\nthe Council can make a determination about a School District parcel, when the decision\nwould be made by the School Board.\nThe Interim Assistant City Manager/Recreation and Parks Director stated tonight's\ndiscussion is to brainstorm and hear ideas, not to confirm or definitively select a site\nlocation; if other sites are to be considered, the discussion should occur tonight; if the\nSchool District decides that no land agreement will occur with the City, City-owned sites\ncould be considered.\nDiscussed the pool needs of various pool users; expressed support for the plan, which\nhas to move quickly: Amelia Busenitz, Alameda Aquatic Alliance (AAA).\nCouncilmember Daysog stated that he supports the option with the least moving parts;\nhe prefers an elegant approach; the School District and the City have previously\nentered into complicated agreements.\nCouncilmember Vella stated a contingency plan helps move both parties along and is\nneeded; expressed support for joint meetings in June; stated at least one joint meeting\nshould be agendized; a May date should also be agendized for a contingency plan; an\nideal location for both a School District and City owned location should be determined;\nthe Alameda Officers' Pool rates higher among City-owned facilities as a backup plan;\nthe community deserves good swimming facilities; the resolution wording can be\nmisleading; if a land transfer is involved, Alameda High School access to the pool\nshould be ensured; everybody should have access; the facility should meet the needs of\nthe community; input from the community should be heard by both City Council and the\nSchool Board, preferably at an upcoming joint meeting; expressed concern about the\nSchool District's budget.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nMay 7, 2019\n10", "path": "CityCouncil/2019-05-07.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2019-05-07", "page": 12, "text": "Councilmember Oddie stated time is of the essence; the issue should have been\naddressed long ago; the project should not be over-engineered and needs to be\ncompleted fast; the longer the project delays, the higher the possibility for complications;\nCouncil should be cognizant of the School District; the City should use some one-time\nmoney to assist with funding; expressed support of a 70%/30% split; stated the School\nBoard is not in the business of running a pool, they are interested in educating children;\nthat he would like more clarity on the agreement because land use agreements can be\ncomplicated; Council should weigh-in on a policy decision; a contingency plan meeting\nshould be agendized in May; expressed concern about not having input on MOU bullet\npoints; stated the City has a bigger responsibility to provide the schools with aquatics\nprograms as a priority; charging the school to fund the construction of the new facility is\nridiculous.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she and Vice Mayor Knox White are part of the pool\nsubcommittee; outlined members and titles of the pool subcommittee; stated charging\nfor use requires a formula; day use of the current facilities is provided to the School\nDistrict at no charge; weekend tournaments are revenue generating events; noted the\nSchool District has budget challenges; stated the committee has the objective of\nworking as quickly and carefully as possible; there are a finite number of possibilities for\nfacilities; expressed support for a contingency plan; stated the community meeting\nscheduled for July will not start from the ground level; everyone is moving toward the\nsame goal with very little time.\nVice Mayor Knox White stated the Council time for comments should be waived; the\nJune date was suggested by the City because a plan and land use agreement must be\ncompleted by the end of December; the School District does not meet in July and\nCouncil does not meet in August; the end of June will be the last meeting before\nSeptember; time constraints do not allow for a land use agreement before October; the\npurpose of the discussion is to identify Council's desires to relay to the School Board;\nquestioned what terms are acceptable; outlined the School Boards' acceptable terms;\nstated the School Board does not think a joint meeting is needed; questioned how time\nwill be accounted for the School District's use; outlined fees pertaining to the School\nDistrict's use; stated the School Board majority are in favor of Emma Hood as the site.\nCouncilmember Vella stated a joint meeting is needed; there are nuances in different\nMOU points raised; that she would like to hear input from the School Board and public\ncomment; Emma Hood is being treated as the location; questioned what future use of\nthe pool will look like from an hourly use perspective; inquired whether there are\nseparate use hours during school hours; stated swim meets and water polo\ntournaments occur on weekends and charging for the use is not desired; a joint meeting\nwill help resolve questions quickly.\nCouncilmember Daysog stated that his preference is the Emma Hood site; details of\nfees and hourly use can be figured out by staff and School Board members in a way\nthat is equitable to all.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nMay 7, 2019\n11", "path": "CityCouncil/2019-05-07.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2019-05-07", "page": 13, "text": "Councilmember Oddie stated Emma Hood is currently the best site; expressed concern\nabout process; stated details should be raised in a staff report for Council deliberation\nnot on the spot with limited time for discussion.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated Council needs to hear back from the School Board after\ntheir meeting next week; Emma Hood is the site to focus on; a contingency plan is a\ngood idea; Thompson Field has many moving parts for a project site; Alameda Point\nproject sites rely on infrastructure that will result in a delay and the need is now;\nAlameda is under-served; the project will be made as perfect as possible; there is a\nlimited budget; outlined the reasons for utilizing a subcommittee; questioned if Council\nis amenable to the City building and maintaining the pool.\nVice Mayor Knox White stated that he expects to have Council discuss the MOU; the\ngoal is to have initial feedback to provide the School Board and staff.\n(19-278) Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated a motion is needed to extend Council speaking\ntime.\nVice Mayor Knox White moved approval of waiving the rule limiting Councilmember\ncomments.\nCouncilmember Daysog seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote\n5.\n***\nCouncilmember Oddie stated that he understands urgent decisions need to be made in\nregard to the repair schedule; many of the urgent decisions have passed; stated three\nout of five Councilmembers are not allowed to attend subcommittee meetings; the\npurpose of the subcommittee has expired; the community and the majority of Council\nshould have an opportunity to weigh-in on details.\nCouncilmember Vella stated that three members of the School Board have not been\nable to weigh-in; one joint Council and School Board meeting should occur; that she\nwould like analysis from staff about finances related to components of what the transfer\nwould look like; Emma Hood requires hearing from the School District first; staff will\nrelay the School Districts' wishes to Council; information can be relayed to Council from\nstaff.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the upcoming budget meetings will include costs\nfor a new pool.\nThe City Manager responded the cost has not been included in the upcoming budget;\nstated Council may provide direction at the upcoming workshop; a temporary cost will\nbe included in the budget this year or next year; the long term costs will not be included;\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nMay 7, 2019\n12", "path": "CityCouncil/2019-05-07.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2019-05-07", "page": 14, "text": "outlined long term funding items for Council to consider.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft questioned if there is a consensus on the City building and\nmaintaining the pool with the understanding that future funding is unknown.\nVice Mayor Knox White stated that he has heard from other Councilmembers school\nuse should not pay fees; inquired the proposed times for school use hours.\nCouncilmember Oddie questioned if there are proposed fees, to which Vice Mayor Knox\nWhite responded about $21,000 per year based on current use.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated that he would like to see some analysis.\nVice Mayor Knox White stated the current discussion will help get a sense of desired\nitems to be analyzed or negotiated.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired whether the analysis and negotiation must be done\noutside of a Council meeting or completed to meet the MOU deadline.\nVice Mayor Knox White responded in the affirmative; stated the School District is\ninterested in discussing the items.\nCouncilmember Oddie noted budget reserves.\nIn response to Vice Mayor Knox White's inquiry regarding School District payment,\nCouncilmember Oddie stated the fee is dependent on the site location; expressed\nconcern about the subcommittee not having 60% of both negotiating bodies present to\nwork out details.\nCouncilmember Daysog stated staff assessment and recommendations for details\nrelated to fees, pool usage and time should be encapsulated in a staff report for Council\nreview and allow for a robust discussion.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated Council should provide a list of wants that staff can bring to\nthe next Council meeting; noted the School District's preferences will be known by the\nnext meeting; stated the resolution should be discussed.\nCouncilmember Vella expressed support of adopting the resolution with the exception of\nthe interpretation of the 7th \"Whereas\" paragraph stating \"replacement plan\" means a\nhigh level discussion and update May 30th to June 30th with staff assessment to come\nback to Council for feedback and giving authority to the subcommittee.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated the request is reasonable; inquired whether the Interim\nAssistant City Manager/Recreation and Parks Director has sufficient Council direction.\nThe Interim Assistant City Manager/Recreation and Parks Director outlined Council\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nMay 7, 2019\n13", "path": "CityCouncil/2019-05-07.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2019-05-07", "page": 15, "text": "direction; stated the process is moving fast making deadline difficult.\nCouncilmember Vella inquired whether the current joint use agreement can be attached\nto the staff report, with an abbreviated notation in the staff report of key points to\nconsider, to which the Interim Assistant City Manager/Recreation and Parks Director\nresponded in the affirmative.\nThe Interim Assistant City Manager/Recreation and Parks Director continued to outline\nCouncil direction for the next meeting; stated that she will provide all available data\npoints to Council.\nCouncilmember Oddie moved adoption of the resolution.\nVice Mayor Knox White seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote -\n5.\n***\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft called a recess at 10:01 p.m. and reconvened the meeting at\n10:08 p.m. with Councilmember Vella participating via teleconference from the City\nManager's office for the remainder of the meeting.\n(19-279) Introduction of Ordinance Authorizing the City Manager to Execute a Fifteen-\nYear Lease with Two Five-Year Options to Extend, Substantially in the Form of the\nAttached, with Nautilus Data Technologies, Inc., a Delaware Corporation, for Building\n530, an 32,251-Square Foot Building Located at 120 West Oriskany Avenue, and the\nAdjacent Building 529, a 3,200-Square Foot Building, and Building 600, a 343-Square\nFoot Building, at Alameda Point. Not Introduced.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director gave a brief presentation.\nVice Mayor Knox White inquired whether the item requires four votes, to which the\nAssistant Community Development Director responded in the affirmative.\nVice Mayor Knox White stated a number of Councilmembers have voiced concerns\nabout the item; inquired whether there are two or more Councilmembers who are not in\nsupport in the idea.\nCouncilmember Daysog stated that he has been supportive of the project for the most\npart, and does not see any reason to change his position; expressed support of the\ncontribution to the Development Impact Fee (DIF).\nVice Mayor Knox White stated that he would like discussion about monitoring and\noutcomes if issues arise; expressed support for the project.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated that he is skeptical of the project.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nMay 7, 2019\n14", "path": "CityCouncil/2019-05-07.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2019-05-07", "page": 16, "text": "Councilmember Vella stated that she has outstanding questions; expressed concern\nover environmental impacts and terms of the lease.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether Councilmember Vella could be in support of the\nitem.\nCouncilmember Vella responded that she potentially could be.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated continuing the discussion is worthwhile; applicants have\nhad a chance to see the letter Council received from the Alameda Sierra Club; that she\nwould like answers to the questions raised, specifically the data center requiring\nconstant cooling and the impact of warming waters contributing to toxic algae blooms;\nnoted the United Nations report of the dramatic decline of biodiversity; stated the\nenvironmental issues have been raised by Council in closed session.\nJim Connaughton, Nautilus Data Technologies, stated Nautilus was founded to be a\nsolution to a very bad problem; the objective is to dramatically contribute to the\nabatement of greenhouse gasses, the reduction of air pollution and provide a\ntechnology solution that will eliminate the common consumption of water in data\ncenters; the objective of the project is to provide a significant environmental benefit;\noutlined the rigorous regulatory review process efforts in Stockton; stated that he has\nprovided the permits to Council.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she requested the permits, but they are voluminous;\nshe would have appreciated having the opportunity to review the permits prior to the\nmeeting to allow for an informed decision to be made.\nMr. Connaughton stated the permits, while voluminous, regulation board's conclusions\nare notated, along with the determination of environmental benefits, and lack of any\nsignificant adverse impact.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft outlined a letter and findings from the Alameda Sierra Club; stated\nthere are significant differences between Alameda and Stockton.\nMr. Connaughton stated that he welcomes the engagement from the Sierra Club;\ntechnical and modeling work must be completed; noted adverse effects do not align with\nthe project goals and objectives; outlined regional board regulators and thermal\ndischarge leaving the facility.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft outlined Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) findings related\nto toxic algae; stated toxic algae blooms are not something the City would like to foster.\nMr. Connaughton stated Nautilus does not want to foster toxic algae; the State\nregulators would not want to approve a project that contributes to toxic algae; the lease\nis expressly conditioned on Nautilus going through the regulatory process, getting\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nMay 7, 2019\n15", "path": "CityCouncil/2019-05-07.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2019-05-07", "page": 17, "text": "approvals and getting sign-off that there are no significant adverse impacts; he\nwelcomes working with the Sierra Club should the conditional lease be approved.\nVice Mayor Knox White outlined questions and responses from the Sierra Club; noted\nthe State regulatory board approval of the project could be wrong, causing difficulty for\nthe project to shut down; inquired whether the staff report includes which boards\naddress regulatory issues, monitoring, and contingency; stated the monitoring portion is\nnot included in the exhibits; expressed support for monitoring the water temperature;\ninquired whether the requests can be built into the project.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft expressed support for independent monitoring, as opposed to\ntenant monitoring.\nMr. Connaughton stated the State Water Board and other regulators impose substantial\nmonitoring requirements; Nautilus is happy to perform monitoring and bear the business\nrisk; noted the thermal load will not be measureable at the discharge site since the\namount of heat is not significant enough; stated Nautilus provides independent\nmodeling; outlined monitoring efforts for all potential impacts.\nCouncilmember Oddie expressed concern about monitoring and potentially finding toxic\nalgae; noted once an adverse effect occurs, it is often too late; expressed concern over\nthe negative impacts of allowing the project to move forward if irreversible\nenvironmental issues occur; stated Council should do the right thing from the beginning\nand prioritize the environment.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated a clause or condition may be added to give the City\nrecourse if there are significant environmental impacts.\nThe Interim City Attorney stated provisions will need to be added to the lease; a \"poison\npill\" provision could state: \"if significant environmental impacts occur that the tenant\ncannot adequately mitigate, there will be grounds to terminate the lease.\"\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated some concerns may be answered by a regulatory body\nlooking at the likelihood of conditions leading to toxic algae blooms; the tenant can\naddress some of the concerns; there are not answers for every question, but significant\nenvironmental issues should be addressed.\nCouncilmember Daysog stated whether the project moves forward and the proponent\nattempts to get approval from regulatory bodies, City staff should also be involved in the\nprocess so a clear understanding and adequacies of the technologies can be evaluated.\nMr. Connaughton stated Nautilus will first have to go through the California\nEnvironmental Quality Act (CEQA) process; the City will be engaged through the entire\nprocess; the process calls for the City to be involved in each permitting process; if\nsignificant impacts arise, Nautilus will not move forward with the project.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nMay 7, 2019\n16", "path": "CityCouncil/2019-05-07.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2019-05-07", "page": 18, "text": "process and funding of removal will occur if the lease is terminated in the future.\nMr. Connaughton stated a very intensive public process will occur to address the\nlocation of the intake and discharge pipe; Nautilus has provided the least impactful\noption and are open to alternatives; outlined the CEQA process.\nCouncilmember Vella stated there may be a difference in opinion related to the location\nof the intake and discharge pipe.\nMr. Connaughton stated the designs are based on discussions related to infrastructure;\nthe CEQA process may identify a better environmental alternative; stated the current\nlease removal provision will ensure there is an obligation to fund and remove the intake\nstructure when the project is complete.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft requested clarification related to removal of the intake structures.\nMr. Connaughton stated the matter is minor; outlined the process for intake removal.\nThe Interim City Attorney discussed the CEQA process.\nMr. Connaughton stated the categorically exempt exemption applies to the existing\nfacility; the intake/discharge component, known as the off-site improvements, are\nsubject to CEQA.\nThe Interim City Attorney inquired who the lead agency will be with respect to the\nintake/discharge component, to which Mr. Connaughton responded the City of\nAlameda.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director stated Mr. Connaughton is correct; the\nPlanning, Building and Transportation Director has stated the entitlements for Alameda\nPoint's industrial use do not include the intake pipe and will have to go through CEQA\nprocess, with the City of Alameda as the lead applicant.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the cost of the CEQA process would be borne by\nthe applicant, to which the Assistant Community Development Director responded in the\naffirmative.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired how the CEQA process will play out and how long it will\ntake.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nMay 7, 2019\n17", "path": "CityCouncil/2019-05-07.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2019-05-07", "page": 19, "text": "The Interim City Attorney responded once the application comes in, there will be a\ndetermination of whether the project described will have a significant environmental\nimpact; depending on the answer, there could be an exemption or a determination\nwhether a mitigated negative declaration would be sufficient or a full Environmental\nImpact Report (EIR) would be required; stated the answer will derive how long the\nprocess takes; a mitigated negative declaration could take three to six months from\npreparation to approval; an EIR can take anywhere from six-months to two-years.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired whether other agencies' review is concurrent or will the\nCEQA process have to be completed first.\nThe Interim City Attorney responded that he is not sure the timing; stated the regulatory\nagencies will want to rely on the City environmental document.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired whether the City would be the defendant covering legal\ncosts if someone opposes the CEQA approval and files a lawsuit.\nThe Interim City Attorney responded in the affirmative; stated typically when an\napplication comes through, part of the application process is for the City to look to the\napplicant to provide legal defense should challenges to the project arise.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated the process seems squishy.\nThe City Manager stated many cities financially obligate the applicant.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired whether the language is included in the lease\nagreement or the CEQA application, to which the Interim City Attorney responded that\nhe does not know if the language is currently in the lease language; stated the language\nis embedded in the conditions of approval.\nCouncilmember Daysog stated that he heard the word \"developer;' inquired whether the\nproject proponent is going to continue with the project itself or if the project is going to\nbe sold to another entity once entitlements are obtained.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded the applicant will perform\nthe project; stated the only option is to assign the interest in the building; however, the\nbuilding cannot be sold because it is City-owned; the proponent is committed to the\nproject; the City would have to approve any assigned similar use.\nCouncilmember Daysog inquired whether the applicant will perform the project with the\ncurrent corporate structure before Council or will a separate corporate structure be\ncreated.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded the applicant will use the\ncurrent corporate structure, but will bid the project out with project management similar\nto all tenant improvements.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nMay 7, 2019\n18", "path": "CityCouncil/2019-05-07.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2019-05-07", "page": 20, "text": "Councilmember Daysog inquired whether said details could be part of the current lease\nagreement; discussed limiting corporate liability.\nThe Interim City Attorney responded a lease provision will typically allow a lessee to be\nassigned to another corporate entity; the City will need to provide approval if the lessee\nintends to assign interest to a separate entity; an internal restructuring is typically\nallowed.\nCouncilmember Daysog expressed concern about the possible worst case scenario.\nThe Interim City Attorney stated staff will ensure there are adequate securities.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired whether environmental review is required in the event\neverything needs to be removed; questioned whether removal requires environmental\nreview.\nThe Assistant City Attorney responded the restoration and surrender provision in the\nlease obligates the tenant to remove alterations at the end of the lease term; stated it is\nnot something that the lessee can performed on their own; there would have to be\nconsultation and coordination with the City as to how the site is restored; removal may\nnot be the best option; capping the pipe might be better; the determination needs to be\nmade at the time.\n***\n(19-280) Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated a motion is needed to consider the four remaining\nitems: the CDBG hearing [paragraph no. 19-281]; the Park Street and Webster Street\nBIAs [paragraph nos. 19-282 and 19-283]; and the City Attorney contract [paragraph no.\n19-284].\nCouncilmember Oddie moved approval of hearing the remaining items.\nVice Mayor Knox White seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote -\n5.\n***\nIn response to Councilmember Vella's inquiry about what the City is receiving, the\nAssistant Community Development Director stated Council directed staff to negotiate\nthe DIF payment; the calculation is based on the life of the building, which is assumed\nat 66 years; the City is getting money for infrastructure that would not ordinarily be\nreceived; with a ten-year lease, only lease revenue would be received; as a long-term\nlease, an investment in infrastructure is being made for Alameda Point.\nIn response to Councilmember Vella's inquiry related to invested capital and building\nlife, the Assistant Community Development Director stated more than $100,000 would\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nMay 7, 2019\n19", "path": "CityCouncil/2019-05-07.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2019-05-07", "page": 21, "text": "be invested in the building; millions will be invested into the building, but no shell credit\nwill be received.\nIn response to Councilmember Vella's inquiry about equipment and investment needs,\nthe Assistant Community Development Director stated the building needs an entire new\nroof.\nThe Assistant City Attorney stated $100,000 is only for the first 12 months of the lease;\nover $6 million would be spent in the following years.\nIn response to Councilmember Vella's inquiry related to high-speed internet, Mr.\nConnaughton stated the $100,000 is to bring the building to occupancy status; after\npermit approvals, the bulk of the money will be invested into the site, with almost all\ngoing into the building; tens of millions of dollars will go into installing fiber and other\nupdates; the project will be roughly $100 million with craft labor involved; at least $6\nmillion will be the resulting investment for the City in the form of an A-class building.\nCouncilmember Vella inquired about the other off-site improvements.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded other tenants interested in\nBuilding 530 were required to do extensive work in order to bring the building to\noccupancy standards; stated the cost is roughly $2 million due to a new electrical\nsystem being required by Alameda Municipal Power (AMP).\nMr. Connaughton stated in relation to off-site improvements, there will be water updates\nin addition to building updates; stated landscaping and parking lots will be included,\nalong with two loops of backbone internet fiber that others can access; outlined other\ninfrastructure improvements that will be a modest net savings to the community;\nelectrical enhancements will also be made.\nIn response to Councilmember Vella's inquiry, Mr. Connaughton stated the project will\nbe in two phases; one will take advantage of spare AMP capacity; in the event further\nexpansion occurs inside the building, there will be an -on upgrade in the addition of new\nAMP facilities; noted the new facilities are several years away; stated Nautilus would\nnegotiate with AMP in accordance with AMP's rules and procedures.\nCouncilmember Vella inquired if AMP is performing the work, to which the Assistant\nCommunity Development Director responded in the affirmative; stated the work is at the\napplicant's cost.\nCouncilmember Vella inquired about revenue generation.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded the $1.5 to$2 million\ndepicted in the staff report is the revenues AMP estimates will be generated from the\nproject at build-out.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nMay 7, 2019\n20", "path": "CityCouncil/2019-05-07.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2019-05-07", "page": 22, "text": "The AMP Assistant General Manager for Administration stated after a year of full rollout,\nthere will be about $1.9 million in revenue; upon the full rollout of the data center, the\nuse will be about 40% of what AMP currently uses.\nMr. Connaughton stated the initial ramp will be about $1 million or more; Phase 1 of the\nplan is for 10 megawatts of use; AMP has 30 megawatts of available capacity; at 10\nmegawatts of use, there will be about $10 million annually to AMP; the amount will grow\nas the project expands.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired if there is a Project Labor Agreement (PLA) on the\nconstruction work, to which Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft responded it is included in the lease\nagreement.\nCouncilmember Daysog moved introduction of the ordinance; stated that he is satisfied\nwith the regulations in place; staff is being vigilant within the lease agreement;\nexpressed support for the project.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft seconded the motion.\nUnder discussion, Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated the project should move forward to allow\nNautilus to go through the regulatory process; requested the motion be amended to\nhave the lease conditioned on Council discussion and input from the Interim City\nAttorney adding conditions that if serious environmental conditions are discovered, the\nproject will shut down.\nCouncilmember Daysog accepted the amendment to the motion.\nVice Mayor Knox White inquired whether the item is to come back with new language to\napprove, or is Council proposing approving the lease with staff executing the Council\nand Interim City Attorney recommendations, to which Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft responded\nwith the latter; stated that she believes Council has given sufficient direction.\nVice Mayor Knox White stated there are four environmental conditions that he would\nlike to see: 1) as part of the State Water Board analysis that Council is specifically\nasking to include, not limit, the analysis to include algae blooms and long-term multi-\nyear impacts of warmth to the water; 2) to have weekly ongoing monitoring and\nreporting; 3) staff may not have sufficient direction of what the Council desires to be\nmonitored; he may not be able to state what exactly should be monitored at this time;\nand 4) a report back to Council after the State Water Board gives clearance on the\nproject.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director stated the items identified are items\nstaff should monitor; noted the City will learn a lot from the State Water Board about\ntheir concerns in order to identify what should be monitored in addition to Council's list;\nstated another layer of protection may be added by consulting with the City's contracted\nenvironmental consultant who assists with Alameda Point cleanup as well as a biologist.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nMay 7, 2019\n21", "path": "CityCouncil/2019-05-07.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2019-05-07", "page": 23, "text": "Vice Mayor Knox White stated monitoring would be done under the idea that if\nsomething is found, the water would be shut off; questioned if the applicant is amenable\nto signing a lease with the knowledge of a monitoring list being added after.\nMr. Connaughton responded in the affirmative; stated the items being monitored should\nbe standards based.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft expressed support for using the City's consultants as a resource.\nIn response the Vice Mayor's suggestion to have Sierra Club input, Mayor Ezzy\nAshcraft stated the City needs to have measurable standards; that she does not support\nincluding the Sierra Club.\nVice Mayor Knox White stated the Sierra Club would only be providing comments to\nconsultants about concerns.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated Sierra Club's correspondence can be shared with the\nconsultants.\nVice Mayor Knox White inquired whether there will be an opportunity for Council raise\nissues and add comments.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded the City's contracted\nbiologist and environmental consultants will provide recommendations and there should\nbe no argument between both parties.\nThe City Manager stated if the City and applicant are negotiating standards and criteria,\nthere is an ability to bring it back to Council.\n***\nCouncilmember Daysog left the dais at 11:21 p.m. and returned at 11:25 p.m.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director stated Council will receive information\nas the project moves along; that she is happy to provide feedback to the applicant.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated the risks outweigh the rewards; he will not support the\nproject; the remedy to environmental risks is to trust the applicant and agencies; the risk\nof environmental impacts occurring are costly in both cleanup and potential litigation;\nthe Enterprise District Plan does not recommend long-term leases; prime property\nwithin the Enterprise District will be tied up for 25 years, potentially losing out on\ndeveloping something better in the space; correspondence provided has de-bunked\nsome of the myths in relation to AMP benefits; job creation and infrastructure should be\nthe priority; the City will not see much money; after seeing the condition of the building\nat the Enterprise District tour, he believes it should be torn down; the property should be\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nMay 7, 2019\n22", "path": "CityCouncil/2019-05-07.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2019-05-07", "page": 24, "text": "sold and developed into something nice; the project will not be a catalyst for the\nEnterprise District; market studies were not provided.\nCouncilmember Vella expressed concern with the project; stated there will be\nmonitoring, but it will need to continue throughout the duration of the lease not just\na\nshort period of time; the applicant should bear the cost of monitoring, which should be\ndone by someone else; expressed support for using Alameda Point consultants;\nexpressed concern about the lease being for three buildings, not just one, for a total of\nroughly 85,000 square feet; stated there is little job creation over the long term; the\nlease options are not favorable.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft questioned if Councilmembers Oddie and Vella do not support the\nitem.\nCouncilmember Vella stated that she is laying out her terms for a lease agreement to be\nacceptable.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated that the Assistant Community Development Director noted\nthe monitoring would be conducted by the Stated Water Board; stated that she supports\nmonitoring longer than five years.\nCouncilmember Vella stated that she would also like to utilize the Alameda Point\nbiological consultants and allow for a community discussion; expressed support for only\none lease extension; expressed concern about amount of pressure put on the current\nelectrical system and the AMP staff workload increase.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft requested clarification that Councilmember Vella would support\none option to extend.\nCouncilmember Vella responded that she will support one five year extension; stated\ntechnology is rapidly expanding.\nMr. Connaughton stated the extension is acceptable; the CEQA process will allow for\nconsultant input.\nVice Mayor Knox White stated that Councilmember Vella desires a City lead community\ndiscussion with the consultants and biologists, not just giving the community an\nopportunity to write letters as part of a CEQA process; inquired how a condition can be\nwritten to address Councilmember Vella's concern about AMP.\nCouncilmember Vella expressed concern about previous negotiations which increased\nAMP loads.\nVice Mayor Knox White noted the right conditions need to appear in order for\nCouncilmember Vella to approve the item.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nMay 7, 2019\n23", "path": "CityCouncil/2019-05-07.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2019-05-07", "page": 25, "text": "and a significant amount of overtime being needed for the project; stated that she would\nlike AMP to provide a rollout plan at some point.\nThe Interim City Attorney inquired whether Council wants the item to return for a vote.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired whether the item would come back with changes for the\nsecond reading.\nThe Interim City Attorney responded the item should return with revisions for a first\nreading.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the item will be placed on Consent, to which the\nInterim City Attorney responded the item will be a Regular Agenda item, brought back\nas quickly as possible.\nIn response to Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft's inquiry regarding Council voting availability,\nCouncilmember Vella stated that she will be calling into meetings when needed and will\nstill participate; expressed support to have the item come back for a first reading.\nThe Interim City Attorney stated the item should come back for a first reading with the\nrecommended changes.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether a vote is needed to proceed.\nThe Interim City Attorney responded that a vote to direct staff to return to Council with\nrevised lease language that encompasses Council discussion will be helpful.\nCouncilmember Daysog moved approval of the recommendation.\nCouncilmember Oddie seconded the motion.\nOn the call for the question, the motion carried by the following roll call vote:\nCouncilmember Daysog: Aye; Knox White: Aye; Oddie: Ayes; Vella: Aye; and Mayor\nEzzy Ashcraft: Aye. Ayes - 5.\n***\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft called a recess at 11:45 p.m. and reconvened the meeting at\n11:50 p.m.\n***\n(19-281) Public Hearing to Consider Adoption of the Fiscal Year (FY) 2019-20\nCommunity Development Block Grant (CDBG)/HOME Partnership Investment Program\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nMay 7, 2019\n24", "path": "CityCouncil/2019-05-07.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2019-05-07", "page": 26, "text": "Action Plan and Authorize the City Manager to Negotiate and Execute Related\nDocuments, Agreements, and Modifications at Funding Levels Approved by Congress.\nStated the importance of the funding cannot be understated; outlined the services\nfunding will help provide: Dan Ashbrook, Legal Assistant for seniors.\nDiscussed Eden I&R services, including 2-1-1, which connects people to health,\nhousing and human services: Alison DeJung, Eden I&R.\nDiscussed a new State grant that will be used to assist with housing matters and an in-\nhouse attorney service: Erin Scott, Family Violence Law Center.\nStated the funding is core to keeping Building Futures running; discussed outreach\nservices and the warming shelter: Liz Varela, Building Futures.\nThanked the City for its support; outlined ECHO housing services: Angie Larson-\nHajjem, ECHO Housing.\nCouncilmember Oddie moved approval of the staff recommendation.\nVice Mayor Knox White seconded the motion, which carried by the following roll call\nvote: Councilmember Daysog: Aye; Knox White: Aye; Oddie: Ayes; Vella: Aye; and\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye. Ayes - 5.\n(19-282) Public Hearing to Consider Resolution No. 15533, \"Confirming the Park Street\nBusiness Improvement Area (BIA) Annual Assessment Report for Fiscal Year (FY)\n2019-20, Changing the BIA Boundaries, and Levying an Annual Assessment on the\nPark Street BIA.\" Adopted.\nVice Mayor Knox White moved adoption of the resolution.\nCouncilmember Vella seconded the motion.\nUnder discussion, Vice Mayor Knox White inquired the process the City is utilizing to\ntake a position on City-owned property.\nThe City Manager responded the discussion has occurred internally; outlined two voting\noptions; stated if tenants express support, he is willing to cast the votes versus returning\nto Council to decide how to vote.\nVice Mayor Knox White stated expressed support for allowing the City Manager to cast\nvotes if there is tenant support.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft requested clarification.\nThe Assistant City Attorney stated that she has consulted with outside counsel; other\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nMay 7, 2019\n25", "path": "CityCouncil/2019-05-07.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2019-05-07", "page": 27, "text": "clients have have the City Manager cast votes for simplicity.\nOn the call for the question, the motion carried by the following roll call vote:\nCouncilmember Daysog: Aye; Knox White: Aye; Oddie: Ayes; Vella: Aye; and Mayor\nEzzy Ashcraft: Aye. Ayes - 5.\n(19-283) Public Hearing to Consider Resolution No. 15534, \"Confirming the Webster\nStreet Business Improvement Area (BIA) Assessment Report for Fiscal Year (FY)\n2019=20 and Levying an Annual Assessment on the Webster Street BIA.\" Adopted.\nCouncilmember Daysog recused himself and left the dais.\nVice Mayor Knox White moved adoption of the resolution.\nCouncilmember Oddie seconded the motion, which carried by the following roll call vote:\nVice Mayor Knox White: Aye; Councilmembers Oddie: Ayes; Vella: Aye; and Mayor\nEzzy Ashcraft: Aye. Ayes - 4. [Absent: Councilmember Daysog - 1.]\n(19-284) Recommendation to Approve Agreement Appointing Yibin Shen as City\nAttorney Effective May 13, 2019.\nThe City Clerk read a summary of the City Attorney's salary and benefits.\nCouncilmember Oddie moved approval of the contract.\nCouncilmember Daysog seconded the motion, which carried by the following roll call\nvote: Councilmember Daysog: Aye; Knox White: Aye; Oddie: Ayes; Vella: Aye; and\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye. Ayes - 5.\nCITY MANAGER COMMUNICATIONS\n(19-285) The City Manager announced the City has put out a press release regarding\nthe 4th of July parade; stated those interested in volunteering should contact the City\nManager's Office for details.\nORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA\nNone.\nCOUNCIL REFERRALS\nNone.\nCOUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS\n(19-286) Councilmember Oddie, Daysog, Vice Mayor Knox White and Vella thanked the\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nMay 7, 2019\n26", "path": "CityCouncil/2019-05-07.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2019-05-07", "page": 28, "text": "Interim City Attorney for his service.\n(19-287) Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft discussed a workshop related tax increment financing,\nthe League of California Cities Legislative Day, the CASA Compact housing legislative\nworking group; announced she and PUB members attended a meeting in Washington\nD.C. on the Northern California Power, Agency ; stated a meeting with the Veterans\nAssociation (VA) has been arranged for the proposed columbarium; further discussed\nmeetings with Congress members and staff from House Appropriations Subcommittee\non VA construction.\nADJOURNMENT\nThere being no further business, Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft adjourned the meeting at 12:13\na.m.\nRespectfully submitted,\nLara Weisiger\nCity Clerk\nThe agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Sunshine Ordinance.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nMay 7, 2019\n27", "path": "CityCouncil/2019-05-07.pdf"}