{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2019-12-17", "page": 1, "text": "MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING\nTUESDAY--DECEMBER 17, 2019- 5:00 P.M.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft convened the meeting at 5:02 p.m.\nRoll Call - Present:\nCouncilmembers Daysog, Knox White, Oddie, Vella and\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft - 5.\n[Note: Councilmember Vella arrived at 5:26 p.m.]\nAbsent:\nNone.\nPublic Comment\nDoug Biggs, Alameda Point Collaborative, discussed his desire to work together and\nsettle the Crab Cove case.\nJack Sylvan, Brookfield Properties, discussed Brookfield's proposal for the Enterprise\nDistrict.\nThe meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider:\n(19-681) Conference with Legal Counsel - Existing Litigation (Pursuant to Government\nCode \u00a7 54956.9); Case Name: Friends of Crab Cove V. Vella et al.; Court: Superior\nCourt of the State of California, County of Alameda; Case Number: RG18933140\n(19-682) Public Employee Performance Evaluation Pursuant to Government Code \u00a7\n54957; Position Evaluated: City Manager - Eric Levitt\n(19-683) Conference with Real Property Negotiators (Pursuant to Government Code\nSection 54956.8); Property: Various Sites at Alameda Point: (a) Site A, Phase 2, area\nbordered by West Atlantic Avenue and Coronado Avenue on the North and South,\nrespectively, and by Ferry Point and Main Street on the West and East, respectively; (b)\nPhase 1 of the Enterprise District, area bordered by Pacific Avenue a and W.\nTiconderoga Avenue on the North and South, respectively, and by Orion Street and\nCentral Avenue on the West and East, respectively; (c) West Midway, area bordered by\nWest Midway Avenue and West Tower Avenue on the North and South, respectively,\nand by Pan Am Way and Orion Street on the West and East, respectively; [not\ndiscussed] and (d) Bachelor Enlisted Quarters (BEQ) and Hangar Row, BEQ -\nBuildings 2, 3, 4, 2660 Monarch Street, 2599 Lexington Street, 2651 Lexington Street,\n2701 Lexington Street, and Hangar Row - W. Tower and Monarch Streets; Persons\nNegotiating: Debbie Potter, Community Development Director, and Michelle Giles,\nRedevelopment Project Manager; Negotiating Parties: City of Alameda and (a) Alameda\nPoint Partners, (b) Prospective Developers, (c) Prospective Developers, [not discussed]\nand (d) Jamestown L.P.; Under Negotiation: Price and terms\nSpecial Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nDecember 17, 2019\n1", "path": "CityCouncil/2019-12-17.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2019-12-17", "page": 2, "text": "Following the Closed Session, the meeting was reconvened and the City Clerk\nannounced that regarding Existing Litigation, the staff provided information to Council\nand Council provided direction with no vote taken; and regarding Performance\nEvaluation, Council voted unanimously to approve a $6,000 annual transportation\nallowance, increase base pay by 3% the first full pay period in January; future increase\namount in 2021 would be tied to the EXME (Executive Management) will be effective on\nanniversary date;\n***\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft called a recess at 7:08 p.m. and reconvened the meeting at 10:21\np.m.\n***\nFollowing the Closed Session, the meeting was reconvened and the City Clerk\nannounced that regarding Real Property, staff provided information and Council\nprovided direction with not vote taken.\nAdjournment\nThere being no further business, Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft adjourned the meeting at 10:48\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\nDecember 17, 2019\n2", "path": "CityCouncil/2019-12-17.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2019-12-17", "page": 3, "text": "MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING\nTUESDAY- - -DECEMBER - 17, 2019- -7:00 P.M.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft convened the meeting at 7:15 p.m. Councilmember Daysog led\nthe Pledge of Allegiance.\nROLL CALL -\nPresent:\nCouncilmembers Daysog, Knox White, Oddie, Vella,\nand Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft - 5.\n[Note: Councilmember Vella arrived at 7:16 p.m.]\nAbsent:\nNone.\nAGENDA CHANGES\nNone.\nPROCLAMATIONS, SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY AND ANNOUNCEMENTS\n(19-684) Presentation by Assemblymember Rob Bonta: State Legislative Update.\nAssemblymember Bonta gave a brief presentation on new State legislation.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft expressed gratitude for the presentation; stated continuing help is\nneeded for the Alameda Hospital.\nCouncilmember Oddie expressed support for the work on homelessness and the\nLeague of California Cities housing committee; stated the most challenging aspect of\ndevelopment is funding for affordable housing projects; inquired upcoming plans for\naffordable housing in the next year.\nAssemblymember Bonta responded that he served on Alameda City Council during the\ntime redevelopment agencies were abolished in California; stated the recession\ncombined with a Supreme Court ruling lead to the abolition; there have been multiple\nefforts to bring redevelopment agencies back; two parts have been promoted: economic\nrevitalization, and affordable housing; given the housing crisis, the focus has primarily\nbeen on affordable housing; many bills have been vetoed due to budget constraints; the\nGovernor requires high cost projects to be included in the budget; tax credits and one-\ntime budget money may be an option going forward; the State of California is short by 3\nmillion housing units; all cities must contribute their fair share.\nCouncilmember Daysog expressed support for the return of redevelopment agencies\nand for more effort around solutions for traffic congestion solutions on major State\nhighways.\nVice Mayor Knox White expressed support for a partnership in traffic safety including\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n1\nDecember 17, 2019", "path": "CityCouncil/2019-12-17.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2019-12-17", "page": 4, "text": "automated speed enforcement.\nCouncilmember Vella stated the City recently passed Vision Zero; traffic safety is the\nmost important element in planning City streets; some City streets are still under control\nof Caltrans; a local jurisdiction determining the safest options for streets should include\nways to work with Caltrans; housing projects need support, especially from the State;\nseveral affordable housing projects have begun and more will be approved; expressed\nsupport for youth mental health services, which do not have enough funding.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether there is an update on the Regional Measure\n(RM) 3 court challenge.\nAssemblymember Bonta responded the eventual outcome is assumed positive; stated\nfunding is held up; follow up will occur.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired the timing of the update; stated there is assurance of\nfunding, but delays are painful; housing and mental health issues are a core focus;\nremnants of the Lanterman-Petris-Short Act are still in effect; commensurate programs\nwith State aid are needed; discussed the homeless encampment conditions on\nAlameda Avenue in Oakland; stated people need to be housed.\nAssemblymember Bonta responded a transportation measure will be on the ballot to\nhelp with congestion; stated access to funding can be applied for through a competitive\ngrant process; expressed support for focus on wide spread mental health services.\nORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA\n(19-685) Laura Gehringer, Alameda, discussed the needs for a safer school zone at\nLove Elementary School; requested help.\n(19-686) Sarah Burninham, Alameda, expressed concern over a letter the City sent\nregarding traffic safety and eight children being hit by cars since the beginning of the\nschool year; stated permanent change is needed; urged the speed limit be changed to\n15 miles per hour (MPH).\n(19-687) Rachel Playto, Alameda, expressed concern over nothing occurring since the\nNovember 5th rally; urged a 15 MPH zone be adopted.\n(19-688) Maria Gayo, Alameda, discussed Fernside Boulevard traffic calming.\nCONSENT CALENDAR\nThe City Clerk made an announcement regarding the two Public Hearing [paragraph\nnos. 19-703 and 19-704 and there was no public comment.\nVice Mayor Knox White moved approval of the Consent Calendar.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n2\nDecember 17, 2019", "path": "CityCouncil/2019-12-17.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2019-12-17", "page": 5, "text": "Councilmember Vella seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.\n[Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk preceding the paragraph\nnumber.]\n(*19-689) Minutes of the Special City Council Meeting, the Special Joint City Council\nand Successor Agency to the Community Improvement Commission Meeting and the\nRegular City Council Meeting Held on November 19, 2019. Approved.\n(*19-690) Ratified bills in the amount of $3,870,487.64.\n(*19-691) Recommendation to Accept the Annual Review of the Affordable Housing\nOrdinance and the City's Affordable Housing Unit Fee Consistent with Section 27-1 of\nthe Alameda Municipal Code; Accept the Annual Affordable Housing Unit Fee Fund\nActivity Report; and Find that: 1) Unit/Fee Requirements Set Forth in Local Law Remain\nReasonably Related to the Impacts of Development, and 2) the Affordable Housing\nUnits, Programs and Activities Required by Local Law Remains Needed to Support the\nProduction of Affordable Housing in the City. Accepted.\n(*19-692) Recommendation to Accept the 2013 Local Library Bond Measure Annual\nReport. Accepted.\n(*19-693) Recommendation to Accept and File Various Community Facilities Districts\n(CFD) Reports for Fiscal Year (FY) Ending June 30, 2019, including: CFD No. 03-1\n(Bayport Municipal Services District); CFD No. 13-1 (Alameda Landing Public\nImprovements); CFD No. 13-2 (Alameda Landing Municipal Services District); CFD\nDistrict No. 14-1 (Marina Cove II); and CFD No. 17-1 (Alameda Point Public Services\nDistrict). Accepted.\n(*19-694) Recommendation to Accept a Biennial Report for the Public Art Fund.\nAccepted.\n(*19-695) Recommendation to Authorize the City Manager to Execute a One-Year\nAgreement, in an Amount Not to Exceed $100,000, with Alameda Family Services for\nStudent Mental Health Services. Accepted.\n(*19-696) Recommendation to Approve Closure of the Remaining North Course Holes\nat Corica Park to Improve the Overall Construction Schedule Timeline. Accepted.\n(*19-697) Recommendation to Authorize the City Manager to Execute an Amendment to\nthe Existing Citywide Project Stabilization Agreement for Public Works or Improvement\nContracts Providing for a Three (3) Year Renewal and Options for Subsequent Annual\nRenewals. Accepted.\n(*19-698) Recommendation to Authorize the City Manager to Execute a First\nAmendment to the Agreement with Trimacs Maintenance & Landscape Construction,\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n3\nDecember 17, 2019", "path": "CityCouncil/2019-12-17.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2019-12-17", "page": 6, "text": "Inc., Extending the Term of the Agreement by Thirteen Months and Increasing the\nCompensation to an Amount Not to Exceed $65,882, for an Aggregate Amount Not to\nExceed $129,845, for Landscape Services in City of Alameda Island City Landscape\nand Lighting District 84-2, Zone 6 - Marina Village. Accepted.\n(*19-699) Resolution No. 15619, \"Reappointing Wendi Poulson as Trustee to the\nAlameda County Mosquito Abatement District Board.' Adopted.\n(*19-700) Resolution No. 15620, \"Receiving and Filing the Fiscal Year 2018-19\nDevelopment Impact Fee (DIF) Report and Five-Year Report, Containing Both\nDevelopment Impact Fees and Fees Otherwise Subject to Development Agreements,\nand Making Certain Findings as Required by Government Code Sections 66000 et seq.'\nAdopted.\n(*19-701) Resolution No. 15621, \"Amending the Electric Utility Professionals of Alameda\n(EUPA) Salary Schedule to Reflect a New Salary for the Finance and Utility Billing\nManager and the Support Services Manager and Revised Job Classification Titles for\nFinance and Utility Billing Manager, Utility Billing Specialist, and Utility Billing\nTechnician.' Adopted.\n(*19-702) Resolution No. 15622, \"Certifying the Ballot Tabulation Results for the 2019\nWater Quality and Flood Protection Fee Initiative\" Adopted; and\n(*19-702 A) Ordinance No. 3258, \"Adding Article IV to Chapter 18 of the Municipal\nCode, and Ordering Levies of the 2019 Water Quality and Flood Protection Fee for\nFiscal Year 2020-21, as Approved by a Majority of Votes in Favor of the Fee Submitted\nby Property Owners.\" Finally passed.\n(*19-703) Public Hearing Under the Federal Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act of\n1982 to Consider Resolution No. 15623, \"Approving the Issuance of Revenue Bonds by\nthe California Municipal Finance Authority in an Aggregate Principal Amount Not to\nExceed $45,000,000 to Finance a 70-Unit Multifamily Rental Housing Facility for Low-\nand Very Low-Income Families Located within Alameda Point Site A for the Benefit of\nEden Housing Inc., or an Entity to be Established by Eden Housing Inc. (or an Affiliate). \"\nAdopted.\n(*19-704) Public Hearing Under the Federal Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act of\n1982 to Consider Resolution No. 15624, \"Approving the Issuance of Revenue Bonds by\nthe California Municipal Finance Authority in an Aggregate Principal Amount Not to\nExceed $45,000,000 to Finance the Rosefield Village, a 92-Unit Multifamily Rental\nHousing Project, Located at 718-746 Eagle Avenue and 715-727 Buena Vista Avenue,\nAlameda, California for the Benefit of the City of Alameda Housing Authority.' Adopted.\nREGULAR AGENDA ITEMS\n(19-705) Recommendation to Authorize the City Manager to Negotiate and Execute the\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n4\nDecember 17, 2019", "path": "CityCouncil/2019-12-17.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2019-12-17", "page": 7, "text": "Seaplane Lagoon Ferry Terminal Operating Agreement between the City of Alameda\nand the Water Emergency Transportation Authority; and\n(19-705 A) Introduction of Ordinance Approving a License and Authorizing the City\nManager to Negotiate and Execute Documents Necessary to Implement the Terms of a\n66-Year License with the San Francisco Bay Area Water Emergency Transportation\nAuthority for Use of Real Property and Submerged Land at Alameda Point. Introduced.\nThe Redevelopment Project Manager gave a brief presentation.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired whether the agreement was previously approved by the\nWater Emergency Transportation Authority (WETA) Board, to which the Redevelopment\nProject Manager responded in the affirmative.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired the process for the City making reasonable efforts to\nensure priority for ferry riders during ferry operation hours under the landside assets\nportion of the agreement.\nThe Redevelopment Project Manager responded said aspect is still being worked out.\nThe Assistant City Attorney stated the parking provision is important to WETA and was\ndiscussed at length; there has been agreement to continue to work on the details.\nThe City Manager stated City staff are currently working on parking management; the\nferry is part of the priority areas; parking management is very important for ferries; the\ngoal is to have parking available by early September.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated the reason AC Transit does not provide service to areas\nsuch as the Main Street Ferry Terminal is due to free parking; paid parking must be\nimplemented in the future; inquired whether WETA will be responsible for hauling away\nand disposing of dredging materials.\nThe Assistant City Attorney responded in the affirmative; stated hauling and disposal\nare part of the dredging process.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the responsibility of replacement falls on the City\nor WETA when submerged pier outlives its useful life and must be replaced.\nThe Assistant City Attorney responded piers are part of the waterside assets and are\nthe responsibility of WETA; stated the distinction of the submerged land is that it is City-\nowned and any damage caused by WETA actions will be their responsibility.\nVice Mayor Knox White moved approval of the staff recommendation and introduction of\nthe ordinance.\nCouncilmember Oddie seconded the motion.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n5\nDecember 17, 2019", "path": "CityCouncil/2019-12-17.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2019-12-17", "page": 8, "text": "Under discussion, the City Manager, Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft and Councilmember Oddie\nmade brief comments about the partnership.\nOn the call for the question, the motion carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.\n***\n(19-706) Councilmember Oddie moved approval of hearing the privacy policy\n[paragraph no. 19-707 next.\nVice Mayor Knox White seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote -\n5.\n(19-707) Resolution No. 15625, \"Establishing a Privacy Policy, Data Management\nPolicy, and Prohibiting the Use of Face Recognition Technology. Adopted.\nThe Assistant City Manager gave a Power Point presentation.\nCouncilmember Daysog inquired whether facial recognition technology would allow for\npolice use.\nThe Assistant City Manager responded facial recognition technology would not be used\nby the City of Alameda; stated City Officers could utilize facial recognition technology if\nit is used as part of a criminal investigation by another agency; the City would not seek\nout or pursue the use of facial recognition technology.\nCouncilmember Daysog inquired whether facial recognition technology could be used if\na potential crime was recorded at an Automated Teller Machine (ATM), to which the\nAssistant City Manager responded in the negative.\nExpressed support of a complete facial recognition ban and concern over democracy\ntaking over privacy: Sal\u00e1h Elbakri, Support Life Foundation.\nExpressed support for an ordinance, rather than policy; discussed the dangers of facial\nrecognition software: Tim Kingston, San Francisco Public Defender Racial Justice\nCommittee.\nExpressed support for the privacy policy and adoption of an ordinance for data\nmanagement and face recognition technology: Brian Hofer, Secure Justice.\nUrged the Council to adopt an ordinance; discussed logging: Matt Cagle, American Civil\nLiberties Union (ACLU) of Northern California.\nDiscussed changing jobs and being questioned by the Federal Bureau of Investigators;\nstated the line has to be drawn: Gulled Mahmoud.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n6\nDecember 17, 2019", "path": "CityCouncil/2019-12-17.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2019-12-17", "page": 9, "text": "Requested an ordinance be adopted; expressed concern over using facial recognition\ntechnology: Mokntar Mohamed.\nCouncilmember Daysog inquired whether the facial recognition policy covers the use of\nvideo data captured by police worn body cameras.\nThe Assistant City Manager responded the City has a separate public safety policy\nrelated to body camera footage; stated the current contract does not have facial\nrecognition technology.\nThe Police Chief stated the vendor for body worn cameras, Axon, does not offer facial\nrecognition technology; facial framing technology, similar to a cellphone, is used for\nredaction purposes.\nCouncilmember Daysog inquired whether the facial recognition technology is algorithm\nbased and able to capture an abundance of data in real-time.\nThe Assistant City Manager responded the policy is not specific to that level of detail;\nprovided the definition of facial recognition technology.\nDiscussed evidence of spying; states use policies make community members feel safe:\nSameena Usman, Council on American-Islamic Relations.\nCouncilmember Vella stated that she previously brought a referral for an ordinance\nrelative to data collection and management; expressed support for going beyond a\npolicy and enacting an ordinance; expressed concern about being tape recorded\nwithout knowledge; stated that she believes in the right to privacy and the Constitution;\nexpressed concern for the propensity for abuse of various types of technology;\ndiscussed electronic forms of communication; expressed support for a data\nmanagement ordinance, adopting privacy policy principles, an ordinance related to\nfacial recognition and legally enforceable safeguards; stated policies can evolve;\nexpressed concern about vendor policy changes; for citizens being unable to participate\nor speak with the City due to protections not being in place.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she is unaware of a reference to cellphone tapings in\nthe policy; noted the Grand Jury report will be discussed at a later time.\nCouncilmember Vella stated that she raises the reference in relation to privacy;\ntechnology can be used in a number of different ways.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the policy refers to telephone recordings made\non a cell phone.\nThe City Attorney responded that with facial recognition, there is a cell phone use\nexemption; stated the data retention policy contains information about phone calls, not\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n7\nDecember 17, 2019", "path": "CityCouncil/2019-12-17.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2019-12-17", "page": 10, "text": "specific to cell phone recordings.\nThe Assistant City Manager stated Exhibit B relates to data collection and does list the\ndifferent kinds of data collected from the public to assist in conducting City operations;\nany data collection City staff would undertake would be covered by that portion of the\npolicy.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired what happens with Ring video footage voluntarily\nprovided by residents to the City.\nThe City Manager responded law enforcement is exempt.\nThe Assistant City Manager stated the Police Department is not subject to all policies\nfor investigative purposes; there are policies in place to address surveillance videos in\nthe investigation of a crime.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated that he has understood the Police Department would not\nbe allowed to use facial recognition software; inquired whether the [Ring doorbell]\nvideos are exempt from facial recognition.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft requested clarification of the difference between a camera taking a\nphotograph or video and facial recognition software.\nCouncilmember Oddie responded the inquiry is related to the use of video for facial\nrecognition.\nThe Police Chief stated the Police Department does not require sharing of video\nfootage.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired the process when video is shared with the Police\nDepartment.\nThe Police Chief responded video received would only be used for the investigation of a\ncrime; stated there is no facial recognition component when videos are received.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired whether video footage would be submitted to a vendor\nthat offers facial recognition software services.\nThe Assistant City Manager responded the City would not initiate the process; stated\nthe software could be leveraged as a resource in the scenario of a crime spree involving\nFederal Bureau of Investigations (FBI) which uses facial recognition technology; the\ntechnology is not something the City of Alameda would be paying for or directly seeking.\nIn response to Councilmember Oddie's hypothetical inquiry about facial recognition\nbeing used in the instance of red light or speed cameras, the Police Chief outlined the\nuse of camera imaging for identification purposes.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n8\nDecember 17, 2019", "path": "CityCouncil/2019-12-17.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2019-12-17", "page": 11, "text": "Councilmember Oddie inquired whether photos would be sent out to a vendor that uses\nfacial recognition to identify the driver, to which the Police Chief responded in the\nnegative.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired whether public transportation authorities could use facial\nrecognition technology within the City.\nThe Assistant City Manager responded the policy would not limit outside agencies from\nimplementing the use of facial recognition technology.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired the difference between a policy and an ordinance.\nThe City Attorney responded an ordinance has the effect of law; stated Council has a\nnumber of choices when an ordinance is adopted such as providing for enforcement\nmechanisms; violation of ordinances cause opportunity for private parties to bring\nlitigation; a policy adopted by resolution is unable to be altered without being brought\nback for Council consideration; a policy does not have some of the enforcement\nmechanisms on the law enforcement and litigation sides that exist with an ordinance.\nCouncilmember Oddie expressed support for an ordinance; stated people deserve the\nprotection of law and not just a policy.\nCouncilmember Daysog stated the item is related to automated or semi-automated\nfacial recognition technology, not body cameras or ATM videos, which capture events or\nactivities that could be interpreted in a non-automated fashion; the policy does not\npreclude Police from using technology in a reasonable manner to help secure public\nsafety; the questions raised are important for every city to address; noted riot\nparticipants are being identified by facial recognition software internationally; expressed\nsupport for the policy; stated facial recognition technology is closely intertwined with first\namendment rights; a reference to storing of information should be made in Exhibit C.\nVice Mayor Knox White expressed support for moving forward with an ordinance; stated\nthat he would like the item to return quickly; expressed support for a facial recognition\nban; discussed the acquisition of surveillance technology; expressed support for\nbringing back a surveillance ordinance; stated facial recognition technology does not\nwork; noted African Americans are 5 to10 times more likely to be misidentified; stated\npeople have a right to not be harassed due to faulty coding of a program; facial\nrecognition technology is not advanced enough for discussion; expressed support for a\nsurveillance ordinance to return and include a facial recognition ban,; including any\nquestions the City Manager and City Attorney might raise; stated policies are the first\nstep to begin the creation of trust in government.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated the report presented is thorough; expressed support for an\nordinance returning to Council; stated the quote \"Everyone Belongs Here\" holds true;\noutlined her experience as a person of Arab-American descent; stated a discussion will\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n9\nDecember 17, 2019", "path": "CityCouncil/2019-12-17.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2019-12-17", "page": 12, "text": "occur related to license plate readers early next year; Council has received\ncorrespondence from residents who would like an increase in the ability to capture\npeople who have committed serious crimes; different interests should be explored.\nCouncilmember Vella moved approval of the policies as written [adoption of the\nresolution] and directing staff to come back to Council with a facial recognition ban\nordinance and with a data management privacy oversight ordinance.\nCouncilmember Daysog seconded the motion.\nUnder discussion, Councilmember Vella stated there are existing examples of both\nordinances; she would like to the ordinance based on existing examples versus being\ndrafted from scratch; she would like to hear back about any City concerns.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated the ACLU model ordinances can be helpful.\nVice Mayor Knox White inquired whether the motion could be amended to include\nadopting the principles and direction to adopt a surveillance ordinance modeled after\nthe San Francisco.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she would like to give staff direction to consider the\nsurveillance ordinance, but not direct use of San Francisco's model; noted there are\ndifferences between Alameda and San Francisco.\nVice Mayor Knox White inquired whether there is support to add the surveillance\n[ordinance] based on the [San Francisco] existing example.\nCouncilmember Vella responded in the affirmative.\nCouncilmember Daysog expressed support for the motion to use \"strongly consider\nusing San Francisco.\"\nVice Mayor Knox White stated the language has come from the privacy groups; the\npolicies are correct as written and only need to be converted to an ordinance.\nOn the call for the question, the motion carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.\n***\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft called a recess at 9:14 p.m. and reconvened the meeting at 9:21\np.m.\n***\n(19-708) Recommendation to Consider Adoption of a City Council Code of Conduct and\nCouncilmember Handbook, and Code of Conduct, Providing Guidelines for\nCouncilmembers to Follow in Conducting City Business and Fulfilling Their\nResponsibilities as City Elected Officials.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n10\nDecember 17, 2019", "path": "CityCouncil/2019-12-17.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2019-12-17", "page": 13, "text": "The City Manager and City Attorney gave a Power Point presentation.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft expressed support for the use of the City of Sunnyvale's handbook\nstyle; stated some of the proposed language is antiquated and could be updated; the\nCity of Sunnyvale's language is well thought out; the item Council adopts should be\nsimple and straight-forward; the policy brought forth by staff is well referenced.\nCouncilmember Oddie discussed an article related to Code of Conduct; stated the City\nof Sunnyvale handbook is comprehensive; the item is an opportunity to show residents\nCouncil's ethics and values; all elected officials should be covered by the policy; officials\ncould sign the proposed handbook to acknowledge their promise of service; that he\nwould like input from Council before discussing social media and the Brown Act;\nquestioned procedures for social media interactions.\nCouncilmember Vella expressed support for the City of Sunnyvale's Code of Conduct,\nfor including all elected officials, for including language reflecting elected and appointed\nofficials interactions with staff, and for providing a safe space for dialogue and open\nconversation with respect; stated open dialogue can sometimes be lost in the heat of\nadvocacy; a fraternization policy is lacking; expressed support for including a\nfraternization policy; noted the City of Sunnyvale adopts its Code of Conduct on the\nConsent Calendar annually and updates the contents regularly.\nVice Mayor Knox White stated the City of Sunnyvale Code of Conduct handbook\nanswers many questions; the Sunnyvale handbook is about ethics and behavior; there\nare long-standing issues and questions that repeatedly arise related to agenda setting\nin the Alameda version; expressed support for adopting a version of the Sunnyvale\nhandbook, with the expansion to all elected officials that are able to be covered, and\nreferencing the Brown Act; discussed social media in relation to the Brown Act.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated that he read an article noting a violation in which three or\nmore Councilmembers press \"like\" [on a social media post] being an expression of\nsupport.\nVice Mayor Knox White stated Councilmembers should trust that other members will\nlook through social media content prior to joining; outlined an instance where he did not\ncomment on social media content since two other Councilmembers already posted;\nstated a lack of social media presence is not the answer; expressed concern over\nbanning social media commenting; stated if a problem occurs, time can be set aside at\nthe following workshop to discuss.\nCouncilmember Vella stated Councilmembers click \"like\" to acknowledge the original\nposter as heard; Councilmembers want to be responsive, but it can be difficult on social\nmedia; expressed concern for excessive censorship, unresponsiveness, or engaging in\nan item that is not up for Council discussion.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n11\nDecember 17, 2019", "path": "CityCouncil/2019-12-17.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2019-12-17", "page": 14, "text": "Councilmember Daysog stated the purpose of discussing a Code of Conduct relates to\ninquiries made by Councilmembers about City Manager administrative tasks and\nprohibitions on Councilmembers involving themselves in the appointment of particular\npositions in City Hall; any Code of Conduct adopted must reflect decisions made;\nexpressed support for Councilmembers never specifically inquiring about or advocating\nfor specific individuals or sets of individuals; stated Councilmembers should have the\nability to talk or inquire about jobs and types of characteristics the City Manager is\ninterested in or characteristics desired by Councilmembers; however, the Code of\nConduct should prohibit the pursuit or inquiry of appointing named individuals or sets of\nindividuals; Councilmembers may also discuss current Department Heads.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft outlined the Executive Summary; stated this is an opportunity to\nbetter prepare the current and future Councils; a clear set of guidelines will equip all to\nperform as best as possible; expressed support for the Sunnyvale handbook; stated the\nSunnyvale handbook lacks specific references to the Alameda Charter; expressed\nsupport for melding the Sunnyvale handbook with references to the Alameda Charter;\nstated that she would like quotes omitted; a social media policy should be discussed.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated that the Sunnyvale handbook dedicates two pages to\nanalysis of member inquiries to staff; many concerns could be addressed; discussed the\nprohibition of Council interference; stated there needs to be guidance related to what is\nand is not allowed regarding employees that do not directly report to Council; expressed\nsupport for including the analysis of an inquiry in the handbook; noted the Sunnyvale\nhandbook contains information about prohibition of interference.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft expressed support for including specific reference to the Alameda\nCity Charter.\nCouncilmember Vella stated the Sunnyvale handbook includes an interpretation of its\nCharter; Council has been tasked with interpreting how the Charter is applied;\nreferencing the Charter section would prove helpful; discussed current Charter\nlanguage related to Council interference; stated outlining and defining terms would be\nhelpful; mentioned the City Manager duties related to staff appointments; stated\nSunnyvale's Charter language is similar to the Alameda City Charter.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft expressed support for a glossary of terms.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated the Sunnyvale handbook includes sanctions and\nguidelines in the event of an issue; outlined a previous event involving officer discipline.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft summarized the direction being provided to staff; stated Council\nsupports the language included in the Sunnyvale handbook, minus the quotes and\nincorporating specific Alameda Charter items.\nCouncilmember Vella requested a fraternization policy be added.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n12\nDecember 17, 2019", "path": "CityCouncil/2019-12-17.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2019-12-17", "page": 15, "text": "Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated the item is a Code of Conduct for the City Council and other\nelected and appointed members; expressed support for further discussion.\nVice Mayor Knox White inquired whether a motion will be made or will direction to staff\nbe provided.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated the City Manager is not expecting adoption; outlined staff\nrecommendations; requested direction from the City Attorney.\nThe City Attorney responded Council motions are acceptable; stated specificity would\nbe most helpful.\nThe City Manager stated that he can accept either a motion or direction; stated the\nbetter direction provided, the better response.\nVice Mayor Knox White moved approval of directing staff to return to the Council with a\nCode of Ethics that is very much based on the Sunnyvale document and consider\nadding or determining where the appropriate place to provide additional items: agenda\nsetting, fraternization, etc., which may not belong in the ethics but could come back to\nCouncil to address said issues.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft questioned if fraternization is among Councilmembers and Board\nand Commission members, which is what the handbook is addressing.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated the handbook should be for all elected officials.\nVice Mayor Knox White stated staff can be included as well.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated the document is a City Council Code of Conduct and\nCouncilmember handbook.\nVice Mayor Knox White stated there is an interest and it overlays with elected officials\nand appointed officials; expressed support for considering expanding it to staff;\nrequested staff to consider and come back with a recommendation.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she respectfully disagrees; it is not the City Council's\nplace to implement policies for the staff; especially under the current item, which is a\nCity Council handbook.\nThe City Attorney stated the Council's concerns have been heard; that he and the City\nManager will work together to bring back an appropriate item.\nVice Mayor Knox White continued the motion to include that direction for consideration,\nbut it also includes the direction to include social media language that does not prohibit,\nbut does highlight Brown Act considerations.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n13\nDecember 17, 2019", "path": "CityCouncil/2019-12-17.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2019-12-17", "page": 16, "text": "Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the direction is to bring back a staff fraternization\npolicy.\nVice Mayor Knox White responded the direction is to consider whether to return with a\nfraternization policy.\nIn response to Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft's inquiry whether it is appropriate, Vice Mayor Knox\nWhite stated the direction is not to implement; staff may return to Council and state a\npolicy currently exists.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft questioned referring to City staff when the item being discussed is\na City Council handbook.\nVice Mayor Knox White stated it refers to elected and appointed officials, but also could\nbe broadened to include City staff; there has been no indication that the minor\namendment to include City staff is inappropriate; everyone should abide by the same\nrules.\nThe City Attorney stated that he and the City Manager understand there is interest in\nbringing information back; the information will be brought forth in whatever appropriate\nform.\nCouncilmember Oddie seconded the motion.\nUnder discussion, Councilmember Daysog stated that he will support the motion based\non the importance of language returning to Council for determination; expressed\nsupport for language regarding interference in the appointment process; stated the City\nCouncil does have a role with Department Heads in the Charter; Council determines the\noffices of the departments and the City Manager then fills the offices; Council may\nchange the composition at its pleasure; there is a review process listed under Item 2-3.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she would like to remain consistent with the\nrecommendations of the civil Grand Jury.\nCouncilmember Oddie requested parts of the Alameda Charter and Sunshine\nOrdinance not be cut and pasted, rather it should be incorporated by reference.\nOn the call for the question, the motion carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.\nCITY MANAGER COMMUNICATIONS\n(19-709) The City Manager announced that people can pin areas where they have felt\nunsafe walking or biking in Alameda at: www.ActiveAlameda.org; expressed\nappreciation for the Alameda Firefighters Toy Drive program; announced the last toy\npickup is December 18th; announced a cannabis operating permit has been sent out;\nwished everyone happy holidays.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n14\nDecember 17, 2019", "path": "CityCouncil/2019-12-17.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2019-12-17", "page": 17, "text": "ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA\nNone.\nCOUNCIL REFERRALS\n(19-710) Consider Resolution No. 15626, \"Supporting the Alameda Unified School\nDistrict's (AUSD) \"Alameda Teacher/Staff Retention\" Measure.\" Adopted. (Vice Mayor\nKnox White/Councilmember Oddie).\nVice Mayor Knox White and Councilmember Oddie made brief comments regarding the\nreferral.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she met with the School Board President to express\nher support; there is a need to attract and retain teachers.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft moved adoption of the resolution supporting the AUSD Alameda\nTeacher/Staff Retention Measure.\nCouncilmember Vella seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.\nCOUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS\n(19-711) Councilmember Vella announced an upcoming Lead Abatement meeting;\noutlined a previous Lead Abatement meeting; stated the Healthy Homes Department is\nlooking at eventually increasing its assessment.\n(19-712) Vice Mayor Knox White announced that he met with the Earhart School Parent\nTeacher Association (PTA) about traffic safety concerns; stated that he is continuing to\nlook for bold and new implementation ideas for traffic safety.\n(19-713) Councilmember Oddie announced Stop Waste's desire for adoption of a model\nordinance regarding take-out food containers being compostable; stated the matter will\nbe placed on the next Council agenda under Council Communication to seek Council\nfeedback; made an announcement regarding the Shop with a Cop event.\n(19-714) Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft made announcements regarding an Association for Bay\nArea Governments (AGBAG) meeting, which discussed the Regional Housing Needs\nAllocation (RHNA) numbers, a meeting in Napa hosted by the League of California\nCities, which discussed the top priorities of housing and homelessness, an interview\nwith KRON 4 about Alameda Point, and a Jammie [pajama] Drive; expressed\nappreciation for the Assistant City Manager attending a meeting related to\nhomelessness; announced Alameda would be hosting the Alameda County Mayor's\nConference February 12, 2020 at Penumbra.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n15\nDecember 17, 2019", "path": "CityCouncil/2019-12-17.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2019-12-17", "page": 18, "text": "(19-715) Councilmember Vella made an announcement regarding the tree lighting and\nthe annual holiday home tour.\n(19-716) Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft announced two upcoming menorah lightings.\nADJOURNMENT\n(19-717) There being no further business, Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft adjourned the meeting\nwith a moment of silence in memory of Ann Bartalini at 10:19 p.m.\nRespectfully submitted,\nLara Weisiger\nCity Clerk\nThe agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Sunshine Ordinance.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n16\nDecember 17, 2019", "path": "CityCouncil/2019-12-17.pdf"}