{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2020-03-17", "page": 1, "text": "MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING\nTUESDAY- - - MARCH 17, 2020- 5:45 P.M.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft convened the meeting at 5:50 p.m.\nRoll Call - Present:\nCouncilmembers Daysog, Knox White, Oddie, Vella and\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft - 5.\n[Note: Councilmembers Oddie and Vella were present via teleconference.]\nAbsent:\nNone.\nConsent Calendar\nVice Mayor Knox White moved approval of the Consent Calendar.\nCouncilmember Vella seconded the motion, which carried by the following roll call vote:\nCouncilmembers Daysog: Aye, Knox White: Aye, Oddie: Aye, Vella: Aye and Mayor\nEzzy Ashcraft: Aye; Ayes - 5. [Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an\nasterisk preceding the paragraph number.]\n(20-148) Recommendation to Approve Eric Levitt, City Manager, Lisa Maxwell,\nAssistant City Attorney, Debbie Potter, Community Development Director, and Nanette\nMocanu, Assistant Community Development Director, as Real Property Negotiators for\nthe Potential Licensing of the Northwest Territories. Accepted.\n(20-149) Recommendation to Approve Eric Levitt, City Manager, Lisa Maxwell,\nAssistant City Attorney, Debbie Potter, Community Development Director, and Nanette\nMocanu, Assistant Community Development Director, as Real Property Negotiators for\nthe Potential Lease of Building 14 at 1800 Ferry Point on Alameda Point. Accepted.\n(20-150) Recommendation to Approve Eric Levitt, City Manager, Lisa Maxwell,\nAssistant City Attorney, Debbie Potter, Community Development Director, and Lois\nButler, Economic Development Manager, as Real Property Negotiators for the Potential\nLease and Development of a Portion of the Ballena Isle Upland Parcel APN 74-1025-3.\nAccepted.\n(20-151) Recommendation to Approve Eric Levitt, City Manager, and Michael Roush,\nChief Assistant City Attorney, as Real Property Negotiators for the Potential Assignment\nand Assumption of the Lease for 300 Island Drive in Alameda. Accepted.\nThe meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider:\n(20-152) Conference with Legal Counsel - Liability Claim (Pursuant to Government\nCode \u00a7 54956.95); Claimant: Shelby Gattenby; Agency Claimed Against: City of\nAlameda\nSpecial Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nMarch 17, 2020", "path": "CityCouncil/2020-03-17.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2020-03-17", "page": 2, "text": "(20-153) Conference with Real Property Negotiators (Pursuant to Government Code\nSection 54956.8) Property: 300 Island Drive; City Negotiators: Eric Levitt, City Manager,\nand Michael Roush, Chief Assistant City Attorney; Negotiating Parties: City of Alameda\nand Greenway Golf; Under Negotiation: Price and terms of lease\n(20-154) Conference with Legal Counsel - Existing Litigation (Pursuant to Government\nCode \u00a7 54956.9); Case Name: Little Sisters of the Poor V. Pennsylvania; Court: United\nState Supreme Court; Case Number: 19-431\n(20-155) Conference with Legal Counsel - Liability Claim (Pursuant to Government\nCode \u00a7 54956.95) Claimant: Grand Edibles; Agency Claimed Against: City of Alameda\n(20-156) Conference with Real Property Negotiators (Pursuant to Government Code\nSection 54956.8) Property: Northwest Territories, approximately 1,704 acres of rentable\nspace on the former Naval Air Station Alameda at Alameda Point; City Negotiators: Eric\nLevitt, City Manager, Lisa Maxwell, Assistant City Attorney, Debbie Potter, Community\nDevelopment Director, and Nanette Mocanu, Assistant Community Development\nDirector; Negotiating Parties: City of Alameda and Porsche Club of America, Inc.; Under\nNegotiation: Licensing, price and terms. Not heard.\n(20-157) Conference with Real Property Negotiators (Pursuant to Government Code\nSection 54956.8) Property: Building 14, approximately 31,194 rentable square feet of\nbuilding area, located at 1800 Ferry Point at Alameda Point; City Negotiators: Eric\nLevitt, City Manager, Lisa Maxwell, Assistant City Attorney, Debbie Potter, Community\nDevelopment Director, and Nanette Mocanu, Assistant Community Development\nDirector; Negotiating Parties: City of Alameda and Navigator Systems; Under\nNegotiation: Price and terms. Not heard.\n(20-158) Conference with Real Property Negotiators (Government Code section\n54956.8) Property: Ballena Isle Upland Parcel APN 74-1025-3; City Negotiators: Eric\nLevitt, City Manager; Debbie Potter, Community Development Director; Lois Butler,\nEconomic Development Manager; Lisa Maxwell, Assistant City Attorney; Maurice\nRobinson, Maurice Robinson & Associates LLC; Potential Tenant: West River, Inc.;\nCurrent Tenant: SHM Ballena Isle, LLC; Issue Under Negotiation: Real Property\nNegotiations Price and Terms. Not heard.\n***\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft called a recess at 6:03 p.m. and reconvened the meeting at 6:08\np.m.\n***\nFollowing the Closed Session, the meeting was reconvened and the City Clerk\nannounced that regarding Gattenby, staff provided information; this matter involves a\nclaim filed by Shelby Gattenby, against the City of Alameda, alleging that Alameda\nSpecial Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nMarch 17, 2020", "path": "CityCouncil/2020-03-17.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2020-03-17", "page": 3, "text": "Police Department (APD) Officers violated Mr. Gattenby's of civil rights under federal\nand California state law and caused his death while in custody on December 5, 2018;\nthe City maintains that APD Officers acted in accordance with all applicable laws;\nnonetheless, in order to avoid the expense and uncertainty of litigation, by the following\nroll call vote: Councilmember Daysog: Aye; Knox White: Aye; Oddie: Aye; Vella: Aye;\nand Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye; Ayes: 5, the City Council authorizes the City Attorney to\nsettle this matter in an amount not to exceed $250,000; regarding Real Property, staff\nprovided information to Council and direction was provided to staff with no vote taken;\nregarding Existing Litigation, staff provided information; this case relates to\nPennsylvania and New Jersey's pending challenge against the Trump administration's\nrecent regulations permitting employers to curtail any and all contraceptive coverage\nunder their health plans; Pennsylvania and New Jersey received favorable rulings at the\nThird Circuit, the US Supreme Court has granted review of the case; Little Sisters of\nthe Poor, a religious non-profit organization, moved to intervene in support of the Trump\nAdministration; by the following roll call vote: Councilmembers Daysog: Aye; Knox\nWhite: Aye; Oddie: Aye; Vella: Aye; and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye; Ayes: 5, the\nCouncil authorized the City Attorney to sign onto an amicus briefed to be drafted by the\nPublic Rights Project and the Oakland City Attorney's Office supporting Pennsylvania\nand New Jersey's positions; regarding Grand Edibles, staff provided information and\nCouncil provided direction by the following roll call vote: Councilmembers Daysog: Aye;\nKnox White: Aye; Oddie: Aye; Vella: Aye; and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye; Ayes: 5.\nAdjournment\nThere being no further business, Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft adjourned the meeting at 6:55\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\nMarch 17, 2020", "path": "CityCouncil/2020-03-17.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2020-03-17", "page": 4, "text": "MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL/SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE\nCOMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION (SACIC) MEETING\nTUESDAY- -MARCH 17, 2020- 5:46 P.M.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft convened the meeting at 6:03 p.m.\nRoll Call -\nPresent:\nCommissioners/Councilmembers Daysog, Knox White,\nOddie, Vella and Mayor/Chair Ezzy Ashcraft - 5.\n[Note: Councilmembers/Commissioners Oddie and Vella were present via\nteleconference]\nAbsent:\nNone.\nThe meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider:\n(20-159 CC/20-008 SACIC) Conference with Legal Counsel - Existing Litigation\n(Pursuant to Government Code \u00a7 54956.9); Case Name: Boatworks V City of Alameda,\net al.; Court: Superior Court of the State of California, County of Alameda; Case\nNumbers: RG16823346, RG16841240, RG19041531\nFollowing the Closed Session, the meeting was reconvened and the City Clerk\nannounced that staff provided information; the SACIC ratified the City Council's\nsettlement decision from March 3, 2020 by the following roll call vote:\nCouncilmembers/Commissioners Daysog: No; Knox White: Aye; Oddie: Aye; Vella: Aye;\nMayor/Chair Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye; Ayes - 4; Noes: - 1; the SACIC authorized the City\nAttorney to execute the agreement on behalf of the SACIC.\nAdjournment\nThere being no further business, Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft adjourned the meeting at 6:08\np.m.\nRespectfully submitted,\nLara Weisiger\nCity Clerk\nThe agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Sunshine Ordinance.\nSpecial Joint Meeting\nAlameda City Council and Successor Agency to the\nCommunity Improvement Commission\nMarch 17, 2020", "path": "CityCouncil/2020-03-17.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2020-03-17", "page": 5, "text": "MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL URGENCY MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL\nTUESDAY--MARCH 17, 2020--6:58 P.M.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft convened the meeting at 7:07 p.m. Vice Mayor Knox White led\nthe Pledge of Allegiance.\nROLL CALL -\nPresent:\nCouncilmember Daysog, Knox White, Oddie, Vella\nand Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft - 5.\n[Note: Councilmembers Oddie and Vella were present via\nteleconference.]\nAbsent:\nNone.\nAGENDA ITEMS\n(20-160) Mayor's Address on the City's Response to COVID-19\nThe Mayor made a brief presentation.\n(20-161) Urgency Ordinance No. 3267, \"Declaring the Existence of a Local Emergency\nin Response to the COVID-19 Pandemic, and Directing City Staff to Respond\nAppropriately to Such Local Emergency.\" Adopted.\nThe City Manager gave a brief presentation.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated that he would like the City of Alameda to know staff is\nworking hard to keep everyone safe; expressed support for the item.\nCouncilmember Vella stated this event is unprecedented; expressed support for the\nitem; stated that she appreciates Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft's comments.\nVice Mayor Knox White inquired whether there is public comment for the item, to which\nthe City Clerk responded in the negative.\nVice Mayor Knox White stated the community understands the effort; expressed support\nfor the item.\nVice Mayor Knox White moved adoption of the urgency ordinance.\nCouncilmember Daysog seconded the motion, which carried by the following roll call\nvote: Councilmember Daysog: Aye; Knox White: Aye; Oddie: Aye; Vella: Aye; and\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye. Ayes: 5.\n(20-162) Urgency Ordinance No. 3268, \"Imposing within the City of Alameda a\nTemporary (60-Day) Moratorium on Evictions from all Residential Rental Units due to\nSpecial Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n1\nMarch 17, 2020", "path": "CityCouncil/2020-03-17.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2020-03-17", "page": 6, "text": "the COVID-19 Pandemic and Landlords' Shutting off Utilities in Rental Units Except for\nEmergency Situations.\" Adopted.\nThe City Attorney gave a brief presentation.\nCouncilmember Vella inquired whether there is public comment for the item, to which\nthe City Clerk responded in the negative.\nCouncilmember Vella stated the City has residential and commercial tenants; inquired\nwhether the City could take action to not just put the moratorium on evictions, but to\nalso postpone the payment of rent and make any rent due April 1st be delayed to\npayment over time.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft requested clarification about whether Councilmember Vella's\ninquiry includes instances when the City is the landlord, to which Councilmember Vella\nresponded in the affirmative.\nThe City Manager responded that he believes a provision exists within the language of\nthe previous urgency ordinance [paragraph no. 20-\n.\nThe City Attorney stated Council approved giving the City Manager the flexibility in the\nprior item.\nCouncilmember Vella inquired whether the language needs to be built-in to the\nordinance or if the City Manager authorization on a case by case basis is enough.\nThe City Attorney responded the prior ordinance gives the City Manager discretion;\nstated due to the City acting as landlord, not a regulator, an ordinance does not need to\nbe adopted; the City Manager may take further direction from Council; however, an\nordinance is not needed to regulate City Manager actions.\nIn response to Councilmember Oddie's inquiry, Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated the Council\nmay direct staff to look into commercial payments.\nCouncilmember Oddie expressed support for including commercial tenants in the\nlanguage; questioned whether property owners who are not receiving rental income\ncould receive aid; stated that he believes the Governor has provided information related\nto foreclosures; the City needs to look into the foreclosure information; inquired whether\na process is being put in place for Section 8 voucher holders to put a pause on\nvouchers being taken away.\nCouncilmember Vella outlined Governor Newsom's Executive Order N-28-20 related to\ncommercial provisions; stated that she would like staff to look into the City's ability to\nplace a moratorium on commercial evictions.\nVice Mayor Knox White expressed support for addressing the commercial property\nSpecial Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nMarch 17, 2020\n2", "path": "CityCouncil/2020-03-17.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2020-03-17", "page": 7, "text": "issue; stated that he would like to give staff direction to consider whether related\nemergency ordinances can be looked into in a timely manner so as not to cause delay\nwith implementation; it is possible there will be daily orders from Governor Newsom;\nexpressed support for clarification on Section 8.\nCouncilmember Daysog stated that he would like to see a mechanism by which\npercentage loss of income stemming from the COVID-19 virus results in a pro-rata\nreduction in rent; should someone lose 20% of their income during the moratorium\nperiod, a mechanism should be put in place that allows for collection of 80% of the\nprevious rent during the life of the moratorium; he believes that the ordinance language\ndoes not contain a mechanism to deal with rent and income reductions; expressed\nsupport for a loss of income not resulting in eviction; stated a loss of income still\nrequires the obligation of communication between the landlord and tenant; he has\ndrafted language to include the mechanism; should rent reductions occur as a result of\nthe ordinance, there should also be a process by which parts of unpaid rent is paid back\nover a period of time; outlined an article from the San Francisco Examiner; stated the\nordinance is silent about repayment of rent, a process that gets tenants speaking to\ntheir landlords, and landlords accommodating tenants to come upon mutually agreed\nupon rent reduction; noted should someone be able to demonstrate a loss of income by\n15%, the language included should depict a rent reduction of 15%; expressed support\nfor a mechanism to be in place indicating: a) a rent adjustment discussion with landlord,\nb) an agreement between landlord and tenant, and c) should no agreement be met, the\noperative parts of the ordinance takes effect; stated the crisis impacts both tenants and\nsmall landlords; the ordinance can be strengthened; both San Francisco and San Jose\nhave 30-day moratoriums with the possibility of extending; Alameda is jumping to 60-\ndays; Section 1 Subsection 3 needs to clarify the timeframe to state during the course of\nCOVID-19 crisis; the ordinance needs to have a clear sunset; the term tenants must be\ndefined; expressed support for adopting a mechanism that gets tenants and landlords to\ntalk to each other and arrive at a mutually agreed upon rent reduction resulting from a\nloss of income and for a payback element to be included in the language.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated that a 60-day moratorium has its own sunset; the Council\nwill either reconsider or sunset at the end of 60 days; the she is unsure of where things\nwill be at the end of 60 days; noted San Jose and San Francisco will possibly extend\ntheir provisions; stated that she believes utilities have all agreed not to shut off during\nthe COVID-19 outbreak; this is a healthcare crisis and people should not be without\nutilities; Councilmember Daysog has raised good points worth reviewing; any items\napproved should not be difficult to administer; expressed concern for pro-rata formulas;\nmany landlords are not present to conduct dialogue, which may cause complications.\nThe City Attorney stated the ordinance will sunset 60 days from today; the ordinance\ndoes allow for the City Manager to extend under two conditions: 1) the State must be in\na COVID-19 declared emergency by the Governor, or 2) the City Council is unable to\nmeet to authorize an extension; should both circumstances be true, the City Manager\ncan offer extensions; the 60-day limit is less than the Governor's current timeframe,\nwhich extends to May 31st and allows the City to pause and review at the 60-day mark;\nSpecial Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n3\nMarch 17, 2020", "path": "CityCouncil/2020-03-17.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2020-03-17", "page": 8, "text": "the utility shut-off provision is directly tied to the declared emergency; every provision in\nthe ordinance is tied to the COVID-19 declared emergency; should the COVID-19\nemergency cease, the prohibition against landlords shutting off utilities, unrelated to an\nemergency, will go away; outlined the emergency utility shut off scenario and non-\nemergency shut off scenario; stated staff can take direction on landlords and tenants\nconversing; the direction will require additional administrative efforts, which could prove\ndifficult to undertake; staff is attempting to limit the impairment of existing contracts and\nusing the City's regulatory powers to alter contracts which are in place\nCouncilmember Daysog stated his drafted language is not an effort for the City to insert\nitself into the discussion between landlord and tenant; the language is to say that\nlandlords and tenants must have the discussion; should litigation be initiated by either\nlandlord or tenant, the question will be asked if communication efforts were made;\nshould communication efforts not be made, the protections listed will not be awarded to\neither party; there is no role of the City; the communication is part of the procedures that\nlandlords and tenants must take as a result of the ordinance.\nThe City Attorney stated should Council desire to place a procedural limit upfront about\nconversations, staff will take direction; previous statements related to administration\nrelate to any pro-rata rent payments; pro-rata rent payments delves into the rent\nprogram reviewing full or partial rent payments.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft requested clarification on the provision requiring reimbursement\nover time.\nThe City Attorney stated the provision is related to pro-rata of rent up-front; there will be\nsome administrative work; the City Manager may have input related to ensuring rent is\ncorrect; changes made to existing contracts relates to pro-rata, which changes and\ncreates new lease terms; staff is proposing a time stop on evictions without changing\nthe existing lease provisions; rates and payments do not change; payments can be\nmade when the emergency is over; the current ordinance is simplistic and creates a\ntime stop allowing for a delay in payment.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated how the City can act as landlord should be reviewed;\nprovisions for small business administration might allow some landlords to qualify.\nVice Mayor Knox White expressed gratitude for Councilmember Daysog's comments;\nstated the explanation given by the City Attorney confirmed his understanding of the\nordinance; evictions are not being stopped; the pro-rata would go further than San\nFrancisco or the current ordinance proposes; questioned whether Councilmember\nDaysog intends for landlords to receive less money over-time.\nCouncilmember Daysog responded in the affirmative.\nVice Mayor Knox White stated the repayment is set to be 100%.\nSpecial Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nMarch 17, 2020\n4", "path": "CityCouncil/2020-03-17.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2020-03-17", "page": 9, "text": "Councilmember Daysog stated should be COVID-19 virus emergency be one-month\nlong and a $1000 per month rent payment is typical, under a 20% loss in income, the\nrent due would now be $800, the 20%, $200, would still be due at a later date spread\nover time.\nVice Mayor Knox White stated the landlord is still receiving 100% of what is owed over\ntime; the total owed is now being stretched over time with administrative processes.\nCouncilmember Daysog stated that he does not see a sufficient mechanisms\naddressing how the process works.\nVice Mayor Knox White stated San Francisco does provide a time by which payment\nneeds to be provided; expressed support for the provision to be inserted into the\nlanguage; questioned whether Council can consider the addition.\nThe City Attorney responded the addition would not necessitate a new hearing to be\nconsidered.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft expressed support for the proposal; stated that she is hearing\nmany people are uncertain about what the future holds; some providers will not be able\nto receive unemployment benefits for two-weeks; many people are living paycheck to\npaycheck; questioned whether the six months would start at the end of the COVID-19\nemergency.\nVice Mayor Knox White stated there is only one month of missing payment due under\nthe 30-day provision; if a payment is missed, there will be 60-days to cure.\nCouncilmember Daysog expressed support for a payback period similar to San\nFrancisco.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft expressed support.\nThe City Clerk announced a public comment has been received.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the public was made aware of how to submit\ncomments, to which the City Clerk responded in the affirmative; stated instructions were\nprovided on the revised agenda; members of the public can either e-mail\nclerk@alamedaca.gov or may text or leave a voicemail at: (510) 747-4802.\nExpressed support for both ordinances as listed in the staff reports; the moratorium on\nevictions urgency ordinance attached to the agenda item reflects the fifth option for\nCouncil actions: direct staff to prepare an urgency ordinance that establishes a\nmoratorium on evictions regardless of the reason for non-payment of rent, for example,\nthe tenant would not have to establish the inability to pay rent was directly related to\nCOVID-19; while there may be an argument for such a broad moratorium, it could be\ndifficult to find housing in this rental market if evicted, thus increasing the likeliness of\nSpecial Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n5\nMarch 17, 2020", "path": "CityCouncil/2020-03-17.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2020-03-17", "page": 10, "text": "homelessness etc.; urged Council to make a decision regarding the moratorium on\nevictions relating to non-payment of rent where the tenant can demonstrate that the\ntenant has suffered a substantial loss of income defined as a reduction of 20% or more\nmonthly gross pay due to COVID-19 pandemic and regardless of the reason for non-\npayment of rent: Alan Teague, Alameda.\nCouncilmember Vella expressed support for the period of payment being six months, for\nVice Mayor Knox White's proposal authorizing staff to look into a number of different\noptions relative to the options constituents might be facing and for local governments to\ntake action.\nVice Mayor Knox White expressed support.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated some options are worth exploring; it is important for\nCouncil to understand the extent of the ordinance; provisions can extend to more than\njust those that are afflicted with the virus; outlined a headline related to unemployment;\nexpressed support for leaving the ordinance as-is without adding any undue\nrequirements; stated that he does understand that Council may have to refine the\nordinance and implement repercussions as indicated.\nVice Mayor Knox White stated the City Attorney should confirm the language being\napproved and voted on; expressed support for adding some sort of repayment within six\nmonths of the end of the state of emergency.\nThe City Attorney stated staff is ready to accept Council direction; the current ordinance\nas drafted requires a tenant to pay within 1 day of the emergency ending; Council\ndirection is to stretch that out to six-months giving more time to pay.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated some tenants may break down payments over a period of\nsix-months.\nCouncilmember Daysog expressed support for the rent payback agreement; stated that\na tenant must make an effort to pay some amount of the rent that they can pay during\nthe moratorium, with payback of the amount that could not be paid.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether there is anything which would stop a tenant\noffering a partial rent payment to a landlord during the COVID-19 declared emergency;\nstated that would require a level of communication between landlord and tenant; that\nshe in unsure something needs to be legislated to the effect.\nCouncilmember Daysog inquired whether the proposed payment would only apply to\nthose that hit the 20% income reduction point.\nThe City Attorney responded there are circumstances: 1) a 20% reduction, 2)\nextraordinary health care or medical costs, 3) if someone or a member of the family is\naffected by COVID-19.\nSpecial Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nMarch 17, 2020\n6", "path": "CityCouncil/2020-03-17.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2020-03-17", "page": 11, "text": "The Community Development Director stated the ordinance is intended to be straight-\nforward for people who are served with an unlawful detainer; should someone receive\na\n3-day notice to pay rent or quit and end up going to court on unlawful detainer, the\nordinance allows an affirmative defense for why there should be no eviction during the\nmoratorium; the ability for landlords and tenants to discuss and work out a reduced rent\ncan happen without the City; the ordinance is a defense against unlawful detainer for\n60-days; at the end of the 60-day period, a notice can be received stating pay rent or\nquit; grants are available at the end of the moratorium period; some with low income will\nhave to qualify under the Centro Legal contract.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated tenants must be prepared to pay full rent at the end of 60-\ndays; questioned whether some will be able to obtain a grant for payment through\nCentro Legal.\nThe Community Development Director responded in the affirmative.\nVice Mayor Knox White moved adoption of the urgency ordinance with direction to\nclarify the six month payback.\nThe City Attorney requested clarification of the motion; stated should there be an\nextension of the 60-days, the Council will extend the moratorium; noted some landlords\nmay not bring an unlawful detainer action during the declared emergency, plus\nwhatever extension is given.\nVice Mayor Knox White stated the requirement should be as long as the tenant has paid\nthe post-moratorium rent on-time.\nThe City Attorney concurred.\nVice Mayor Knox White stated rent must begin to be paid on-time after the moratorium\nconcludes; the tenant then has six-months to pay back the up to two months or 60 days'\nworth of rent.\nThe City Attorney stated staff will need time to draft the ordinance to ensure\ncorrectness; for the declared period of an emergency, non-payment is a non-evictable\noffense; the non-eviction period will be extended by however much the Council decides.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether Council is balancing the needs of property\nowners.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated staff can return to Council with a proposal on how to deal\nwith payback and the six-month timeline; there is not an anticipation of a nine-month\nmoratorium on evictions; expressed support for a mechanism that landlords can be\nmade whole; stated there are many ways to proceed.\nSpecial Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n7\nMarch 17, 2020", "path": "CityCouncil/2020-03-17.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2020-03-17", "page": 12, "text": "Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated the ordinance is being enacted as an emergency ordinance;\nthe effective date is March 1 if approved; the item should be decided now; questioned\nwhat should be proposed.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated May 1st would allow for an unlawful detainer to be placed\nshould the defense no longer hold; expressed support for six-months and concern about\npeople lingering.\nThe Community Development Director stated that she understands there is concern for\nhow landlords will be paid after being out rent during the moratorium period of non-\neviction; stated that she hears a desire to ensure rent is recouped after the moratorium;\ntypically, a tenant can be served a notice to pay rent or quit which would accrue for the\nmonths of non-payment and is due immediately; questioned whether there is desire for\neveryone to be made whole, with more time for the tenant to catch up paying rent; once\nthe moratorium expires, total rent will be due within 3 days.\nCouncilmember Vella expressed concern about the duration of time; expressed support\nfor giving more time to ensure a lump sum is not due all at once; questioned whether\ndirection can be given to staff to figure out.\nThe City Attorney stated due to the moratorium giving 60-days, Council can direct staff\nto return in April with more information.\nCouncilmember Vella expressed support; inquired whether the commercial provision\ncan be back-dated and brought back; expressed concern about small businesses' ability\nto pay expenses.\nThe City Attorney responded in the affirmative.\nCouncilmember Oddie expressed support for the Community Development Director's\ncomments.\nCouncilmember Daysog expressed support for the Community Development Director's\ncomments; stated this is all about a tenant being in front of a judge stating reasons for\nnon-eviction; there are three tests to avoid eviction: 1) experiencing a 20% loss of\nincome or more, 2) experiencing extraordinary medical expenses, or 3) experiencing\nextraordinary childcare needs during the time of crisis; there are additional tests missing\nfrom the process; the judge also needs to question whether the tenant made efforts to\ncome to a mutually agreeable rent, which takes into account the loss of income or\nwhether a payback agreement been reached; stated that he cannot support the item\nwithout the additional test.\nVice Mayor Knox White restated his motion: approval of the ordinance as-written, with\ndirection for staff to return at the next Council meeting with language that adds a rent\nrepayment over the suggested six months, as well as commercial considerations and\nany other further considerations related to Governor Newsom's state of emergency\nSpecial Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nMarch 17, 2020\n8", "path": "CityCouncil/2020-03-17.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2020-03-17", "page": 13, "text": "orders made in the future.\nCouncilmember Vella seconded the motion, which carried by the following roll call vote:\nCouncilmembers Daysog: No; Knox White: Aye; Oddie: Aye; Vella: Aye; and Mayor\nEzzy Ashcraft: Aye. Ayes: 4. Noes: 1.\nADJOURNMENT\nThere being no further business, Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft adjourned the meeting at 8:29\np.m.\nRespectfully submitted,\nLara Weisiger\nCity Clerk\nThe agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Sunshine Ordinance.\nSpecial Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n9\nMarch 17, 2020", "path": "CityCouncil/2020-03-17.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2020-03-17", "page": 14, "text": "MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL JOINT MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL\nAND THE SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE\nCOMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION (SACIC)\nTUESDAY- -MARCH 17, 2020- -6:59 P.M.\nMayor/Chair Ezzy Ashcraft convened the meeting at 8:29 p.m.\nROLL CALL -\nPresent:\nCouncilmembers/Commissioners\nDaysog,\nKnox\nWhite, Oddie, Vella and Mayor/Chair Ezzy Ashcraft -\n5.\n[Note: Councilmembers/Commissioners Oddie and Vella were\npresent via teleconference.]\nAbsent:\nNone.\nCONSENT CALENDAR\nCouncilmember/Commissioner Oddie moved approval of the Consent Calendar.\nVice Mayor/Commissioner Knox White seconded the motion, which carried by the\nfollowing roll call vote: Councilmembers/Commissioners Daysog: Aye; Knox White: Aye;\nOddie: Aye; Vella: Aye; and Mayor/Chair Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye. Ayes: 5. [Items so\nenacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk preceding the paragraph number.]\n(*20-163 CC/20-009 SACIC) Minutes of the Special Joint City Council and SACIC\nMeeting Held on March 3, 2020. Approved.\n(*20-164 CC/20-010 SACIC) Recommendation to Accept the Third Quarter Financial\nReport for the Period Ending March 31, 2019. Accepted.\n(*20-165 CC/20-011 SACIC) Recommendation to Accept the Fourth Quarter Financial\nReport for the Period Ending June 30, 2019. Accepted.\n(*20-166 CC) Resolution No. 15637, \"Approving Parcel Map No. 11038 - A Parcel Map\nto Subdivide Six Parcels Comprising Approximately 22.86 Acres at 2800 Fifth Street\ninto Four Parcels.\" Adopted.\n(*20-012 SACIC) Recommendation to Find that Pulte Home Company, LLC is a\nQualified Developer Pursuant to the Alameda Landing Disposition and Development\nAgreement, and Consent to the Form of the Partial Assignment and Assumption\nAgreement (Disposition and Development Agreement (Alameda Landing Mixed Use\nProject) - Remainder Residential Parcel), and Authorize the City Manager, or Designee,\nto Execute the Required Documents; and\nSpecial Joint Meeting\nAlameda City Council and Successor Agency\n1\nto the Community Improvement Commission\nMarch 17, 2020", "path": "CityCouncil/2020-03-17.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2020-03-17", "page": 15, "text": "(*20-167 CC) Recommendation to Consent to the Form of the Partial Assignment and\nAssumption Agreement (Development Agreement (Alameda Landing Mixed Use\nCommercial Project) - Remainder Residential Parcel) to Pulte Homes Company LLC,\nand Authorize the City Manager, or Designee, to Execute the Required Documents.\nAccepted.\nADJOURNMENT\nThere being no further business, Mayor/Chair Ezzy Ashcraft adjourned the meeting at\n8:30 p.m.\nRespectfully submitted,\nLara Weisiger, City Clerk\nSecretary, SACIC\nThe agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Sunshine Ordinance.\nSpecial Joint Meeting\nAlameda City Council and Successor Agency\nto the Community Improvement Commission\n2\nMarch 17, 2019", "path": "CityCouncil/2020-03-17.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2020-03-17", "page": 16, "text": "MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING\nTUESDAY- - - MARCH 17, 2020-7:00 P.M.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft convened the meeting at 7:03 p.m.\nROLL CALL -\nPresent:\nCouncilmembers Daysog, Knox White, Oddie, Vella,\nand Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft - 5.\n[Note: Councilmembers Oddie and Vella were present via\nteleconference.]\nAbsent:\nNone.\nAGENDA CHANGES\n(20-168) Councilmember Vella moved approval of hearing the Charter amendment at a\nlater date.\nCouncilmember Daysog seconded the motion, which carried by the following roll call\nvote: Councilmember Daysog: Aye; Knox White: Aye; Oddie: Aye; Vella: Aye; and\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye. Ayes: 5.\n***\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft called a recess to hold the special urgency meeting at 7:06 p.m.\nand reconvened the meeting at 8:30 p.m.\n***\nPROCLAMATIONS, SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY AND ANNOUNCEMENTS\n(20-169) Proclamation Declaring March as Women in History Month 2020. Not heard.\nORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA\n(20-170) The City Clerk read the following public comment: Rosalinda Corvi, Alameda,\nstated given that everyone is supposed to be sheltered-in-place, a problem is posed for\nsignature gathering for the petitions: Initiative to Keep Safe Areas in Alameda and an\ninitiative for expansion of open space at Crab Cove for the November general election;\nin-person signature gathering is not a reasonable option; urged Council to approve the\nprint and mail option for signature gathering where people could certify that they are the\ncirculator of the initiatives and also sign the initiatives; another option in the midst of\nCoronavirus pandemic perhaps could be the use of electronic signatures.\nCONSENT CALENDAR\nCouncilmember Oddie moved approval of the Consent Calendar.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n1\nMarch 17, 2020", "path": "CityCouncil/2020-03-17.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2020-03-17", "page": 17, "text": "Vice Mayor Knox White seconded the motion, which carried by the following roll call\nvote: Councilmember Daysog: Aye; Knox White: Aye; Oddie: Aye; Vella: Aye; and\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye. Ayes: 5. [Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an\nasterisk preceding the paragraph number.]\n(*20-171) Minutes of the Special and Regular City Council Meetings Held on February\n18, 2020. Approved.\n(*20-172) Ratified bills in the amount of $3,925,387.41.\n(*20-173) Recommendation to Accept the Work of MCK Services, Inc. for Repair and\nResurfacing of Portions of Otis Drive and Pacific Avenue, No. P.W. 03-15-02. Accepted.\n(*20-174) Recommendation to Accept the Work of MCK Services, Inc. for Repair and\nResurfacing of Certain Streets, Phase 38, No. P.W. 02-19-03. Accepted.\n(*20-175) Recommendation to Approve a Policy for the City's Approach to\nCouncilmember Initiated Events. Accepted.\n(*20-176) Resolution No. 15638, \"Authorizing the City Manager to Negotiate and\nExecute a Grant Agreement Between the State of California Department of Parks and\nRecreation, Division of Boating and Waterways and the City of Alameda by and through\nthe Alameda Police Department.\" Adopted and;\n(*20-176 A) Resolution No. 15639, \"Amending the Fiscal Year 2019-20 Police Grants\nFund Estimated Revenue and Expenditures by $75,000 Each for the Surrendered and\nAbandoned Vessel Exchange Grant.\" Adopted.\n(20-177) Ordinance No. 3269, \"Amending the Alameda Municipal Code by Adding\nProvisions to Section 4-32 (Firearms and Weapons) of Article V (Firearms and\nExplosives) of Chapter IV (Offenses and Public Safety), Requiring Safe Storage of\nFirearms and Enhancing Enforcement Provisions.' Finally passed.\nUrged Council to pull the item and continue until after the COVID-19 epidemic is over;\nstated this is the wrong time to place additional burdens on the people of Alameda or on\nCity staff; people need come together and help each other: Steve Slauson, Alameda.\nCouncilmember Daysog moved final passage of the ordinance.\nCouncilmember Oddie seconded the motion, which carried by the following roll call vote:\nCouncilmember Daysog: Aye; Knox White: Aye; Oddie: Aye; Vella: Aye; and Mayor\nEzzy Ashcraft: Aye. Ayes: 5.\n(20-178) Ordinance No. 3270, \"Amending the Alameda Municipal Code by Adding\nProvisions to Section 4-36 (License Requirements for Firearms and Munitions Dealers)\nof Article V (Firearms and Explosives) of Chapter IV (Offenses and Public Safety),\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n2\nMarch 17, 2020", "path": "CityCouncil/2020-03-17.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2020-03-17", "page": 18, "text": "Requiring Firearms Dealers to Provide Video Surveillance and Enhancing Enforcement\nProvisions.' Finally passed.\nUrged Council to pull the item and continue until after the COVID-19 epidemic is over:\nSteve Slauson, Alameda.\nCouncilmember Oddie moved final passage of the ordinance.\nVice Mayor Knox White seconded the motion, which carried by the following roll call\nvote: Councilmember Daysog: Aye; Knox White: Aye; Oddie: Aye; Vella: Aye; and\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye. Ayes: 5.\nREGULAR AGENDA ITEMS\n(20-179) Mayor's State of the City Address. Not heard.\n(20-180) Public Hearing to Consider Accepting: 1) an Annual Report on the Status of\nthe General Plan and Housing Element, 2) an Annual Report on the Status of the\nTransportation Choices Plan and Associated Work Program Priorities, and 3) an Annual\nReport for the West Alameda Transportation Management Association (TMA).\nConsideration of an Annual Report is Exempt from Review Under California\nEnvironmental Quality Act (CEQA), Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061 (b)(3),\nthe General Rule that CEQA only Applies to Actions that have the Potential to Cause a\nSignificant Impact on the Environment. Not heard.\n(20-181) Adoption of Resolution Establishing Policies on Street Width, Lane Width,\nCrosswalks and Bulb-Outs to Promote Safe, Livable Streets and Environmentally\nSustainable Transportation Choices; and Recommendation to Provide Direction to Staff\non Tools for Improving Safety at Intersections. Not heard.\n(20-182) Public Hearing to Consider Introduction of Ordinance Amending Alameda\nMunicipal Code Chapter XII (Designated Parking) to Improve Procedures for\nManagement of Public Parking on City Streets and in City Lots; and Recommendation\nto Approve a Policy for the Use of License Plate Recognition Technology for the\nPurpose of Parking Enforcement. Not heard.\n(20-183) Recommendation to Accept 2020 Annual Report on the Climate Action and\nResiliency Plan (CARP). Not heard.\n(20-184) Recommendation to Provide Direction on Potential Measures Amending the\nCity Charter. Not heard.\n(20-185) Recommendation to Provide Direction on Potential Revenue Measures to\nSubmit to Voters for the November 3, 2020 Election. Not heard.\nCITY MANAGER COMMUNICATIONS\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n3\nMarch 17, 2020", "path": "CityCouncil/2020-03-17.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2020-03-17", "page": 19, "text": "(20-186) The City Manager expressed gratitude for staff and Council keeping lines of\ncommunication open while going through COVID-19 items.\nORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA\nNone.\nCOUNCIL REFERRALS\n(20-187) Consider Directing Staff to Provide Health Insurance to Part-Time Employees\nWorking Over 20 Hours per Week in Time for Fiscal Year 2020-21. (Councilmember\nOddie)\nCouncilmember Oddie made brief comments regarding the referral.\nCouncilmember Vella stated there are currently many issues occurring; whether or not\nsomeone has healthcare could mean the difference between getting tested or treated;\nexpressed support for the item.\nThe City Manager stated if Council moves forward with the item, direction should be\nprovided to staff to bring back a report with both the cost, benefits of the proposal and a\nway to implement; staff can also bring back an interim option solely for testing.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft expressed support for the proposal; stated that she would like to\nadd treatment in addition to testing; should someone test positive, treatment will be\nneeded.\nCouncilmember Vella expressed support.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether there is consensus to add direction to staff to\nbring back the costs and benefits of the proposal, implementation, and even sooner,\ncovering the cost of testing and treatment for those relevant part-time employees.\nCouncilmember Oddie expressed support for the proposal; stated that he appreciates\nthe idea of acting sooner for testing and treatment of COVID-19.\nCouncilmember Daysog stated there needs to be a distinction between permanent part-\ntime from non-permanent part-time positions; some part-time staff members work all\nyear and some work only part of the year; any report set to return to Council should\ndistinguish the staff members' status.\nThe City Manager stated there are 30 part-time employees defined as permanent part-\ntime working 20-hours per week or more; the evaluation is being prepared to return for\nCouncil consideration.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n4\nMarch 17, 2020", "path": "CityCouncil/2020-03-17.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2020-03-17", "page": 20, "text": "Vice Mayor Knox White outlined an instance involving a teacher supplementing\nhealthcare with employment at Starbucks; stated the issue is important; inquired\nwhether the item can be wrapped into other employment changes; expressed support\nfor identifying any Council or staff issues that might affect part-time or full-time staff.\nIn response to Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft's inquiry, the City Attorney responded the Vice\nMayor giving brief, general direction related to the item is acceptable.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft expressed support for the item; stated staff should not feel the\nneed to come to work while ill or not get tested due to not being able to afford\nhealthcare; inquired whether a motion is needed to approve the item.\nThe City Manager stated a motion is requested.\nCouncilmember Oddie moved approval of the item, incorporating comments from the\nCity Manager and Councilmembers related to potential implementation.\nCouncilmember Vella seconded the motion, which carried by the following roll call vote:\nCouncilmember Daysog: Aye; Knox White: Aye; Oddie: Aye; Vella: Aye; and Mayor\nEzzy Ashcraft: Aye. Ayes: 5.\n(20-188) Consider Providing Direction to Staff on Handling Late Rent Payments.\n(Councilmember Oddie) Not heard.\nCOUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS\n(20-189) Councilmember Vella stated the Lead Abatement meeting for the month has\nbeen cancelled due to COVID-19; the meetings are set to reconvene in April.\n(20-190) Councilmember Oddie expressed gratitude to all City staff in supporting the\nresidents of Alameda and to the Mayor for leading the effort.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she appreciates Councilmember Oddie's efforts in\nfollowing up with the Alameda Healthcare District.\n(20-191) Councilmember Daysog stated that he is thankful for many people remaining\npositive despite the difficulties being faced; expressed gratitude toward\nCouncilmembers for exhibiting the same positivity.\n(20-192) Vice Mayor Knox White expressed gratitude; stated the Registrar of Voters has\nupdated results and Measure A is passing.\n(20-193) Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft expressed gratitude toward staff, Councilmembers, and\nthe community.\nADJOURNMENT\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n5\nMarch 17, 2020", "path": "CityCouncil/2020-03-17.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2020-03-17", "page": 21, "text": "There being no further business, Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft adjourned the meeting at 8:52\np.m.\nRespectfully submitted,\nLara Weisiger\nCity Clerk\nThe agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Sunshine Ordinance.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n6\nMarch 17, 2020", "path": "CityCouncil/2020-03-17.pdf"}