{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2020-04-07", "page": 1, "text": "MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING\nTUESDAY- - - APRIL 7, 2020- 5:30 P.M.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft convened the meeting at 5:30 p.m.\nRoll Call - Present:\nCouncilmembers Daysog, Knox White, Oddie, Vella and\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft - 5.\n[Note:\nCouncilmembers Knox White, Oddie and Vella were present\nvia teleconference.]\nAbsent:\nNone.\nThe meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider:\n(20-195) 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.\n(20-196) 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.\n(20-197) Conference with Legal Counsel - Existing Litigation (Pursuant to Government\nCode \u00a7 54956.9); Case Name: City of Evanston, et al., V. Barr; Court: United States\nCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit; Case Number: 19-3358\n(20-198) Conference with Legal Counsel - Existing Litigation (Pursuant to Government\nCode \u00a7 54956.9); Case Name: City of Alameda V. Union Pacific; Court: Superior Court\nof the State of California; Case Numbers: RG18920939\nFollowing the Closed Session, the meeting was reconvened and the City Clerk\nannounced that regarding Union Pacific, staff provided information and Council provided\ndirection by the following roll call vote: Councilmember Daysog: Aye; Knox White: Aye;\nOddie: Aye; Vella: Aye; and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye; Ayes: 5; regarding Evanston,\nstaff provided information to Council and no vote was taken; regarding Northwest\nTerritories, staff provided information and Council provided direction by the following roll\ncall vote: Councilmember Daysog: Aye; Knox White: Aye; Oddie: Aye; Vella: Aye; and\nSpecial Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nMarch 17, 2020", "path": "CityCouncil/2020-04-07.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2020-04-07", "page": 2, "text": "Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye; Ayes: 5; regarding Building 14, staff provided information\nand Council provided direction by the following roll call vote: Councilmember Daysog:\nAbsent; Knox White: Aye; Oddie: Aye; Vella: Aye; and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye; Ayes:\n4, Absent: 1.\nAdjournment\nThere being no further business, Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft adjourned the meeting at 6:30\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/2020-04-07.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2020-04-07", "page": 3, "text": "MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING\nTUESDAY - - APRIL 7, 2020- 7:00 P.M.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft convened the meeting at 7:03 p.m. and had everyone make noise\nto recognize medical personnel, first responders and other essential service workers.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft led the Pledge of Allegiance.\nROLL CALL -\nPresent:\nCouncilmembers Daysog, Knox White, Oddie, Vella,\nand Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft - 5.\n[Note: Councilmembers Knox White, Oddie and Vella were present\nvia teleconference.]\nAbsent:\nNone.\nAGENDA CHANGES\nNone.\nPROCLAMATIONS, SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY AND ANNOUNCEMENTS\n(20-199) Proclamation Declaring March 30th through April 3, 2020 as National Boys and\nGirls Club Week. [Informational only]\n(20-200) Proclamation Declaring April 22, 2020 as Earth Day Alameda 2020 and April\n24, 2020 as Arbor Day Alameda 2020. [Informational only]\nORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA\nNone.\nCONSENT CALENDAR\nCouncilmember Vella moved approval of the Consent Calendar.\nCouncilmember Oddie 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 asterisk\npreceding the paragraph number.]\n(*20-201) Minutes of the Special and Regular City Council Meetings Held on March 3,\n2020. Approved.\n(*20-202) Ratified bills in the amount of $5,304,053.64.\n(*20-203) Recommendation to Authorize the City Manager to Execute a Four-Year\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n1\nApril 7, 2020", "path": "CityCouncil/2020-04-07.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2020-04-07", "page": 4, "text": "Agreement for Online Applicant Tracking, Recruitment, and Onboarding Services with\nGovernmentjobs.com Inc. (NEOGOV) in an Amount Not to Exceed $116,400. Accepted.\n(*20-204) Recommendation to Accept the Work of Garland/DBS, Inc. for City Hall\nExterior Walls Waterproofing Restoration Project, No. P.W. 07-19-38. Accepted.\n(*20-205) Recommendation to Authorize the City Manager to Execute an Agreement\nwith Innovative Construction Solutions, in an Amount Not to Exceed $407,184, for\nAlameda South Shore Lagoons 3 and 5 Dredging Project, No. P.W. 09-14-49.\nAccepted.\n(*20-206) Resolution No. 15640, \"Declaring the City's Intention to Revise the Sewer\nService Charge and Establish Procedures for Accepting Protests Pursuant to Article\nXIID, Section 6(a) of the California Constitution Regarding Property-Related Fees and\nCharges.' Adopted; and\n(*20-206A) Recommendation to Set a Public Hearing on June 16, 2020 to Consider\nAdoption of New Sewer Service Charges. Adopted.\nREGULAR AGENDA ITEMS\n(20-207) Urgency Ordinance No. 3271, \"Suspend During the Local Emergency due to\nthe COVID-19 Pandemic Certain Provisions of the City's Sunshine Ordinance to the\nExtent Inconsistent with, or Impose Requirements Beyond Those Explicitly Waived or\nWaivable by, Executive Orders of the Governor.\" Adopted.\nThe City Attorney gave a brief presentation.\nVice Mayor Knox White moved adoption of the urgency ordinance.\nCouncilmember Oddie seconded the motion.\nUnder discussion, Councilmember Daysog inquired whether the changes are\nspecifically about meeting together due to close proximity; and whether the 12-day\nnoticing will still be in-effect.\nThe City Attorney responded in the affirmative; stated the restrictions are related to\nmeeting proximity; the current 12 and 7 day noticing requirements stand; various\nprovisions within the Sunshine Ordinance which require human interactions are being\nconsidered and suspended.\nOn the call for the question, the motion carried by the following roll call vote:\nCouncilmembers Daysog: Aye; Knox White: Aye; Oddie: Aye; Vella: Aye; and Mayor\nEzzy Ashcraft: Aye. Ayes: 5.\n(20-208) Urgency Ordinance No. 3272, \"(A) Extending the Declaration of the Existence\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n2\nApril 7, 2020", "path": "CityCouncil/2020-04-07.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2020-04-07", "page": 5, "text": "of a Local Emergency to Respond to the COVID-19 Pandemic for the Duration of the\nState of California's Emergency Declaration; (B) Authorizing the City Manager to Forego\nthe Competitive Bid Process, Subject to Ratification by the City Council, Consistent with\nCity Charter Section 3-15.2, for the Duration of the Local Emergency; and Approving\nCity Manager Spending Authority of Up to $2 Million Dollars to Address the Local\nEmergency.' Adopted.\nThe Assistant City Manager gave a brief presentation.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she would like to see the language that would apply to\nCharter Section 3-15.2 to seek Council ratification post-spending of each expenditure\nbeyond $75,000 as soon as practical; the City Manager will need to make fast decisions\nat times and will not always be able to seek Council approval; noted that she would feel\nmore comfortable if the Charter Section could be cited in the ordinance itself.\nCouncilmember Daysog inquired the thoughts given to streamlining the competitive bid\nprocess; questioned which parts of the competitive bid process are problematic in terms\nof getting needed items.\nThe City Manager responded typical bidding procedures can be anywhere from 15 to 30\ndays in an emergency situation; stated that he is unsure if the normal bidding procedure\ncould be accommodated; staff has been evaluating the purchasing procedures; bidding\nwould not be a problem in a normal situation; the item is related to emergency\nsituations; an item over $75,000 might need to be purchased in a short time frame; the\n$2 million funding is available; however, allocation and budget authorization is not\navailable to be able to spend the funds; there is no current anticipation of spending $2\nmillion; expressed concern about not having spending authority readily available in the\nevent of emergency needs; stated the emergency is not like a natural disaster; noted\nthat he does not anticipate spending any of the $2 million funding based on savings in\nareas that do have authorization.\nCouncilmember Daysog inquired whether there is a way to streamline the bid process\nso that there is not a 30-day delay; stated should a good or service be needed, a\nprovider will need to be identified and some level of procurement will be required.\nThe City Manager responded the concept can be defined more narrowly, such as\nwaiving purchasing policy as bid timelines and restricting to quotes from various\nvendors; stated the changes should not pose an issue.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated that he does not want to speculate on the events which\ncould happen; Council owes residents the ability for City Hall to respond quickly to\nprotect residents should things go haywire.\nCouncilmember Vella concurred with Councilmember Oddie's comments; stated there is\na way for Council to check back on the accounting of the funds; expressed concern\nabout being in a position of inability to respond to crisis.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n3\nApril 7, 2020", "path": "CityCouncil/2020-04-07.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2020-04-07", "page": 6, "text": "Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft concurred with Councilmembers Oddie and Vella; stated that she\nwould like the ordinance to reference to the Charter Section.\nCouncilmember Vella moved adoption of the urgency ordinance, adding the Charter\nlanguage reference.\nCouncilmember Daysog seconded the motion, which carried by the following roll call\nvote: Councilmembers Daysog: Aye; Knox White: Aye; Oddie: Aye; Vella: Aye; and\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye. Ayes: 5.\n(20-209) Urgency Ordinance No. 3273, \"Imposing within the City of Alameda a\nTemporary Moratorium on (A) Residential and Commercial Evictions due to the COVID-\n19 Pandemic and (B) Landlords Shutting off Utilities in Residential and Commercial\nRental Units Except for Emergency Situations, and Repealing Ordinance No. 3268.\nAdopted.\nThe City Attorney gave a brief presentation.\nIn response to Councilmember Oddie's inquiry, the Community Development Director\nstated the ordinance and regulations urge the tenant to provide communication, but it is\nnot mandatory to take advantage of rent deferment.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated that he has been alerted via social media that some\ntenants have been locked out of laundry facilities; inquired whether there is a plan to\neducate people about the emergency ordinance; noted some tenants are receiving\nletters related to rent being due and payment is needed.\nThe Community Development Director responded laundry rooms are essential services\nand must remain open; however, the landlord has the ability to reduce the hours for\ncleaning and other purposes or to restrict the number of people allowed in the laundry\nroom to enforce social distancing; stated outreach will be similar to the first moratorium\nordinance; an additional press release and distribution of an e-mail blast with\ninformation to the rent program list of over 3,000 landlords and tenants; the information\nwill be available on the rent program website; the rent program link will be available on\nthe City's website; rent program staff is preparing to field questions and follow-up.\nIn response to Councilmember Oddie's inquiry, the Community Development Director\nstated the regulations provide that the landlord cannot target, collect late fees or\nprocessing fees if paying by credit card.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft expressed gratitude toward the City Attorney's office for\naddressing a senior citizen's concern related to laundry room cleanliness.\nCouncilmember Daysog stated it is reasonable to ask tenants to pay what they can and\nto protect those who make an effort; the emergency ordinance should not protect those\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n4\nApril 7, 2020", "path": "CityCouncil/2020-04-07.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2020-04-07", "page": 7, "text": "who can cover their rent but refuse to pay; the ordinance, as drafted, addresses his\nconcern under Section 2 Provision 5; outlined the provision; expressed support for the\nemergency ordinance.\nCouncilmember Vella inquired whether Centro Legal de la Raza is aware of the\nemergency ordinance and whether they aware each time it is changed.\nThe Community Development Director responded in the affirmative; stated once Council\ntakes action, staff will forward the new language and accompanying regulations to\nCentro Legal.\nCouncilmember Vella inquired whether any evictions or tenant issues have been\nreported to Centro Legal aside from the laundry room issue.\nThe Community Development Director responded that she has not heard any reports\nfrom Centro Legal; stated most staff are fielding calls and trying to provide resources.\nThe City Attorney stated the City Attorney office has received a number of calls with\nmany questions from landlords and tenants about rights and responsibilities; staff has\nworked to field calls to the best of abilities; in every circumstance, landlords and tenants\nhave been able to reach a reasonable place through mediation; no direct action has\nbeen needed and no cases have been referred to Centro Legal.\nCouncilmember Vella inquired whether the new information could be included in an\nAlameda Municipal Power (AMP) bill in order to help spread knowledge; expressed\nconcern about only sending the information to a rent registry and not including\ncommercial tenants.\nThe City Manager responded that he has a request in with the AMP General Manager\nto have information in upcoming utility bills, but he has not received a response back;\nstated the request is possible in some form.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the action would be a request or a directive.\nThe City Manager responded the action is currently a request based on printing timing.\nThe Community Development Director stated a lead time on printing is needed; the City\ncan work with AMP; stated staff will work with the Chamber of Commerce and other\nbusiness associations in order to push out the information.\nThe City Attorney stated that his office has prepared an information item for public\ncirculation and has provided the information to the Alameda Sun; staff will continue to\nprovide the information on a regular basis.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she would like to have the information shared with both\nthe Alameda Sun and Alameda Journal.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n5\nApril 7, 2020", "path": "CityCouncil/2020-04-07.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2020-04-07", "page": 8, "text": "Councilmember Vella stated laundry areas are essential functions; inquired whether\nsomething can be posted in facilities to inform people of any changes.\nThe Community Development Director responded in the affirmative.\nCouncilmember Vella expressed concern about vulnerable populations, which may not\nhave access to, or be comfortable with, using different modes of technology in order to\nacquire information, stated small businesses may not be associated with a business\ngroups and might not receive information.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated the City is under a shelter in place directive and any\ndirection provided by Council to staff, including posting notices, should attempt to\nprotect staff going out physically; notices could also be placed in Food Bank orders;\nstated staff can work to discover the best way to notify the most tenants and landlords\npossible.\nCouncilmember Vella expressed support for the lack of late fees and processing fees;\ninquired whether language has been reviewed prohibiting increases for residential and\ncommercial tenants at this time.\nThe Community Development Director responded the ordinance does not include a\nfreeze on rent increases; stated Council could provide direction to staff to return with\nsomething for consideration.\nCouncilmember Vella expressed support for a freeze on rent increases; stated there are\ncurrently millions of people applying for unemployment; that she would like staff to look\ninto whether or not Council may place a freeze on increases at this time.\nThe Community Development Director stated a rent freeze could be imposed for\nresidential tenants, but not for commercial tenants.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired the reason a rent freeze would only apply to residential\ntenants.\nThe City Attorney responded if the City were not under a declared emergency, State law\nis clear that local agencies have no right to regulate rents with respect to commercial\nentities; stated the City's ability to regulate rent is exclusively residential; the Governor\nissued an Executive Order which carves out a narrow exception with respect to\nevictions; staff has reviewed the Order, which does not extend far enough to controlling\nrent; staff's recommendation is for residential tenants only.\nCouncilmember Vella inquired whether after one year, the rent due is no longer\nevictable.\nThe City Attorney responded staff does not believe the rent to be non-evictable; stated\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n6\nApril 7, 2020", "path": "CityCouncil/2020-04-07.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2020-04-07", "page": 9, "text": "local agencies have not been given authority to regulate the matter; case law needs to\nbe evaluated to clarify.\nThe Community Development Director stated the ordinance, as drafted, will provide up\nto six months to repay any rent deferred during the local emergency; deferred rent is a\nseparate issue.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the six month time frame begins when the\nemergency is over, to which the Community Development Director responded in the\naffirmative.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the City Manager will declare the emergency\nover.\nThe City Attorney responded either the Council or Governor will declare the emergency\nover; stated the declaration of emergency is adopted by the Council; therefore, the\nCouncil has the authority.\nCouncilmember Daysog inquired whether the current rent regime would place a\nmaximum on any rent increases should the City not develop a rent freeze.\nThe City Attorney responded in the affirmative; stated Council has set the increase to be\n70 to 75% of Consumer Price Index (CPI); rents cannot be increased beyond said\nindex; the program administrator will announce the index in the fall; the previous year\npercentage was either 2.7 or 2.8%.\nThe Community Development Director stated the 70% of CPI maximum allowable\nadjustment of 2.8% would go into place without a rent freeze.\nCouncilmember Daysog inquired whether a rent increase issued effective July 1stcould\nhave a maximum increase of 2.8% as a result from the September 2019 CPI, to which\nthe City Attorney responded in the affirmative.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired how low rent increases could go should the CPI drop\ndrastically given the economic conditions.\nThe City Attorney responded the increase could be zero; stated the result could never\nbe negative.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the rent freeze would remain for the six month\nduration of non-payment.\nCouncilmember Vella stated that she would like feedback from staff on two options: 1)\nduring the moratorium, and 2) in concurrence with the payback period; expressed\nconcern about facing a rent increase and the burden of paying back rent.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n7\nApril 7, 2020", "path": "CityCouncil/2020-04-07.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2020-04-07", "page": 10, "text": "Councilmember Oddie expressed support for a rent freeze; stated there are other topics\nto consider from various agencies; one month of rent will be easier to pay back over a\nsix month period versus three months; rent cannot be collected that is over one year\nold; Berkeley has provisions related to rent increases based on original rent; that he\nwould like to hear comments from the City Manager and City Attorney about judicial\ncourts in California; many landlords can post items and notices.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether Councilmember Oddie is questioning rent\ncollection past one year old or asking staff to look into the validity of rent being ineligible\npast one year.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated the eligibility should be known; that he understands the\ncourt will not hear eviction cases.\nThe Community Development Director stated a publication has been issued related to\ncourt cases and evictions.\nThe City Attorney stated the Judicial Council's rule making provides for a 90-day period;\nthe courts are not issuing summons for unlawful detainers; unlawful detainers may be\nall encompassing; the City Attorney's office has not had a chance to take a close look at\nthe document; noted there will not be evictions for 90-days; the ordinance provides\nmore protection than the Judicial Council rules; stated local protections are sufficient.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft expressed concern about the alternative stating: direct staff to\nprepare a revised ordinance based on City Council direction; such direction could\ninclude: expanding the moratorium to cover evictions due to no fault of the tenant, such\nas a removal from the rental market, unless necessary for the health and safety of\ntenants, neighbors or landlords; establishing the moratorium for a specific number of\ndays, etc.; stated it will be difficult to be out and about looking for another place to rent\nlet alone packing and moving during the shelter in place; inquired whether Council\ncannot allow said types of evictions during the emergency declaration; inquired whether\nCouncil would have to legally allow the evictions and if Council could require proof that\nthe owner move-in is due to COVID-19; expressed concern about people being evicted\nduring the crisis.\nThe City Attorney responded the ordinance is drafted to target protections for COVID-19\nimpacts; stated should Council want to expand the ordinance to preclude all evictions,\nstaff will recommend not precluding evictions based on the Ellis Act due to State law\nrequirements; under the Governor's Order, local jurisdictions cannot bypass Ellis Act\nprovisions; many provisions based on owner move-in become illusory due to an owner\nexercising their right to an Ellis Act provision; tenants could not be evicted for quite\nsome time based on no court summons being issued for 90 days; tenants are protected\nunder both State and local law at this time.\nThe following comments were read into the record by the City Clerk:\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n8\nApril 7, 2020", "path": "CityCouncil/2020-04-07.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2020-04-07", "page": 11, "text": "Stated many of her neighbors cannot meet the high rent within the Bay Area; people\nfear becoming infected and becoming homeless; the span of the moratorium will not be\nlong enough to help; urged Council to expand the moratorium to extend beyond the\nshelter in place, to require landlords to give tenants a period of no less than one year to\nbring back-rent current and to institute a freeze on rent increases for at least one year:\nJacqueline Barden, Alameda.\nStated her family is experiencing a more than 50% loss of income due to COVID-19;\nunemployment claims have not been addressed; the urgency rent ordinance better\nprotects renters; the ordinance does not ensure renters affected by COVID-19 have\nenough time to recoup loss of income and employment; urged Council to modify the\nordinance with a freeze on rent increases for 2020 applying only to tenants experiencing\na loss of 20% or more of their gross monthly income from COVID-19 disruptions,\nchanging Section 3 of the urgency ordinance to extend the substantive defense against\nnon-payment evictions from 180 days to 365 days after the conclusion of the COVID-19\npandemic, and extending the rent deferment policy to continue for 30 days after the City\nrescinds its emergency declaration: Staci Lewis, Alameda.\nExpressed concerns about his landlords actions to evict tenants during the COVID-19\npandemic; noted that he lost his job in March; stated the ordinance does not fully protect\nrenters through COVID-19 related financial hardships; urged Council to consider a\nfreeze on rent increases for 2020 applying only to tenants experiencing a loss of 20% or\nmore of their gross monthly income from COVID-19 disruptions, changing Section 3 of\nthe urgency ordinance to extend the substantive defense against non-payment evictions\nfrom 180 days to 365 days after the conclusion of the COVID-19 pandemic, and\nextending the rent deferment policy to continue for 30 days after the City rescinds its\nemergency declaration: Stephen Bissinger.\nVice Mayor Knox White stated that he would like to discuss allowing eviction protection\nto go past 30 days after the state of emergency; people are having a hard time paying\nrent; expressed concern about Council being unable to provide much protection to\nthose having a difficult time paying mortgages in relation to the rent freeze; stated\nresidents have two new recent parcel tax items; going beyond 180 days would be a long\ntime; Council cannot assume that all property owners can bear the lack of payment for\nmonths at a time.\nThe read an additional comment:\nExpressed support for passing the moratorium on evictions ordinance including\ncommercial and residential tenants; stated businesses will be able to maintain a roof\nover their head; the moratorium will help many who are struggling: Eric Gantos,\nAlameda.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated hopefully the speakers can take advantage of the new\nsystem; noted that Council needs to discuss and plan what will happen when things get\nback to normal; stated one month of rent is easier to absorb versus six months;\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n9\nApril 7, 2020", "path": "CityCouncil/2020-04-07.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2020-04-07", "page": 12, "text": "expressed support for a two year period and for the rent freeze; stated there are\nprograms in place for people with mortgages; expressed support for a temporary freeze;\nstated there needs to be a way to make landlords whole again based on partial\npayments; the shelter in place could go on for an unknown amount of time; Council\nmust be flexible and open to adjusting to whatever happens; this will likely not be the\nlast emergency ordinance; expressed support for more eviction protections, including\ncommercial tenants and finding ways to offer support to small businesses; stated the\nchallenge is going to be how people get back on their feet; the next round of ordinances\nshould include ways to help small businesses.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated anything done has to be fair in balancing all sides; that she\nis mindful of many landlords working with tenants; a lot has been imposed on property\nowners; no one should suffer; people will not be thrown out; repayment time periods can\nstart out conservatively; proactive work from the State and County will create success at\nflattening the curve of COVID-19; more will be known before the next meeting; a year to\nrepay rent is too long; expressed support for starting conservatively and extending if\nneeded.\nCouncilmember Vella stated that there is an incredible amount of stress being placed on\nthe community; people are now depending on the Food Bank in Alameda which has\nseen a tremendous increase; millions of people are applying for unemployment;\nexpressed concern for those that are behind in paying, not only rent, but also utilities\nand other items; stated the stress of repayment is difficult; stated six months is a long\ntime to pay items back, but the time is not long considering that people are unemployed\nwith no way of earning an income for at least 3 months; stated there are a lot of things\nmost families cannot prepare for and many could not prepare for this; expressed\nsupport for a longer payback period of 12 months; stated allowing longer payback\nperiods will put more pressure on the federal and State government to come down\nharder on the banks and force a negotiation of longer payback terms; noted Governor\nNewsom has been able to negotiate a 90-day forgiveness period with banks; stated the\nfederal government needs to do more; everyone must work together to prevent another\nhousing and mortgage crisis; it is reasonable to allow a rent increase freeze through the\nend of 2020; expressed support for the inclusion of commercial tenant protection.\nCouncilmember Vella moved adoption of the urgency ordinance, with a 12-month\nrepayment period.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she would like more information; that she would like\nstaff to have the ability to hear from property owners in order to avoid operating in a\nvacuum; expressed support for Councilmember Vella's comments; stated that she has\ndifficulty understanding the pressure being placed on State and federal government by\nthis action; noted that she would like to ensure people are aware of the available\nassistance from federal, State and local governments; stated that she would like an\nunderstanding of the implications for all landlords; she would like staff to have a better\nopportunity to conduct outreach.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n10\nApril 7, 2020", "path": "CityCouncil/2020-04-07.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2020-04-07", "page": 13, "text": "Councilmember Vella inquired whether Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft would be amenable to\nadopting the urgency as drafted with the 6-month repayment period and direction to\nstaff to conduct more outreach and look at potential impacts of a longer repayment\nperiod.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft responded in the affirmative; stated that she would also like to see\nlanguage in the ordinance about a rent freeze for residential tenants.\nCouncilmember Vella inquired whether it is possible for Council to find a way to support\nproperty owners and add priorities to lobbyists for mortgage relief for landlords.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft responded that she is in support of the idea; inquired whether the\nCouncil may take such action.\nThe City Manager and City Attorney responded in the affirmative.\nCouncilmember Vella moved adoption of the urgency ordinance, with direction for staff\nto return with rent freeze language for residential tenants, to conduct outreach relative\nto the payback period, and to look at impacts and language for an extended payback\nperiod.\nCouncilmember Oddie seconded the motion, with a friendly amendment to evaluate\ntransition timing.\nUnder discussion, Vice Mayor Knox White stated that his understanding from the City\nAttorney would be to allow adding the 30-day language at the current time rather than\ndelaying another two weeks for discussion.\nThe City Attorney stated some of the Council changes could be enacted at this meeting\nand some changes will have to wait until later; that he would like to review the list of\nactions that can be taken at this meeting and which need to be performed at a later\ndate.\nVice Mayor Knox White stated that he would like to see how the City is balancing the\nrent freeze range; expressed support for the motion.\nCouncilmember Daysog stated the City is going to have to work with State and federal\nlegislators and lobbyists sooner rather than later; outlined allowable tax expense\nexamples for unpaid rent; stated smaller landlords would like some provisions allowed\nfor unpaid rent expenses on tax returns.\nThe City Attorney reviewed the list of Council direction and possible timelines; stated\ndirection has been given to look at a rent freeze for a short period; staff believes the rent\nfreeze item can be brought back at the next Council meeting as another emergency\nordinance; direction has been given to staff to look at whether or not the City can\nexpand the substantive defense to be 30-days after the conclusion of the pandemic;\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n11\nApril 7, 2020", "path": "CityCouncil/2020-04-07.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2020-04-07", "page": 14, "text": "direction can be given at this meeting and will be incorporated into the current\nemergency ordinance as a clear, simple, additional change; direction has been provided\nto staff to look at whether or not a longer repayment period beyond 180-days after the\nconclusion of the pandemic is appropriate; staff will need approximately two months to\nconduct outreach to stakeholders; which can be done given the existing grace period of\n180-days after the conclusion of the pandemic; direction has been provided for lobbying\nat this meeting and staff will do so as appropriate.\nOn the call for the question, the motion carried by the following roll call vote:\nCouncilmembers Daysog: Aye; Knox White: Aye; Oddie: Aye; Vella: Aye; and Mayor\nEzzy Ashcraft: Aye. Ayes: 5.\n(20-210) Public Hearing to Consider Entitlements and a Development Agreement for the\nDevelopment of the 9.4 Acre Property Located at 2229 to 2235 Clement Avenue with\n182 Residential Units and Publicly Accessible Waterfront Open Space;\n(20-210 A) Resolution No. 15641, \"Approving Tentative Map Tract 8060 PLN 20-0118,\nDensity Bonus Application PLN 20-0119, Development Plan PLN 20-0120 and Open\nSpace Design Review PLN 20-0121 for Development of the 9.48 Acre Property Located\nat 2229 to 2235 Clement Avenue;\" Adopted; and\n(20-210 B) Introduction of Ordinance Approving a Development Agreement By and\nBetween the City of Alameda and Boatworks, LLC Governing the Boatworks Project for\nReal Property Located at 2229 to 2235 Clement Avenue. Introduced.\nThe Planning, Building and Transportation Director, City Attorney and Assistant City\nAttorney gave a brief presentation.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired whether changes made to the first reading can be\nplaced into the second reading for final passage.\nThe City Attorney responded in the affirmative; stated any Council changes at the\nmeeting will be considered dais changes and can be incorporated for adoption; when an\nitem is brought back for second reading, the only change that can be made would be\nclerical changes, nothing substantive.\nCouncilmember Daysog stated the Planning Board had concerns related to the\nconcession of affordable units requested by the project proponent; outlined the Density\nBonus ordinance; noted that he did not see a proforma or financial report in the record\nas required.\nThe City Attorney stated State law has changed and become more restrictive; when the\nCity's local Density Bonus ordinance was written, the onus fell on the developer; State\nlaw has recently changed; Government Code Sections 65915e1 provides that the City\nnow has to bear proof or denial of a Density Bonus request; the change results in the\nCity not being able to bear the burden to disprove the request.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n12\nApril 7, 2020", "path": "CityCouncil/2020-04-07.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2020-04-07", "page": 15, "text": "The Planning, Building and Transportation Director stated State law has changed; the\nCity now has the burden to provide evidence that there is no validity to the proponent's\ncontention of project viability; the information would be a high lift for staff to produce and\npresent to Council and would also present a high risk of challenge; noted the proponent\nis only allowed one concession.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she sits on a Statewide policy committee with\nCouncilmember Vella; she has discussed housing production within the State as well as\nhow to increase housing; the current crisis brings to light the lack of adequate housing;\ncities are scrambling to find hotel rooms, trailers, motels, etc. so those living in\nencampments are less likely to spread COVID-19 she understands where this change\nin State law is coming from.\nCouncilmember Daysog inquired whether the Planning Board expressed interest in\nconducting a study.\nThe Planning, Building and Transportation Director responded in the negative; stated all\nPlanning Board members expressed concern about the aspect of State law and what\nthe law means for future projects in Alameda; affordable units in Alameda are required\nto be distributed and of comparable size; Planning Board members expressed concern\nabout State law overriding the City in good planning; the new law will make it difficult to\nimpose requirements on future Density Bonus projects; future developers may use the\nsame strategy; there is no quick fix of State law.\nCouncilmember Daysog stated the project is seeking a waiver to Alameda Municipal\nCode Section 30-4.2.D; the Code prohibits lot sizes less than 2,000 square feet;\ninquired whether the prohibition is also reflected in the City Charter.\nThe Planning, Building and Transportation Director responded in the affirmative; stated\nboth waivers deal with the Municipal Code and City Charter.\nCouncilmember Daysog inquired City Council is able to waive a City Charter provision;\nstated it is a hard sell for him.\nThe City Attorney responded generally, the Council could not waive Charter provisions\nunless provided for by State law; stated State law allows an unlimited number of\nwaivers under Density Bonus law to the extent that it precludes the project; in addition\nto one concession, State law also authorizes these types of waivers to the extent that\nthey preclude the project and there is not a numerical limit; the City has a right, under\nState law, to attempt to demonstrate there are specific adverse impacts to public health\nand safety, the environment, or that the project would harm historical resources; Council\nwould have to make very strong findings in order to deny such a waiver; staff is not\naware of any case where a court has upheld a city denying a waiver on a similar basis\nof the prohibition of a multi-family residential housing; there is significant risk to the City;\nplanning staff has recommended that there is no factual basis to make such findings;\nlegal staff does not recommend Council deny the waiver.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n13\nApril 7, 2020", "path": "CityCouncil/2020-04-07.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2020-04-07", "page": 16, "text": "The Planning, Building and Transportation Director stated the way State law is written, a\ndeveloper may request, and the City can approve, a waiver of any development\nstandard that precludes the additional units whether adopted by ordinance, resolution or\ninitiative; State law is specific.\nCouncilmember Daysog stated the waiver requested from the developer goes around\nthe third part of Measure A; Charter cities have some leeway that General Law cities do\nnot with regard to initiatives; inquired the protections given by Charter cities with\nreference to initiatives.\nThe City Attorney responded Charter cities have the Home Rule Doctrine: Charter cities\nhave the right to regulate municipal affairs, notwithstanding State law to the contrary;\nState law is clear on the issue of housing; the loss of affordable housing and the\nproduction of affordable housing is a Statewide concern; courts have upheld the\nfindings many times; staff believes the legal fight would be difficult; should Council direct\nstaff to take legal action, staff would comply; however, it is not the recommendation;\nCharter cities do not have home rule authority.\nStated that he is available to address questions or comments from Council; that he is\nlooking forward to moving the project forward: Robert McGillis, Boatworks.\nExpressed support for moving the project forward: urged Council not to take action on a\nportion of the density bonus waiver: Shona Armstrong, Boatworks.\nThe City Attorney stated Ms. Armstrong is requesting Council to delay action on the\nwaiver on universal design, which is consistent with the Planning, Building and\nTransportation Director's request; the action is premature at this time; the Planning,\nBuilding and Transportation Director will be working with the project applicant to go to\nthe Disability Commission first; the waiver may return to the Council at a later date.\nExpressed gratitude for meeting under unprecedented conditions; noted the Planning\nBoard has recommended approval of the project; stated that she is available to help:\nNicoley Collins, Boatworks\nVice Mayor Knox White expressed support for the project; stated staff has a chance to\nwork out details with Boatworks; the item will come back for a second reading.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated that he agrees with comments made by the Planning,\nBuilding and Transportation Director; noted the City Manager and the Planning, Building\nand Transportation Director have been instrumental in reaching this point; stated the\nitem is being discussed at a strange time in history; expressed support for the item.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she agrees with Vice Mayor Knox White and\nCouncilmembers Oddie and Vella; only items of crucial importance are being\nconsidered; providing more housing is of crucial importance; noted that she served on\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n14\nApril 7, 2020", "path": "CityCouncil/2020-04-07.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2020-04-07", "page": 17, "text": "ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA\nNone.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n15\nApril 7, 2020", "path": "CityCouncil/2020-04-07.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2020-04-07", "page": 18, "text": "COUNCIL REFERRALS\nNone.\nCOUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS\n(20-212) Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft expressed her appreciation for medical personnel, first\nresponders, essential service providers, retail clerks and drivers, sanitation workers,\nand transit workers; expressed gratitude toward members of the public who are\nfollowing proper protocol; noted it is advisable in smaller, closed areas to wear a face\ncovering or mask; many people are practicing social distancing and following the shelter\nin place order; stated everyone is in this together; the Governor has communicated\nfrequently about the status and timing of items; public health officers are working\ntogether throughout the County; urged all to continue social distancing and follow the\nshelter in place order; expressed gratitude for City staff.\n(20-213) Councilmember Oddie expressed gratitude for Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft's\nleadership and City staff.\n(20-213A) Stopwaste March 2020 Topic Brief: Fruit and Veggie Storage Guide.\n(Councilmember Oddie) [Informational only]\nCouncilmember Oddie made brief comments.\n(20-214) Vice Mayor Knox White expressed gratitude toward City staff and the Mayor of\nSan Francisco.\n(20-215) Councilmember Daysog stated the following days and weeks are going to be\nvery trying; urged people to do even more to stay safe.\nADJOURNMENT\nThere being no further business, Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft adjourned the meeting at 9:28\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\n16\nApril 7, 2020", "path": "CityCouncil/2020-04-07.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2020-04-07", "page": 19, "text": "MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL\nTUESDAY--APRIL 7, 2020-7:0 P.M.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft convened the meeting at 9:29 p.m.\nROLL CALL -\nPresent:\nCouncilmember Daysog, Knox White, Oddie, Vella\nand Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft - 5.\n[Note: Councilmembers Knox White, Oddie and Vella were present\nvia teleconference.]\nAbsent:\nNone.\nAGENDA ITEMS\n(20-216) Recommendation to Approve Recommendations on Continuation of City\nOperations and Compensation for Employees, Implementation of the Families First\nCoronavirus Response Act (FFCRA) and to Increase Vacation Accrual Caps and Other\nEmployees Actions Related to the City Response to COVID-19.\nThe Human Resources Director gave a brief presentation.\nCouncilmember Daysog inquired whether the item covers part-time staff.\nThe Human Resources Director responded many departments continue to have work\nfor part-time staff; stated staff is not recommending the continuation of pay for part-time\nemployees past the COVID-19 bank; there are many part-time employees that do not\nhave work; staff recommends working with part-time employees, providing the available\nhours, but they can also apply for unemployment; some part-time employees continue\nto work in a very specialized manner and continue work.\nCouncilmember Oddie moved approval of the staff recommendation.\nVice Mayor Knox White seconded the motion.\nUnder discussion, Councilmember Vella stated that she is ready to support the item.\nOn the call for the question, the motion carried by the following roll call vote:\nCouncilmembers Daysog: Aye; Knox White: Aye; Oddie: Aye; Vella: Aye; and Mayor\nEzzy Ashcraft: Aye. Ayes: 5.\nCOUNCIL REFERRALS\n(20-217) Consider Directing Staff to Identify Funding for Four Federal Emergency\nManagement Agency (FEMA) Trailers and Develop an Overnight Safe Parking Site for\nHomeless.\nSpecial Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n1\nApril 7, 2020", "path": "CityCouncil/2020-04-07.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2020-04-07", "page": 20, "text": "County guidelines for safe parking; stated City staff has been great and has looked at\nguidelines from other cities safe parking guidelines; the COVID crisis makes these items\nurgent; the Governor has directed cities to find places to house the unsheltered\nbecause they are at high risk.\nCouncilmember Vella expressed stated this is the right thing to do; expressed support\nfor the item.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated the trailers come to the City for free; the trailers are new\nand will provide a resource during the COVID crisis; and the City can use the trailers\neven after the COVID crisis.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated homelessness has been a known issue for a long time;\nexpressed support for making solutions permanent.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated the first steps are the hardest; once policies and guidelines\nare in place lessons are learned.\nCouncilmember Daysog requested clarification about the safe parking areas.\nThe City Manager responded the area near the Fire training site; stated the area is\nfenced in and not far from the Encinal Boat Launch.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated the location is near Alameda Point and the Encinal Boat\nRamp.\nCouncilmember Daysog inquired the process for safe parking; questioned whether the\noperation will be on a first come first served basis.\nSpecial Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nApril 7, 2020\n2", "path": "CityCouncil/2020-04-07.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2020-04-07", "page": 21, "text": "Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft responded the safe spaces will be registered; stated a\ncombination of working with Building Futures and Operation Dignity will be used with\ncertain criteria to be followed; no Recreational Vehicles (RV's) will be allowed; noted\nfacilities for homeless have changed since COVID-19 and have created a separate\nhealth and safety crisis; the safe parking process will be regulated.\nVice Mayor Knox White stated the trailer direction is to come back with funding ideas at\nsome point as potentially part of the budget discussion and to continue to work on safe\nparking in the discussions.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether Vice Mayor Knox White is requesting safe\nparking be part of the budget discussion.\nVice Mayor Knox White responded that he is questioning the direction being provided to\nstaff.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated direction is to develop funding for the four trailers; the\ntrailers are free, but they do come with a need for some staff and security oversight; the\novernight safe parking will require working with Operation Dignity and Building Futures.\nThe City Manager stated the safe parking areas will have security as well.\nVice Mayor Knox White inquired whether the expenses are Homeless Emergency Aid\nProgram (HEAP) funded.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft responded some is HEAP and Home Acquisition Program (HAP)\nfunded.\nThe City Manager stated the safe parking is part of HEAP funding.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated Oakland Mayor Schaaf announced Alameda County will\nreceive $3 million related to the FEMA trailers; noted staff will be looking into said\nfunding opportunity.\nThe City Manager stated the funding has been indicated as not available for FEMA\ntrailers; noted the $3 million funding is primarily related to the hotel project.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated funding will be pursued; noted that she has received\nmessages related to funding for the FEMA trailers.\nVice Mayor Knox White moved approval of Council supporting and encouraging staff to\ncome back with a funding plan for the FEMA trailers and continue to support moving the\nparking forward with a program to be developed.\nCouncilmember Oddie seconded the motion.\nSpecial Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n3\nApril 7, 2020", "path": "CityCouncil/2020-04-07.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2020-04-07", "page": 22, "text": "Under discussion, Councilmember Daysog stated that he is not in support of the safe\nparking aspect.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired whether the motion could be bifurcated.\nVice Mayor Knox White expressed support for bifurcating the motion.\nOn the call for the question regarding the FEMA trailer funding, the motion carried by\nthe following roll call vote: Councilmembers Daysog: Aye; Knox White: Aye; Oddie: Aye;\nVella: Aye; and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye. Ayes: 5.\nVice Mayor Knox White moved approval of continuing to work on the safe parking.\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.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired the conditions for Councilmember Daysog to convert his\nvote.\nCouncilmember Daysog responded he would need more information and can discuss\nthe issue with staff.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated questions should be directed at the City Manager.\nADJOURNMENT\nThere being no further business, Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft adjourned the meeting at 9:49\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\nApril 7, 2020\n4", "path": "CityCouncil/2020-04-07.pdf"}