{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2020-09-15", "page": 1, "text": "MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING\nTUESDAY--SEPTEMBER - 15, 2020- -5:30 P.M.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft convened the meeting at 5:00 p.m.\nRoll Call - Present:\nCouncilmembers Daysog, Knox White, Oddie, Vella and\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft - 5. [Note: The meeting was held via\nWebEx.]\nAbsent:\nNone.\nThe meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider:\n(20-586) Conference with Real Property Negotiators (Pursuant to Government Code\nSection 54956.8); Property: Site A at Alameda Point; Persons Negotiating: Eric J. Levitt,\nCity Manager; Debbie Potter, Community Development Director; Michelle Giles,\nRedevelopment Project Manager; and Lisa Maxwell, Assistant City Attorney;\nNegotiating Parties: City of Alameda and Alameda Point Partners: Under Negotiation:\nPrice and Terms. Continued to September 22, 2020 at 5:00 p.m.\n(20-587) Conference with Legal Counsel: Existing Litigation (Pursuant to Government\nCode Section 54956.9); Case Name: Application of Pacific Gas and Electric Company\n(U 39-E) for Approval and Recovery of Oakland Clean Energy Initiative Preferred\nPortfolio Procurement Costs; Court: Public Utilities Commission of the State of\nCalifornia; Case Number: CPUC Docket No. A.20-04-013\n(20-588) Conference with Legal Counsel: Existing Litigation (Pursuant to Government\nCode Section 54956.9); Case Name: City of Alameda V. Pacific Gas and Electric\nCompany under EL20-630\" Petition for Declaratory Order, et al. and Conditional\nComplaint of City of Alameda, California under EL20-63; Court: Federal Energy\nRegulatory Commission; Case Number: FERC Docket No. EL20-63-000\n(20-589) Conference with Legal Counsel: Workers' Compensation Claim (Pursuant to\nGovernment Code Section 54956.95); Claimant: Employee - Fire Department; Claim\nNos.: ALAZ-005283 and ALAV-004823; Agency Claimed Against: City of Alameda\n(20-590) Conference with Legal Counsel: Existing Litigation (Pursuant to Government\nCode Section 54956.9); Case Name: National Urban League, et al. V. Wilbur L. Ross,\nJe, et. al.; Court: United States District Court for the Northern District of California; Case\nNumber: 20-cv-5799\n(20-591) Conference with Legal Counsel: Existing Litigation; Requests for the City to\nparticipate as amicus in pending litigations (Pursuant to Government Code Section\n54956.9); Case Name: Common Wealth of Pennsylvania, State of California, et. al. V.\nSpecial Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nSeptember 15, 2020", "path": "CityCouncil/2020-09-15.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2020-09-15", "page": 2, "text": "Louis Dejoy, et al.; Court: United State District Court for the Easter District of\nPennsylvania; Case Number: 2:20-cv-4096\n(20-592) Conference with Labor Negotiators (Pursuant to Government Code Section\n54957.6); City Negotiators: Eric J. Levitt, City Manager; Gerry Beaudin, Assistant City\nManager; and Nancy Bronstein, Human Resources Director; Employee Organizations:\nInternational Association of Firefighters, Local 689 (IAFF); Under Negotiation: Salaries,\nEmployee Benefits and Terms of Employment.\nFollowing the Closed Session, the meeting was reconvened and the City Clerk\nannounced that regarding Site A, staff provided information, Council provided direction\nto continue the meeting to September 22nd at 5:00 p.m.; regarding Oakland Clean\nEnergy Initiative and City of Alameda V. Pacific Gas and Electric, staff provided\ninformation and Council provided direction by the following roll call vote:\nCouncilmembers Daysog: Aye; Knox White: Aye; Oddie: Aye; Vella: Aye; and Mayor\nEzzy Ashcraft: Aye; Ayes: 5; regarding Workers' Compensation Claim, staff provided\ninformation and Council approved staff's recommendations by the following roll call\nvote: Councilmembers Daysog: Aye; Knox White: Aye; Oddie: Aye; Vella: Aye; and\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye; Ayes: 5; these two worker's compensation claims were filed\nby a Firefighter who first joined the City on October 24, 2002; applicant experienced a\nneck injury on or about November 5, 2018, while participating in training; applicant also\nexperienced a neck injury on or about August 11, 2014, while on a Fire engine; the\nCouncil authorized the City Attorney to settle the pending worker's compensation claims\nin an amount not to exceed $100,000; regarding National Urban League, staff provided\ninformation and Council approved staff's recommendation by the following roll call vote:\nCouncilmembers Daysog: Aye; Knox White: Aye; Oddie: Aye; Vella: Aye; and Mayor\nEzzy Ashcraft: Aye; Ayes: 5: the City has been asked to join numerous other local\njurisdictions by authoring and/or signing on to an amicus briefs to be filed in the above\ncase to support the Plaintiff's efforts to forestall the Trump Administration's efforts to cut\nshort, by as much as half the 2020 Census operations; among other harms, the Trump\nadministration's decision would shorten the time period for the Census Bureau's non-\nresponse follow up (NRFU) efforts, which are critical to enumerate hard-to-count\ncommunities, such as racial and ethnic minorities; especially in the context of the\nongoing COVID-19 pandemic, an abbreviated NRFU period will inevitably and\ndisproportionately undercount communities of Color; the Council has authorized the City\nAttorney to author and/or sign amicus briefs in support of the plaintiffs in this case, in\nany trial or appellate court of competent jurisdiction; regarding Common Wealth of\nPennsylvania, staff provided information and Council approved staff's recommendations\nby the following roll call vote: Councilmembers Daysog: Aye; Knox White: Aye; Oddie:\nAye; Vella: Aye; and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye; Ayes: 5; the City has been asked to join\nnumerous other local jurisdictions by authoring and/or signing on to an amicus briefs to\nbe filed in the above case to support the plaintiffs' challenge against recent changes to\nU.S. Postal Service policies; more specifically, the U.S. Postmaster General has\nadopted several policies that have delayed mail delivery, including: (1) eliminating\novertime, (2) eliminating trips to postal sorting facilities to pick up mail for delivery, (3)\nremoving mail sorting machines in certain localities, and (4) deprioritizing election\nSpecial Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nSeptember 15, 2020", "path": "CityCouncil/2020-09-15.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2020-09-15", "page": 3, "text": "September 15, 2020", "path": "CityCouncil/2020-09-15.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2020-09-15", "page": 4, "text": "MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING\nTUESDAY- - SEPTEMBER 15, 2020- 7:00 P.M.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft convened the meeting at 7:25 p.m. and Councilmember Oddie led\nthe Pledge of Allegiance.\nROLL CALL -\nPresent:\nCouncilmembers Daysog, Knox White, Oddie, Vella,\nand Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft - 5. [Note: The meeting\nwas conducted via Zoom.]\nAbsent:\nNone.\nAGENDA CHANGES\nNone.\nPROCLAMATIONS, SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY AND ANNOUNCEMENTS\n(20-593) Proclamation Declaring October 4 through 10 as Public Power Week 2020.\nORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA\n(20-594) Jay Garfinkle, Alameda, discussed the Closed Session report out; expressed\nconcern for General Plan discussions proceeding; stated that he believes there has not\nbeen adequate notification and every resident should receive a letter detailing the\nprocesses; expressed support for deferring the matter until COVID-19 is under better\ncontrol.\n(20-595) James Downey, Alameda, discussed conditions of the dumping near Posey\nTube; stated the condition has grown considerably worse over time; discussed a fire\nand vehicles at the site; stated the Posey Tube is a major thoroughfare for the Island;\nthe matter is becoming a public health crisis; provided suggestions; urged Council to\ntake decisive action.\n(20-596) Kenneth Werner, League of Women Voters (LOWV), made an announcement\nregarding National Voter Registration Day; stated the LOWV has actively participated in\nthe nationwide event; there is a higher than average number of registered voters; urged\nall eligible citizens to register and vote in every election; discussed potential ways to\nregister.\nCONSENT CALENDAR\nThe City Clerk announced the Local Communities Funding Act [paragraph no. 20-605\nand the Development Impact Fees [paragraph no. 20-607 was removed from the\nConsent Calendar for discussion.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n1\nSeptember 15, 2020", "path": "CityCouncil/2020-09-15.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2020-09-15", "page": 5, "text": "Vice Mayor Knox White moved approval of the remainder 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(*20-597) Minutes of the Continued July 14, 2020 Special Meeting, the Special Meeting,\nthe Joint City Council and Successor Agency to the Community Improvement\nCommission Meeting, the Regular Meeting and the Special Meeting Held on July 21,\n2020; the Special Meeting Held on July 25, 2020 and the Special Meeting Held on July\n28, 2020. Approved.\n(*20-598) Ratified bills in the amount of $7,740,543.22\n(*20-599) Recommendation to Accept the Quarterly Sales Tax Report for the Reporting\nPeriod Ending June 30, 2020 (Funds Collected During the Period January 1 to March\n31, 2020). Accepted.\n(*20-600) Recommendation to Authorize the City Manager to Execute a Fourth\nAmendment to the Service Provider Agreement with Cultivate, LLC to Increase\nCompensation by $75,000, for a Total Aggregate Compensation Not to Exceed\n$220,500, to Continue Providing Technical Planning Support to the City of Alameda\nGeneral Plan Update through Plan Adoption. Accepted.\n(*20-601) Recommendation to Authorize the City Manager to Execute a First\nAmendment to Service Provider Agreement with Douglas Herring & Associates to\nIncrease Compensation by $109,800, for a Total Aggregate Compensation Not to\nExceed $180,000, to Complete the Environmental Impact Report for the General Plan\n2040 Update. Accepted.\n(*20-602) Recommendation to Authorize Purchase of APX 4000 Portable Radios, in an\nAmount Not to Exceed $86,659.92, from Alameda County East Bay Regional\nCommunications System Authority. Accepted.\n(*20-603) Recommendation to Authorize the City Manager to Execute a Five-Year\nAgreement with Revel Environmental Manufacturing Inc. for Storm Drainage Trash\nCapture Device Maintenance and Improvements in an Amount Not to Exceed $668,494,\nwith Contingency. Accepted.\n(*20-604) Resolution No. 15689, \"Approving Tentative Map No. 8561 for the Subdivision\nof Eleven Lots on Approximately 12.07 Acres at the North Housing Site Located at 501\nMosley Avenue (PLN20-0099). Adopted.\n(20-605) Resolution No. 15690, \"Supporting the Schools and Local Communities\nFunding Act on the November Ballot.\" Adopted.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n2\nSeptember 15, 2020", "path": "CityCouncil/2020-09-15.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2020-09-15", "page": 6, "text": "The Public Information Officer made brief comments.\nCouncilmember Daysog stated that he does not support the split role tax approach;\nthere is an argument that commercial and industrial were not meant to be part of\nProposition 13 when it passed in 1978; small mom and pop businesses are affected; the\nSchool District stands to gain from the split role approach; Proposition 13 should remain\nin-tact as originally put together; there are other approaches to deal with funding.\nVice Mayor Knox White noted that he and Councilmember Vella were set to bring the\nmatter forth as Council Referral; stated there were loopholes left in Proposition 13,\nwhich have unintentionally removed billions of dollars from schools.\nCouncilmember Vella stated Proposition 15 exempts all commercial property below $3\nmillion in value and provides a tax cut on business equipment that will benefit small\nbusinesses; there is misinformation related to harm for small businesses; outlined\nDisneyland's tax payments; stated large scale commercial properties, which have\nconsiderable wealth and equity will not be exempt from Proposition 15; expressed\nsupport for closing loopholes.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated times have changed since 1978; school districts used to\nbe top 10 in the nation and now are ranked in the bottom 10 related to funding; there\nare many issues with funding, especially due to COVID-19; $7 million would be good for\nthe City and unfunded obligations; funding will help transit authorities stay afloat; the\nmatter is overdue.\nCouncilmember Daysog stated small businesses will still be subject to taxes; many\nsmall businesses are tenants of larger properties; the matter will negatively impact small\nbusinesses; Council must be cognizant of the impacts especially in the current\nenvironment.\nCouncilmember Vella noted the tax is for commercial properties valued at $3 million or\nover; stated relatively few specific business will pay the tax; 92% of the revenue\ngenerated will come from 10% of the properties in the State.\nCouncilmember moved approval of the staff recommendation and adoption of the\nresolution.\nCouncilmember Oddie seconded the motion.\nUnder discussion, the Public Information Officer stated a large portion of the revenue is\ngenerated from a small portion of commercial properties; properties are generally\nreassessed when sold; the assessed value is less than the market value for commercial\nproperties; commercial properties are sold every 30 years on average; residential\nproperties are generally sold every six years which can cause disparities.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n3\nSeptember 15, 2020", "path": "CityCouncil/2020-09-15.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2020-09-15", "page": 7, "text": "On the call for the question, the motion 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.\n(*20-606) Resolution No. 15691, \"Authorizing the City Manager to Accept up to\n$140,000 in National Park Service Japanese American Confinement Sites Grant\nProgram Funds.\" Adopted.\n(20-607) Ordinance No. 3288, \"Amending the Alameda Municipal Code by Amending\nChapter XXVII (Development Fees) by Repealing Section 27-4 (Alameda Point\nDevelopment Impact Fees) in Its Entirety. Finally passed.\nExpressed concern about the process; stated there is a letter from an attorney\nrepresenting a company challenging the proceeding; urged input be provided in writing\nfrom the City Manager and City Attorney to determine the validity of the objection: Jay\nGarfinkle, Alameda.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated the matter is a final passage of an ordinance; noted the\nmatter was on the previous Council meeting agenda for discussion and deliberation.\nVice Mayor Knox White moved final passage of the ordinance.\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.\nREGULAR AGENDA ITEMS\n(20-608) Resolution No. 15692, \"Reappointing Thomas Saxby as a Member of the\nHistorical Advisory Board.\" Adopted;\n(20-608A) Resolution No. 15693, \"Reappointing Adam Gillitt as a Member of the Public\nArt Commission.' Adopted;\n(20-608B) Resolution No. 15694, \"Appointing Tierney Sneeringer as a Member of the\nPublic Art Commission.\" Adopted;\n(20-608C) Resolution No. 15695, \"Reappointing Gerald Serventi as a Member of the\nPublic Utilities Board.\" Adopted; and\n(20-608D) Resolution No. 15696, \"Reappointing Samantha Soules as a Member of the\nTransportation Commission.\" Adopted.\nCouncilmember Oddie moved adoption of the resolutions.\nVice Mayor Knox White seconded the motion.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n4\nSeptember 15, 2020", "path": "CityCouncil/2020-09-15.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2020-09-15", "page": 8, "text": "Under discussion, Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft made brief comments related to the quality and\nquantity of applications received for Boards and Commissions.\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.\nThe City Clerk administered the Oath of Office to Mr. Saxby, Mr. Gillitt, Ms. Sneeringer,\nand Mr. Serventi.\n(20-609) Recommendation to Approve the De-Pave Park Vision Plan.\nThe Recreation and Parks Director and Kevin Conger and Arturo Fuentes-Ortiz, CMG\nLandscape Architecture, gave a PowerPoint presentation.\nCouncilmember Daysog inquired whether the image shown with greenery is depicted as\na projection of 75 years in the future, to which the Recreation and Parks Director\nresponded in the affirmative.\nDiscussed San Francisco Bay Keeper roles and expressed support for De-Pave Park;\ndiscussed wetland loss statistics; stated concrete conversions will create habitat for bay\nfish and wildlife and a public good for residents; De-Pave Park will accommodate over\nthree feet of sea level rise; urged Council to approve the De-Pave Park Vision Plan:\nCole Burchiel, San Francisco Bay Keeper.\nDiscussed providing input on the Vision Plan; stated the vision and staff leadership is\nimpressive; this type of project shows how Alameda can embrace the water and\naccommodate sea level rise; expressed support for De-Pave Park: Ruth Abbe,\nCommunity Action for Sustainable Alameda.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated now is the perfect time to bring forth a project which\naddresses the impacts of climate change, including sea level rise.\nCouncilmember Oddie expressed support for the De-Pave Park project; stated the\ndesign is amazing; noted former Councilmember Matarrese advocated for the project;\nstated the Park has many great uses; the project will be eligible for Measure AA\nfunding; the project will bring international recognition and put Alameda on the map;\nexpressed support for the removal of Buildings 25 and 29.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether Council must provide direction in order to pursue\ngrant funding.\nThe Recreation and Parks Director responded a pre-application has already been\nsubmitted and upcoming meetings will be held with funders; noted the final grant\napplication is due in October; stated should a resolution be required, the matter will\nreturn to Council.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n5\nSeptember 15, 2020", "path": "CityCouncil/2020-09-15.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2020-09-15", "page": 9, "text": "Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft expressed gratitude toward CMG Landscape Architecture for\nproviding services pro bono.\nCouncilmember Oddie moved approval of the staff recommendation.\nCouncilmember Vella seconded the motion.\nUnder discussion, Councilmember Daysog stated Council will face a difficult decision\nabout ways to save money; potential cuts could be active or passive recreational\namenities; Council will be looking at De-Pave Park; the presentation and information\nprovided is helpful to understand how to score De-Pave Park against other active or\npassive recreational amenities.\nVice Mayor Knox White expressed concern about the process related to proper\nengagement of neighbors and community; stated not having Alameda Point\nCollaborative (APC) listed as a stakeholder is concerning; without proper and engaging\noutreach to communities, Council is continuing harms, which he wishes to be stopped;\nthe Measure AA grant is new and there is time; expressed support for the matter\nreturning following substantial, engaging community input; expressed concern about\nselling people on the idea of the park and why it is good without authentic outreach;\nstated Council has been asking for better outreach and community engagement on\nprojects; that he would like to ask some time be given to determine how to proceed\nforward and ensure the vision is flexible enough to allow engagement with the\ncommunities local to the Park prior to cementing a Vision Plan.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft requested clarification about the outreach goals and efforts.\nThe Recreation and Parks Director stated at the beginning of the process, staff had\nbeen looking at specific stakeholders around the ecological park concept; a list of\nstakeholders and groups has been developed, which includes APC as one of many;\ngrant funders will know more input needs to happen; the Vision Plan is intended to be\nhigh level; the grant includes the Master Plan process, which will heavily involve the\nentire community and local stakeholders; should the October 2020 opportunity be\nmissed, the next application window will be October 2021.\nIn response to Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft's inquiry regarding the due date, the Recreation\nand Parks Director stated October 23rd\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated the next meeting is October 6th; inquired whether the matter\ncan return by that date.\nThe Recreation and Parks Director responded that she needs clarity about what would\nreturn to Council; stated that she can meet with APC and allow a group of constituents\nto review the project.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n6\nSeptember 15, 2020", "path": "CityCouncil/2020-09-15.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2020-09-15", "page": 10, "text": "Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she does not want to delay the process; noted that she\nwould like a report back at the October 6th meeting.\nCouncilmember Vella stated the goal of the project is to create an ecological park in line\nwith advancing sea level rise and other goals listed in the Climate Action Plan; the\npresented plan is shown under the purview and constraints of the Climate Action Plan's\ngoals; an explanation allowing input on the plan of the ecological park will show what\nneeds exist from neighboring communities; expressed support for the list attached to\nthe grant application being shared to inform Council about who is being reached out to;\nstated the Park embodies thinking outside the box and is not a traditional park; the use\nof funding for the Park will maximize opportunities; there is an opportunity to perform\noutreach and discover input within the confines of an ecological park; questioned the\ntype of feedback needed for the next Council meeting; expressed concern about\ndelaying the grant application process; stated the conversation and report back could\noccur after the grant application.\nVice Mayor Knox White stated that he does not want to delay the grant application;\nexpressed support for community input about the Park vision; expressed concern about\ncementing the vision and unchangeable features; stated that he has difficulty supporting\napproval of the vision and application since a small group of people instead of the\nimmediate community made the decisions.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated there is a distinction of the park being passive versus\nactive, which has a certain specific purpose of addressing and mitigating sea level rise\nand climate change; outlined her participation in the Jean Sweeney Open Space Park\ndesign; expressed support for receiving input from the public; expressed concern about\nslanting the view of experts in the environmental protection and mitigation field; stated\neveryone benefits from the improvements proposed.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated the Vision Plan is part of the Town Center Precise Plan;\nnoted the purpose of the referral was to find funding to create a Vision Plan, which\nallows grant funding to be found for the master plan; stated the master plan process will\nbe heavily community intensive, similar to the process for Jean Sweeney Park;\nexpressed support for the commitment from the Recreation and Parks Director ensuring\na tremendous amount of community input; noted the Climate Action Resiliency Plan\n(CARP) includes sections devoted to how vulnerable populations are dealt with; stated\nsea level adaptation is one thing needed in order to help prevent massive negative\nimpacts; the sooner the plan moves forward, the sooner the master plan can evolve and\nincorporate input from the community.\nThe Recreation and Parks Director stated the intent of the Vision Plan is to be malleable\nand changed; the grant application is being processed with the community input aspect\nincluded; expressed support for a shift in how community input is processed and\nconducted; stated staff is beginning the shift starting with projects, such as renaming\nJackson Park.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n7\nSeptember 15, 2020", "path": "CityCouncil/2020-09-15.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2020-09-15", "page": 11, "text": "Vice Mayor Knox White stated that he will be abstaining from the vote since the process\ndid not involve people of color, low-income or living nearby; stated Council needs to\nquestion the general idea that when a project requires experts, there is no valuable\ninput from the people living nearby who will use the space; expressed support for\nmoving the item forward; stated that he cannot buy into the Vision Plan as proposed;\nthe plan needs a stronger backbone from the broader community; plans become\nunending drum beats that move projects forward; outlined the need for funding; stated a\ndecision is being made, which will have ramifications through the master planning\nprocesses; it is important to live up to the commitment made in June and July; the plan\nis centering people at the beginning; expressed concern about \"important\" stakeholders\nmissing 90% of the community.\nCouncilmember Vella stated it is important for Council to move forward and take steps\non wetlands projects at Alameda Point; the process is an early step to secure funding to\nperform in depth community engagement; expressed support for Council reviewing the\nlist of who is included in the outreach process; stated Council can provide direction;\nexpressed support a plan for engagement being included with the timeline; stated there\nare a number of opportunities to partner with Park neighbors; cautioned that the project\nis connected to climate goals and is a passive park, which deals with sea level rise;\nstated there is a limit to what the park can be within constraints; expressed concern for\nequity conversations delaying moving forward with a project to preserve space at\nAlameda Point; expressed support for the Vision Plan in the hopes of Council seeing\nthe grant application and receiving an update on the outreach program timeline and\ncommunity engagement process.\nCouncilmember Daysog stated that he will support the Vision Plan; noted the\nRecreation and Parks Commission and City Council will be looking at the range of\npassive and active recreational uses at Alameda Point; stated Council will have to make\ndecisions on the Master Infrastructure Plan (MIP); expressed support for the\npresentation and information provided.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft outlined the staff recommendation; proposed the motion include\ninformation related to the community outreach process and timeline return to Council;\nrequested clarification of the motion.\nCouncilmember Vella agreed to second the motion, including requesting information\nreturning to Council.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the information would return to Council at the\nOctober 6th meeting, to which Councilmember Vella responded in the affirmative.\nCouncilmember Oddie expressed concern about overburdening of staff; noted the\ndeadline for reports on the October 6th meeting is a week away.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n8\nSeptember 15, 2020", "path": "CityCouncil/2020-09-15.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2020-09-15", "page": 12, "text": "The Recreation and Parks Director stated the report will likely be included in the\nOctober 20th Council Meeting; noted the time will allow staff to incorporate information\nand feedback.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated even though a Master Plan is created, the City will not go\nout and build; Council must still find a way to prioritize and fund the project; accepted\nthe motion amendment.\nOn the call for the question, the motion carried by the following roll call vote:\nCouncilmembers Daysog: Aye; Knox White: Abstain; Oddie: Aye; Vella: Aye; and Mayor\nEzzy Ashcraft: Aye. Ayes: 4. Abstention: 1.\n(20-610) Recommendation to Approve Staff's Approach to Developing a City of\nAlameda Race and Equity Action Plan for the Organization, including Joining the\nGovernment Alliance on Race and Equity (GARE).\nThe Assistant City Manager gave a brief presentation.\nVice Mayor Knox White inquired whether staff is requesting Council to approve joining\nGARE and for the City to move forward with the Fair and Impartial Policing (FIP) implicit\nbias training or is the request for Council to approve $75,000 for the general approach\noutlined.\nThe Assistant City Manager responded the work program attached to the staff report\nassociated with GARE includes workshops; stated staff will pick from the menu of\nworkshops in a logical order to deliver content to the organization and get into policies\nand procedures; there are department-specific efforts as well; noted there is a work\nprogram, GARE program and FIP with an estimated budget of $75,000, which will return\nto Council for formal action.\nVice Mayor Knox White inquired whether the recommendation is asking Council to\napprove the specific work program, with flexibility for which workshops, and use of the\nFIP, to which the Assistant City Manager responded in the affirmative.\nCouncilmember Oddie expressed concern about the content included in e-mails\nreceived related to the FIP; stated issues have been raised about interviews with an\nonline magazine, which show there has not been a change in behavior and there are\nissues with those running the training; questioned how Council should respond to the\nconcerns.\nThe Assistant City Manager stated the implicit bias training received mixed reviews;\nthere is an organizational approach to training employees, including implicit bias\ntraining; staff is still working to deliver implicit bias training; a work plan for the\norganization is being developed and implicit bias training is an important foundational\npiece; the selected training group brings the community into the conversation; there is\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n9\nSeptember 15, 2020", "path": "CityCouncil/2020-09-15.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2020-09-15", "page": 13, "text": "an opportunity to build relationships between the Police Department and the community\nwith the FIP approach to implicit bias training.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the program has been used by any other cities in\nthe area.\nThe City Manager responded the implicit bias training has been used extensively in\nBerkeley, which has seen success and change; stated the issues have been\nexperienced in society for a long time; change will not occur overnight; favorable\nreviews have been heard from Berkeley and the program is still used; the training is not\none-time and is integrated into the organization; should success be found, the program\ncan extend outside of the Police Department.\nCouncilmember Daysog stated the goal is to put together a race and equity plan; the\nCity will draw on resources such as GARE and FIP; GARE and FIP have the\nbackground and will help staff and other stakeholders put the process of the FIP action\nplan in at a cost of $75,000; expressed concern about ensuring an evaluation\ncomponent is included within the plan and having the resources identify how to go about\nevaluating the race and equity action plan once designed and implemented; stated the\nevaluation component will be important due to the potential need to change course\nthrough the process; outlined the importance of an evaluation process being included in\nthe program; stated Council must ensure the process is performed professionally and is\nsensitive to different perspectives; in order for the program to work, Council must\nintentionally think through the evaluation process and track processes to make any\nneeded adjustments.\nStated that she is concerned about the recommendations related to Fair and Impartial\nPolicing training; declaring racism as a public health emergency did not proceed as\ninitiated and is causing confusion; subcommittees have been formed to ensure the\ncommunity can be heard, but plans are being presented without community input\nbeforehand; the company selected for bias trainings are in cities where bias training has\nbackfired; urged Council to look at how to re-route funds to ensure services are working\nfor, not against, people: Alexia Arocha, Alameda.\nDiscussed the racial equity plan; stated the Government Justice Alliance for Racial\nEquity has been a helpful resource; FIP concerns will arise to similar to the independent\ninvestigation of the Mali Watkins incident; another research based organization is the\nCenter for Policing Equity (CPE); he is unsure the extent of the issues in Alameda;\nurged Council to have an academic organization, such as CPE or other institutions,\nprovide analysis: Rasheed Shabazz, Alameda.\nExpressed concern about cutting off the community input; stated the committees formed\nto provide guidance on the topic are having their hands tied; urged Council to listen to\nthe community before implementation: Cheri Johansen, Alameda.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n10\nSeptember 15, 2020", "path": "CityCouncil/2020-09-15.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2020-09-15", "page": 14, "text": "Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the proposal hampers or precludes the public\nprocess put in place.\nThe City Manager responded the committees are working to bring an interim report\nback to Council in December; stated assembling the committees took time; one option\nwould be to proceed forward with GARE and research the District Attorney's program; it\nis not a lengthy time between now and December; a change in dynamic going forward is\nbeing created for the organization as a whole; the fair implicit bias training could wait\nuntil December and be reviewed by the committees.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft discussed a meeting with District Attorney (DA) O'Malley; stated\nthe training is similar to the Crisis Assistance Helping Out On The Streets (CAHOOTS)\nprogram; expressed support for Alameda's participation.\nCouncilmember Vella stated that she is generally supportive of the GARE program;\nexpressed concern about the implicit bias training; outlined a National Public Radio\n(NPR) article related to an implicit bias study at New York University (NYU); stated the\ntraining does not necessarily change behavior; a common response in cities looking to\nchange is implicit bias training; outlined concerns stemming from studies; stated implicit\nbias training can often displace other types of effective training; some Cities can ignore\nfactors, which are external to policing but have greater impacts in overall results; the\nsuggestion has been to find levels of intervention relative to overall office culture and for\nunderstanding reasons certain communities have more negative encounters with Police,\nsuch as poverty or housing policies that concentrate specific ethnic groups into\ndesignated areas becoming crime prone; outlined the bias which exists in the\ncommunity; stated there are additional policies to review that cause a criminalization of\nsurvival; expressed support for holding back on the FIP and allowing the community\nprocess take place; stated there is value to GARE specifically because it is more geared\nat the overall cultural approach; noted that she will need to recuse herself should\nCouncil partner with the DA's Office; outlined her experience in representing law\nenforcement; stated items like the FIP takes away from broader goals; expressed\nsupport for the matter being brought forth for Council consideration; stated the timing is\nCouncil driven; program specifics can be worked out in the community led process;\nexpressed support for input and feedback from the community led process relative to\nthe types of public meetings being held.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated that he is fine with the GARE program; the process helps\ncenter communities of Color on the solutions and bringing forward suggestions; staff\nhas brought forth suggestions for the DA's office and the FIP, which centers\ninstitutionalized law enforcement; expressed support for the committee task force\nsolutions being presented instead of Council choosing; stated the Center for Policing\nEquity looks like a supportive process; Council must take community concerns\nseriously.\nCouncilmember Daysog stated Police are especially implicated in the discussion about\nrace and equity in Alameda and across the nation; the process leading to the race and\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n11\nSeptember 15, 2020", "path": "CityCouncil/2020-09-15.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2020-09-15", "page": 15, "text": "equity action plan discussed must involve the perspective of an organization such as\nFIP; the organization does not have to be FIP; however, the perspective of the Police\nshould be included; there is something special about the possible interaction between\nPolice and Persons of Color having to do with issues of potential violence and harm that\nneeds an organization which understands policing perspectives, procedures and\npolicies; GARE may understand the broader questions regarding race, culture and\nequity; not including an organization that intentionally includes the Police perspective\nwould weaken the race and equity action plan; he does not know if GARE has the\nsubject matter expertise to be able to translate questions and answers with regard to\nrace and equity into specific policies and procedures for the Police; he disagrees with\nthe City Manager's recommendation to hold off on including FIP; holding off on FIP\nshould only occur during the search for a program similar to FIP.\nVice Mayor Knox White expressed support for the openness, transparency, and\ncommitment he witnessed in his conversation with the Interim Police Chief; stated that\nhe is not the right person to decide between FIP or implicit bias as the correct process;\nexpressed support for approving the financial aspect of the matter; stated conversations\nshould occur with the proper subcommittees and steering committees; Council should\nhear the feedback from those conversations; he does not feel comfortable approving the\nprogram; he has read studies which show implicit bias training has not been useful; the\nCity of San Francisco offers the training and has shown success; expressed support for\nensuring Council hears more; stated there is still room for conversations about how to\ncall out racist actions without accusing someone of being immoral and racist;\nconversations about racial inequity centered around policing are also occurring around\nland use and parks; there is a reason Police are the focal point due in part to the\nincident in Minneapolis and the aftermath; conversations might need to be held prior to\nimplicit bias training to ensure all are on the same page related to the reasons why the\ntraining is being held; he has not gone through GARE programs, but has worked with\nmultiple people who have; the City of San Francisco has made efforts to put many\npeople through GARE programs; this will not be a one-time cost for the City; a\ncommitment is being made; expressed support for the City joining GARE, approving the\n$75,000, and directing staff return with community and Police groups feedback; stated\nthe committees have not met and do not have work plans; there is no expectation to\nchange course due to a current lack of feedback; expressed concern about suggesting\nthere is a robust public process in the works; stated Council does not know what is\nhappening until a public process occurs; expressed support for the matter with the\ncaveat of the FIP and the public input process.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated Councilmembers received a spreadsheet with all members\nbroken down by subcommittee; Berkeley has had positive results with GARE and it is\ngood to know the results in San Francisco as well; Bay Area cities have common issues\nand similar sensibilities; expressed support for the proposed recommendations of\nmoving forward with GARE and delaying the FIP portion until reports back from the\nsubcommittees; she has not received details about the DA's program, but would like a\nfoot in the door prior to the opportunity closing; she is proud of the work being done;\nroughly 200 members of the community expressed interest in the subcommittee;\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n12\nSeptember 15, 2020", "path": "CityCouncil/2020-09-15.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2020-09-15", "page": 16, "text": "expressed support for approving the $75,000 expenditure and moving forward with staff\nrecommendations.\nCouncilmember Vella stated the spreadsheet was sent out on September 7th. the\ncommittees met on September 8th; subcommittee members are listed on the City\nwebsite; demographic and meeting information is also listed on the website; there is a\ndigital divide resulting in not everyone knowing the information online; expressed\nsupport for an update and report back during City Manager Updates in advance of\nmeetings.\nVice Mayor Knox White moved approval of the City joining GARE, moving forward in\ndeveloping a work plan and approving the $75,000 for the effort, including an effort to\nstart engaging with City Police in consultation with Police Department and community\nenforcement subcommittees.\nCouncilmember Vella seconded the motion.\nUnder discussion, Councilmember Oddie inquired whether the matter will return to\nCouncil before a program or contract is approved.\nThe City Manager responded staff will wait on the FIP until the subcommittee reports\nreturn.\nCouncilmember Oddie expressed concern about staff making a selection based on\nsubcommittee input without a second set of eyes; stated the matter is sensitive and\ndiscussions should work quickly and intelligently; expressed support for ensuring the\ncommunity input is followed.\nVice Mayor Knox White stated the motion is to allow staff the flexibility to hire the\nappropriate consultant in consultation with the committees; the motion may be amended\nto include Council approval if desired; however, the direction feels administrative; the\nmatter may also return to Council as an informational item; he anticipates the\ncommittees will inform Council should a decision move forward that is not consistent\nwith the recommendations.\nCouncilmember Oddie expressed support for amending the motion; stated that he\nwould like to review the selection prior to confirmation; questioned the outcome if staff\ndoes not select the subcommittees' recommendation or if the committee recommends\nmultiple selections.\nCouncilmember Vella stated $75,000 is not a significant amount of money; should\nmultiple suggestions be recommended, Council can review and discuss; a report back\nfrom the committee will occur in December; there is anticipation the report will include\ndetails about the $75,000 recommendation; expressed concern over delaying the matter\nby requiring Council approval; stated Council has provided the direction to have the\ndecision made in consultation with the subcommittees.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n13\nSeptember 15, 2020", "path": "CityCouncil/2020-09-15.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2020-09-15", "page": 17, "text": "Councilmember Oddie withdrew his concern.\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***\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft recessed the meeting at 9:35 p.m. and reconvened the meeting at\n9:45 p.m.\n(20-611) Introduction of Ordinance Amending the Alameda Municipal Code by Adding a\nNew Article XVIV (Third-Party Food Delivery Services) of Chapter VI (Businesses,\nOccupations and Industries) Establishing a Temporary Limit on Charges Imposed by\nThird-Party Delivery Services During the Locally Declared State of Emergency Related\nto the COVID-19 Pandemic. Introduced.\nThe Development Manager gave a brief PowerPoint presentation.\nCouncilmember Daysog inquired how pervasive the response was from potentially\naffected businesses.\nThe Development Manager responded three out of four expressed major concerns\nabout the fees.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated many people driving for Uber and Lyft are trying to make\nends meet; she does not want to disparage the companies; inquired the model of\ncompensation for drivers.\nThe Development Manager responded the model varies and can be complicated; stated\nsome use an algorithm, which includes order size, distance driven, time of day and\ndemand with a minimum amount paid; some use a bonus system which includes a\nminimum order fulfilment.\nCouncilmember Vella stated there is a weekly meeting of a restaurant subcommittee;\ndiscussed a meeting with DoorDash and small business owners; stated drivers are not\ncompensated as employees, do not have paid sick leave, worker's compensation or\nsocial security; expressed concern about prince gouging small businesses, and\nbusiness owners having 40% taken out of profits; stated large companies are taking\nmoney and opportunity from the community and are not helping the individuals\nperforming the labor of bringing food to customers; there is an interesting finding about\nwhere deliveries are being sent; it makes sense for Council to cap the fees; Council is\ntaking steps to help small businesses; requested input from the City Attorney regarding\nthe City of Santa Monica's approach of capping delivery fees and shifting funds to the\nconsumer.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n14\nSeptember 15, 2020", "path": "CityCouncil/2020-09-15.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2020-09-15", "page": 18, "text": "The City Attorney stated the City of Chicago is actively considering limiting consumer\ncharges; the City of Santa Monica has said consumer charges are an issue, but has not\ntaken final action; expressed concern about delivery apps taking in revenue from two\nsources: restaurants and customers; stated should the City adopt an ordinance that only\nlimits the charge in one place and not the other, residents could face consequences,\nsuch as increased charges; UberEats is the one example where charges have\nincreased for residents following a jurisdiction capping delivery charges; staff is\nrecommending capping charges to both restaurants and freezing in place customer\ncharges as of September 3rd.\nVice Mayor Knox White expressed support for the matter being brought for discussion;\nstated app based services are shifting revenues and income from people performing\nhard work to people that run apps; noted Proposition 22 on the upcoming ballot relates\nto paying app based staff; stated restaurant delivery will continue; the matter should not\nbe overly controversial; expressed support for the will of the majority as long as the\nrestaurants fees are capped; stated divers will suffer in the end if the ability to charge\nfees is capped; the impact of the delivery services is huge; stated the fee should be\nclear and upfront.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired whether tips go to the driver.\nThe Development Manager responded in the affirmative; stated most companies have\nstopped the practice of yielding tip garnishments from; staff has included a clause to\nensure the practice is not allowed.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated that he would prefer Option 3: freeze the customer fees;\nbusinesses will likely cost shift; restaurants have expressed concern; the demand for\nservice is present and the need will be met; Uber and Lyft threatened to pull out of\nCalifornia, which fell through; this is a temporary emergency ordinance.\nCouncilmember Daysog stated Alameda has a rare opportunity to set a freeze for both\nrestaurants and customers; expressed support for the fee freeze for restaurants and\ncustomers.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft questioned the reason other progressive cities in the area do not\ncap fees; stated the cap seems like the right thing to do; some cities have bicycle\ndelivery of food; creative alternatives could arise if Uber and/or Lyft pull out of the\nCalifornia market; urged residents to personally pick up to-go food orders as often as\npossible; those who cannot pick up orders need services such as these and the value\nshould not be minimized; bold steps must be taken.\nCouncilmember Oddie moved approval of approving the emergency ordinance, setting\nthe limit at 15% for fees charged at restaurants and freezing customer fees at the\ncurrent rate per the recommendation of the City Attorney.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n15\nSeptember 15, 2020", "path": "CityCouncil/2020-09-15.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2020-09-15", "page": 19, "text": "Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired the current rate, to which the Development Manager\nresponded the rate varies.\nThe City Attorney stated the matter placed before Council is a regular ordinance and the\nrates are frozen as of the date of the staff report publication to prevent gaining.\nCouncilmember Vella expressed concern about capping the fee for the consumer;\nstated many companies have hidden fees elsewhere; there are differences in ordering\ndirectly through a restaurant website versus DoorDash; inquired how the capping works\nand whether there are ways around the fee cap; questioned whether the matter may be\nbifurcated; expressed concern about price shifting; inquired whether Council can\nregulate such matters.\nThe City Attorney responded the ordinance contains a prohibition on charging a higher\nprice than listed at the retail establishment; stated proposed language would include: \"it\nshall be unlawful for a third party food delivery service to increase any fee, cost or\ncommission or establish any new fee, cost or commission with respect to customers\nbeyond those established on September 3rd 2020;\" should Council desire additional\nflexibility, a provision could be added to allow the City Manager to implement additional\nadministrative regulations to monitor gaining; staff is recommending broad prohibitions.\nCouncilmember Vella stated local companies are trying to coordinate with restaurants;\ninquired whether there is a way to distinguish local from third party companies.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated the goal is to protect both small businesses and residents\nimpacted by the pandemic; it is possible smaller community-run delivery companies\nwould not charge high percentages.\nCouncilmember Vella expressed concern about price gouging; stated that she wants to\nensure the person providing service gets paid; inquired whether costs may be modified\ndue to mode-shifting under the ordinance.\nThe City Attorney responded one additional exception included in the ordinance guards\nagainst unconstitutional takings; any company, whether in or out of town, has the ability\nto demonstrate proof that the limitations established constitute a unconstitutional taking;\nstated the provision ensures that companies have the ability for a fair return; any\ncompany able to demonstrate proof is able to seek an exemption from the City.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated another way to incentivize is for allowing a higher fee for\ncompanies that practice mode-shifting in Alameda.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft outlined the staff recommendation; expressed support for moving\nforward with the matter and modifying the ordinance at a later time should the need\narise.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n16\nSeptember 15, 2020", "path": "CityCouncil/2020-09-15.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2020-09-15", "page": 20, "text": "Councilmember Vella stated a 15% fee can be large for smaller orders; there is an\ninherent value in finding local delivery services; expressed concern about throwing out\nlocal services in the attempt at taking on bigger companies, which are price gouging;\nexpressed support for keeping track of problematic effects on local delivery companies;\nstated the service is necessary and should not be cut-off.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated a stronger ordinance can be created based on actual\ndocumentation.\nCouncilmember Oddie expressed support for a second look at the ordinance in the\nfuture; outlined the difference between a large company like Lyft and a local startup\ndelivery service.\nCouncilmember Vella seconded the motion, with a friendly amendment to include\ndirection for staff to track and monitor and return to Council.\nCouncilmember Oddie accepted the friendly amendment.\nUnder discussion, Councilmember Vella stated third party delivery companies are not\nhurting for money and have spent $180 million in trying to not pay workers; the\nordinance is a strong statement.\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(20-612) Introduction of Ordinance Amending the Alameda Municipal Code by\nAmending Various Provisions of Article VIII (Sunshine Ordinance) of Chapter Il\n(Administration) Concerning Special Meetings, including the Setting and Noticing of\nSuch and Other Meetings. Introduced.\nThe Assistant City Attorney gave a brief presentation.\nCouncilmember Vella moved approval of the staff recommendation, including\nintroduction of the ordinance.\nVice Mayor Knox White 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.\nCITY MANAGER COMMUNICATIONS\n(20-613) The City Manager made an announcement regarding meetings of the steering\ncommittees, subcommittees and task force; stated a report is due in December; final\nrecommendations will be placed on the agenda after the first of the year in time for\nbudget discussions; staff will provide a more thorough report and update in October\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n17\nSeptember 15, 2020", "path": "CityCouncil/2020-09-15.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2020-09-15", "page": 21, "text": "2020; announced staff has been working on the Posey Tube encampments; an\nencroachment permit was issued by Caltrans for garbage bins to be placed at the\nlocation; staff is looking into the issue of vehicles being parked at the site and providing\nservices to individuals; announced the Chamber of Commerce Economic Forecast will\nbe on September 25th at 11:30 a.m. via Zoom.\nORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA\nNone.\nCOUNCIL REFERRALS\n(20-614) Resolution No. 15697, \"Amending Section 6 of Resolution No. 15382, which\nAdopted Rules of Order Governing City Council Meetings.\" Adopted. (Mayor Ezzy\nAshcraft and Councilmember Oddie)\nCouncilmember Oddie made brief comments.\nVice Mayor Knox White stated this is a common sense approach; expressed support for\nthe referral and for encouraging concise presentations.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated encouraging concise presentations is not disparaging, it is\nencouraging a positive of brevity.\nCouncilmember Oddie moved approval of the Council Referral [including adoption of the\nresolution].\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.\nCOUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS\n(20-615) Vice Mayor Knox White announced that many members of Fire Department\nstaff have been off on mutual aid fighting wildfires; stated wildfires are an unfortunate\nannual occurrence; expressed gratitude for staff.\n(20-616) Councilmember Oddie announced Jean Nader gave a Stopwaste presentation.\n(20-617) Stopwaste June 2020 Topic Brief: Sustainable Landscapes. (Councilmember\nOddie)\nCouncilmember Oddie made brief comments.\n(20-618) Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft made an announcement regarding the Plan Bay Area\nreport from the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) Regional Planning\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n18\nSeptember 15, 2020", "path": "CityCouncil/2020-09-15.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2020-09-15", "page": 22, "text": "Committee; discussed housing needs and the Regional Housing Needs Allocation\n(RHNA) numbers.\n(20-619) Consideration of Mayor's Nominations for Appointments to the Civil Service\nBoard, Commission on Persons with Disabilities, Golf Commission, Housing Authority\nBoard of Commissioners (HABOC), Planning Board, and Social Service Human\nRelations Board.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft made brief comments related to the selection process and\nnominees; nominated Ben Finkenbinder for the Golf Commission; Bashir Hadid,\nElizabeth Kuwada, Sandra Kay, Kenji Tamaoki and Vadim Sidelnikov for the HABOC;\nand Ron Curtis and Xiomara Cisneros for the Planning Board.\nADJOURNMENT\nThere being no further business, Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft adjourned the meeting at 10:58\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\n19\nSeptember 15, 2020", "path": "CityCouncil/2020-09-15.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2020-09-15", "page": 23, "text": "MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING\nTUESDAY- - SEPTEMBER 15, 2020- 7:01 P.M.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft convened the meeting at 10:50 p.m.\nROLL CALL -\nPresent:\nCouncilmembers Daysog, Knox White, Oddie, Vella,\nand Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft - 5. [Note: The meeting\nwas conducted via Zoom]\nAbsent:\nNone.\nAGENDA ITEM\n(20-620) Recommendation to Authorize the City Manager to Negotiate and Execute a\n$100,000 Contract with Block by Block to Help in the Economic Recovery Efforts from\nCOVID-19 in Alameda's Business Improvement Areas; and Negotiate and Execute an\nAmendment to the Agreement with Creative Build Inc. to add $103,970 to Provide\nExtended Hours of Operation for the Day Center and Related Support Services.\nThe Community Development Analyst gave a brief presentation.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated outreach is important; people need to go out to unhoused\nindividuals and establish rapport, trust, and relationships; noted that she has submitted\nan inquiry to Supervisor Wilma Chan related about setting aside number of rooms for\nAlameda unsheltered individuals; stated having hotels available is vital; sites must be\nsupervised; there is room for everybody; expressed support for services.\nCouncilmember Daysog stated that he does not support safe parking; the limited money\navailable should be focused on putting people into shelters; outreach programs should\nalso be funded; expressed support for the matter.\nCouncilmember Vella moved approval of the staff recommendation.\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.\nADJOURNMENT\nThere being no further business, Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft adjourned the meeting at 10:58\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\nSeptember 15, 2020", "path": "CityCouncil/2020-09-15.pdf"}