{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2021-04-20", "page": 1, "text": "MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING\nTUESDAY- -APRIL 20, 2021 - -5:00 P.M.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft convened the meeting at 5:06 p.m.\nRoll Call - Present:\nCouncilmembers Daysog, Herrera Spencer, Knox White,\nVella and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft - 5. [Note: The meeting was\nheld via Zoom.]\nAbsent:\nNone.\nPublic Comment read into record:\nZac Bowling, Alameda, expressed his opposition to selling the Alameda Theatre to a\nprivate entity; stated the City has invested tax payer money into refurbishing the theatre;\nurged the matter be brought to the public prior to Council consideration of sale.\nSavanna Cheer, Alameda, urged Council not spend additional budget dollars on\npolicing, including salaries and benefits; stated the Unbundling Subcommittee provided\nrecommendations for Police spending; urged Council to table the negotiations until the\ncommunity has been consulted; stated there needs to be a clear definition about how\nthe Police engages with the public; urged Council to define how the Police engages with\nthe public before defining terms of employment.\nErin Fraser, Alameda, suggested Council adopt approaches to negotiations with the\nAlameda Fire Chiefs Association (AFCA), Alameda Police Officers Association (APOA)\nand the Alameda Police Managers Association (APMA); outlined five approaches\nrelated to short terms, solving category one crimes, no piggyback provisions, demotion\nabilities, and Council recusals based on receiving funding.\nGrover Wehman-Brown, Alameda, urged Council to remember the commitments voted\non not to increase Alameda Police Department (APD) staffing levels as terms are\nnegotiated; stated the recent revelations that APD staff used facial recognition software\nafter Council direction not to, the use of force on Mr. Watkins, and now the death of\nsomeone while in Police custody are examples of how the members of the organization\nare not keeping basic agreed upon commitments.\nThe meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider:\n(21-241) Conference with Legal Counsel - Existing Litigation (Pursuant to Government\nCode Section 54956.9); Case Names: Application of Pacific Gas and Electric Company\n(U39-E) for Approval and Recovery of Oakland Clean Energy Initiative Preferred\nPortfolio Procurement Costs; Court: Public Utilities Commission of the State of\nCalifornia (CPUC); Case Number: CPUC Docket No. A.20-04-013; City of Alameda,\nCalifornia V. Pacific Gas and Electric Company under EL20-63.-\"Petition for Declaratory\nOrder, et al. and Conditional Complaint of City of Alameda, California under EL20-63;\"\nSpecial Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nApril 20, 2021\n1", "path": "CityCouncil/2021-04-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2021-04-20", "page": 2, "text": "Court: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC); Case Number: FERC Docket\nNo. EL20-63-000.\n(21-242) Conference with Real Property Negotiators (Pursuant to Government Code\nSection 54956.8); Property: Alameda Theatre, Located at 2317 Central Avenue,\nAlameda, CA; City Negotiators: Eric Levitt, City Manager; Lisa Maxwell, Interim\nCommunity Development Director; and Nanette Mocanu, Assistant Community\nDevelopment Director; Negotiating Parties: City of Alameda and Entertainment\nAssociates, L.P.; Under Negotiation: Price and Terms.\n(21-243) Conference with Labor Negotiators (Government Code Section 54957.6); City\nNegotiators: Eric Levitt, City Manager; Gerry Beaudin, Assistant City Manager; and\nNancy Bronstein, Human Resources Director; Employee Organizations: Alameda Fire\nChiefs Association (AFCA), Alameda Police Officers Association (APOA) and Alameda\nPolice Managers Association (APMA); Under Negotiation: Salaries, Employee Benefits\nand Terms of Employment.\nFollowing the Closed Session, the meeting was reconvened and the City Clerk\nannounced that regarding Existing Litigation, staff provided information and Council\nprovided direction by the following roll call vote: Councilmembers Daysog: Aye; Herrera\nSpencer: Aye; Knox White: Aye; Vella: Aye; and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye; Ayes: 5;\nregarding Real Property, staff provided information and Council provided direction by\nthe following roll call vote: Councilmembers Daysog: Aye; Herrera Spencer: Aye; Knox\nWhite: Aye; Vella: No; and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft: No; Ayes: 3. Noes: 2; regarding Labor\nNegotiators, staff provided information and Council provided direction with no vote\ntaken.\nAdjournment\nThere being no further business, Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft adjourned the meeting at 6:36\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 20, 2021\n2", "path": "CityCouncil/2021-04-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2021-04-20", "page": 3, "text": "MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL JOINT MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND\nSUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE\nCOMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION (SACIC)\nTUESDAY--APRIL 20, 2021 - -6:59 P.M.\nMayor/Chair\nEzzy\nAshcraft\nconvened\nthe\nmeeting\nat\n7:06\np.m.\nCouncilmember/Commissioner Daysog led the Pledge of Allegiance.\nROLL CALL -\nPresent:\nCouncilmembers/Commissioners\nDaysog,\nKnox\nWhite, Spencer, Vella and Mayor/Chair Ezzy Ashcraft\n- 5. [Note: The meeting was held via Zoom.]\nAbsent:\nNone.\nCONSENT CALENDAR\nExpressed appreciation for timely completion of the audit; discussed outside audit\nissues, which could be recurring; stated having more staff to help with the audit process\ncould resolve some of the material weakness items; urged Council help further staff the\nFinance Department: Kevin Kearney, City Auditor.\nCouncilmember/Commissioner Herrera Spencer inquired whether the Auditor and\nTreasurer make prior arrangements with staff in order to speak on matters of the\nagenda; questioned what the policy is for elected speakers.\nThe City Clerk responded the audit was placed on the Consent Calendar; stated there\nare no presentations for Consent items; anyone wishing to speak on a matter is done as\npublic Comment.\nCouncilmember/Commissioner Herrera Spencer stated other elected officials have\npreviously been allowed significant time to present; requested clarification about the\npolicy when another elected official speaks on an item of financial significance;\nexpressed support for pulling an item to allow further comments to be made; questioned\nwhether a motion is needed to allow further speaking time; stated that she would like to\navoid cutting off elected speakers in the future.\nThe City Clerk stated the newly revised Rules of Order for the Consent Calendar only\nallow members of the public to address the Council once on the entire Consent\nCalendar; stated Consent Calendar items are considered routine, there are no\npresentations, and only the Council may discuss the matter if a Councilmember pulls an\nitem,; if there be an agenda item, such as a State Assemblymember giving a\npresentation, the Assemblymember would be allowed the same ten minute time limit as\nall presentations; when Consent Calendar items are pulled, there is no additional public\ndiscussion; any of the Rules can be suspended by a vote of four Councilmembers.\nSpecial Joint Meeting\nAlameda City Council and Successor Agency\n1\nto the Community Improvement Commission\nApril 20, 2021", "path": "CityCouncil/2021-04-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2021-04-20", "page": 4, "text": "Councilmember/Commissioner Herrera Spencer stated that she does not think it is\nappropriate to cut-off elected officials; questioned whether it is appropriate for her to\nmake a motion to allow the Auditor to complete his comments.\nThe City Clerk responded in order to suspend any Rule, a motion and a vote of four\nCouncilmembers is needed.\nCouncilmember/Commissioner Herrera Spencer moved approval of allowing the City\nAuditor an additional two minutes of speaking time to complete his comments.\nCouncilmember/Commissioner Knox White seconded the motion, which failed by the\nfollowing roll call vote: Councilmembers/Commissioners Daysog: Aye; Herrera Spencer:\nAye; Knox White: Aye; Vella: No; and Mayor/Chair Ezzy Ashcraft: No. Ayes: 3. Noes: 2.\nCouncilmember/Commissioner Daysog stated that he appreciates the comments\nprovided by the City Auditor; the City Auditor is a Charter position and is elected; the\nposition is meant to provide independent review of financial documents.\nCouncilmember/Commissioner Knox White expressed support for the City Auditor;\nstated that he would have liked to provide more speaking time.\nVice Mayor/Commissioner Vella proposed the next audit return with a presentation from\nthe City Auditor versus under public comment; expressed support for the work\nperformed by staff on the audit.\nVice Mayor/Commissioner Vella moved approval of accepting the audit report.\nCouncilmember/Commissioner Daysog seconded the motion.\nUnder discussion, Councilmember/Commissioner Herrera Spencer stated that she is\ndisappointed in Council for not allowing an elected official to speak on the matter; the\naudit is within the City Auditors purview; it is sad that he was not shown professional\ncourtesy; she will vote no on the matter due to not hearing a report from the Auditor; it is\nunfortunate that the matter unfolded as it did; it is important for the Auditor to speak on\nan item under his purview.\nCouncilmember/Commissioner Daysog outlined Section 4-2 of the City Charter; stated\nthe responsibility is listed in the City Charter.\nThe City Manager stated staff can place the matter on the Regular Agenda in the future\nand ensure the City Auditor is part of the presentation with the Finance Director.\nVice Mayor/Commissioner Vella inquired whether there is an issue with Council\napproving the matter since a Charter issue raised.\nSpecial Joint Meeting\nAlameda City Council and Successor Agency\nto the Community Improvement Commission\n2\nJanuary 5, 2021", "path": "CityCouncil/2021-04-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2021-04-20", "page": 5, "text": "The City Attorney responded in the negative; stated the City Manager has worked with\nthe City Auditor in providing for the audit.\nThe City Manager noted the City Auditor has reviewed the outside audit.\nThe City Attorney stated given the review and approval of the audit, Council may vote\non the matter.\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer stated that she respectfully disagrees; it is appropriate\nto allow an elected official to speak on matters put forth as duties in the City Charter; the\nCity Manager is not an elected official and it is not within the City Manager's\nresponsibility to speak on behalf of the City Auditor.\nCouncilmember/Commissioner Knox White made a substitute motion: moved approval\nof the Consent Calendar.\nVice Mayor/Commissioner Vella seconded the motion, which carried by the following roll\ncall vote: Councilmembers/Commissioners Daysog: No; Herrera Spencer: No; Knox\nWhite: Aye; Vella: Aye; and Mayor/Chair Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye. Ayes: 3. Noes: 2. [Items\nso enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk preceding the paragraph number.]\n(*21-244 CC/21-08 SACIC) Minutes of the Special Joint City Council and Successor\nAgency to the Community Improvement Commission (SACIC) Meeting Held on March\n16, 2021. Approved.\n(*21-245 CC/21 - 09 SACIC) Recommendation to Accept the Investment Report for the\nQuarter Ending December 31, 2020. Accepted.\n(*21-246 CC/21-10 SACIC) Recommendation to Accept the Fiscal Year 2019-20\nAudited Financial Statements and Compliance Reports. Accepted.\nADJOURNMENT\nThere being no further business, Mayor/Chair Ezzy Ashcraft adjourned the meeting at\n7:24 p.m.\nRespectfully submitted,\nLara Weisiger, City Clerk\nSecretary, SACIC\nThe agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Sunshine Ordinance.\nSpecial Joint Meeting\nAlameda City Council and Successor Agency\n3\nto the Community Improvement Commission\nApril 20, 2021", "path": "CityCouncil/2021-04-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2021-04-20", "page": 6, "text": "MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING\nTUESDAY--APRIL 20, 2021--7:00 - P.M.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft convened the meeting at 7:24 p.m.\nROLL CALL -\nPresent:\nCouncilmembers Daysog, Herrera Spencer, Knox White,\nVella, and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft - 5. [Note: The meeting\nwas conducted via Zoom]\nAbsent:\nNone.\nAGENDA CHANGES\n(21-247) Councilmember Daysog moved approval of combining the COVID-19 Emergency\n[paragraph no. 21-267 matter with the Council Referral.\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer seconded the motion.\nUnder discussion, Councilmember Knox White noted Consent Calendar and Council Referral\nmatters have different discussion rules; inquired whether the Council Referral will be treated as\na Consent Calendar item.\nThe City Attorney stated if Councilmember Daysog wishes to combine the Council Referral with\na Consent Calendar item, the Consent Calendar rules will apply to the entire item.\nOn the call for the question, the motion carried by the following roll call vote: Councilmembers\nDaysog: Aye; Herrera Spencer: Ayes; Knox White: Aye; Vella: Aye; and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft:\nAye. Ayes: 5.\nPROCLAMATIONS, SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY AND ANNOUNCEMENTS\n(21-248) Proclamation Declaring April 22nd as Earth Day and April 24th as Arbor Day Alameda\n2021.\n(21-249) Proclamation Declaring April as Parkinson's Awareness Month 2021.\nORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA\nThe City Clerk announced there are 180 Zoom participants.\n(21-250) Erin Fraser, Alameda, discussed a quote by Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft; stated many have\nproposed the City lead on racial justice; urged Council action; outlined Mayor responsibilities in\nthe City Charter; discussed the killing of a 27-year old man.\n(21-251) Alexia Arocha, Alameda, discussed the killing of Mario Gonzalez; urged an\nindependent investigation be conducted; stated the details and comments from the report are\nconfusing; Alameda is not unique to the pervasive problem in the Country; Officers should not\nbe handling mental health calls; urged the release of body camera footage and implementation\nof mental health first responders program.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n1\nApril 20, 2021", "path": "CityCouncil/2021-04-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2021-04-20", "page": 7, "text": "(21-252) Laura Cutrona, Alameda, discussed the killing of Mario Gonzalez; stated thoughts and\nprayers are more harmful when not followed with action; questioned the nature of the call that\ninitiated the fatal interaction, how Mr. Gonzalez was deemed as the potential suspect of a theft\nand was there use of force; stated that she will pose the questions to Alameda Police\nDepartment (APD); urged Council to release the body camera footage immediately, initiate an\nimpartial investigation and implement two recommendations from the Police Reform and Racial\nEquity Committee by June 30, 2021: mental health first responders and a paid Police Oversight\nCommittee.\n(21-253) Michael Tal, East Bay Democratic Socialists of America, stated the tone of the meeting\nhas been embarrassing; discussed the killing of Mario Gonzalez and the guilty verdict for Derek\nChauvin; stated militarized policing is a disease and is affecting the entire Country; Council must\ninvest in people and social services and the funding must come from the APD budget; urged\nimplementation of the mental health first responders program and release of the body camera\nfootage.\n(21-254) Debra Mendoza, Alameda, discussed the results of the Derek Chauvin and George\nFloyd case; expressed concern about the press release issued by APD regarding the death of\nMario Gonzalez; stated Alameda needs more information, transparency and immediate\ncommunity oversight; urged the body camera footage be released; stated body cameras do not\nprevent State sanctioned violence; the City needs mental health first responders by July 1,\n2021; urged Council take immediate action and make changes.\n(21-255) James Bergquist, Alameda, expressed concern about the direction the City is headed\nrelated to racial justice; stated it is not lost on people that the conviction of Derek Chauvin\ncoincides with issues Alameda is currently facing; the time is pivotal for the City and Country;\ndiscussed APD's armored vehicle sale, an armed white man threatening the public, and the\ndeath of Mario Gonzalez; stated transparency is crucial; urged release of the body camera\nfootage.\n(21-256) Janani Ramachandran, discussed killings of 2021 and Mario Gonzalez; stated that she\nis demanding justice and transparency; the conviction of Derek Chauvin means nothing when\nthere has been more than 1,000 people killed by Police since George Floyd's death; urged the\nimmediate release of body camera footage, initiation of an independent investigation,\ndevelopment of a non-police program to respond to mental health calls and ensure Officers\ninvolved are on leave with disciplinary measures.\n(21-257) Jenice Anderson, discussed the killing of Mario Gonzalez; stated that she takes issue\nwith APD's repeated use of the words \"scuffle\" and \"suspect;\" 27-year olds do not die of a\nmedical emergency from a scuffle; details about the alleged crime are not known; no possible\nthreat is worth a human life; the Sherriff's office and the District Attorney are not impartial or\nindependent; if an independent investigator is sought, the community should be involved in\nselection; the recommendations from the Police Reform Committee are imperative; the City is\nnot a leader on policing.\n(21-258) Venecio Camarillo, Alameda, stated the incident with Mario Gonzalez is appalling and\nthe Press Release factors are off-putting; discussed the statement provided by the City; stated\nthe medical emergency induced came from the Police due to either excessive force or the use\nof a deadly weapon; earlier versions of the Press Release do not state a weapon was used;\nMario did not deserve to die; the Officers involved are continuing to be paid while under\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n2\nApril 20, 2021", "path": "CityCouncil/2021-04-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2021-04-20", "page": 8, "text": "investigation; urged the body camera footage be released to the public; stated an impartial\ninvestigation and a Community Police Oversight Committee is needed.\nCONSENT CALENDAR\nCouncilmember Daysog stated that he will recuse himself from the Webster Street BIA\n[paragraph no. 21-265 matters.\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer stated that she would like the Park Street BIA [paragraph no.\n21-264 and Webster Street BIA [paragraph no. 21-265 matters removed from the Consent\nCalendar for discussion.\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer moved approval of the remainder of the Consent Calendar.\nCouncilmember Daysog seconded the motion, which carried by the following roll call vote:\nCouncilmembers Daysog: Aye; Herrera Spencer: Ayes; Knox White: 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(*21-259) Minutes of the Continued March 9, 2021 Special Meeting and the Special and Regular\nMeetings Held on March 16, 2021. Approved.\n(*21-260) Ratified bills in the amount of $2,546,512.43.\n(*21-261) Recommendation to Accept the Quarterly Sales Tax Report for the Reporting Period\nEnding December 31, 2020 (Funds Collected During the Period July 1, 2020 to September 30,\n2020).\n(*21-262) Recommendation to Authorize the City Manager to Execute a Second Amendment\nto\nthe Service Provider Agreement with City ConText to Increase Compensation by $76,080 for a\nTotal Aggregate Compensation Not to Exceed $150,000, and Extend the Term to December 31,\n2023, to Continue Providing Technical Planning Support to the City of Alameda Housing\nElement Update and Related Zoning Amendments.\n(*21-263) Recommendation to Authorize the City Manager to Execute a First Amendment to the\nAgreement with Coastland Civil Engineering for the Services of the Interim City Engineer, in an\nAmount Not to Exceed $75,000 for an Aggregate Amount Not to Exceed $149,500.\n(21-264) Recommendation to Approve the Park Street Business Improvement Area (BIA)\nAnnual Assessment Report; and\n(21-264A) Resolution No. 15756, \"Intention to Levy an Annual Assessment on the Park Street\nBIA for Fiscal Year 2021-22, and Set a Public Hearing for May 4, 2021 to Levy an Annual\nAssessment on the Park Street BIA.\" Adopted.\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer expressed support for efforts made during the past year;\nstated that she would like to continue encouraging the community to support local businesses.\nNote: The motion was made under the Webster Street BIA [paragraph no. 21-265].\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n3\nApril 20, 2021", "path": "CityCouncil/2021-04-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2021-04-20", "page": 9, "text": "(21-265) Recommendation to Approve the Webster Street Business Improvement Area (BIA)\nAnnual Assessment Report; and Resolution No. 15757, \"Intention to Levy an Annual\nAssessment on the Webster Street BIA for Fiscal Year 2021-22; and Set a Public Hearing for\nMay 4, 2021 to Levy an Annual Assessment on the Webster Street BIA.\" Adopted.\nNote: Councilmember Daysog recused himself.\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer expressed support for the Webster Street BIA efforts in the\npast year; stated that she would like to continue supporting moving forward.\nCouncilmember Knox White moved approval of the staff recommendation approving the BIA\n[including adoption of the resolutions].\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer seconded the motion.\nThe motion on Park Street BIA carried by the following roll call vote: Councilmembers Daysog:\nAye; Herrera Spencer: Aye; Knox White: Aye; Vella: Aye; and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye. Ayes:\n5.\nSince Councilmember Daysog recused himself on the Webster Street BIA, the motion carried by\nthe following roll call vote: Councilmembers Daysog: Absent; Herrera Spencer: Aye; Knox\nWhite: Aye; Vella: Aye; and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye. Ayes: 1. [Absent: Councilmember\nDaysog - 1.]\n(*21-266) Resolution No. 15758, \"Amending the Fiscal Year 2020-21 Project Budget by\nReducing Revenue and Appropriations in the Enterprise Resource Planning System\nImplementation Project 90002704 by $360,000 and Increasing Revenue and Appropriations for\nthe Strategic Technology Plan Project 90003704 by $360,000.' Adopted.\n(21-267) Resolution No. 15759, \"Continuing the Declaration of the Existence of a Local\nEmergency in Response to the COVID-19 Pandemic, Consistent with Government Code\nSection 8630(c). Adopted.\nCouncilmember Knox White moved adoption of the resolution.\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer stated that she would like staff to provide an explanation for\nthe matter.\nThe City Attorney stated under State Law, a declaration of local emergency only lasts for 60\ndays; every period, staff must return to Council for approval of re-declaring the local emergency\nin order for it to continue; every hearing, Council has the choice to not approve an extension;\nhowever, staff does have to return and provide the matter for consideration.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired the implications for the emergency expiring.\nThe City Attorney responded a number of implications would occur; stated the City may have\ndifficulties recovering Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) money; the City also\nhas implemented certain renter and mortgagee protection provisions which hinge on the\ncontinuation of the local emergency.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n4\nApril 20, 2021", "path": "CityCouncil/2021-04-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2021-04-20", "page": 10, "text": "Councilmember Daysog seconded the motion, which carried by the following roll call vote:\nCouncilmembers Daysog: Aye; Herrera Spencer: Aye; Knox White: Aye; Vella: Aye; and Mayor\nEzzy Ashcraft: Aye. Ayes: 5.\nCOUNCIL REFERRALS\n(21-268) Consider Directing Staff to Provide COVID-19 Updates and Increase Outreach.\n(Councilmember Daysog)\nCouncilmember Daysog gave a brief presentation.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated there are County dashboards which show COVID-19 rates city-by-\ncity; the dashboard shows vaccination rates.\nCouncilmember Daysog stated the dashboard is a great resource; the information should be\ntracked; inquired whether a letter can be sent to the East Bay Regional Park District (EBRPD)\nBoard encouraging more vigilance for the month of May; stated staff can figure out what\nconstitutes stepped up outreach.\nThe City Manager stated staff has conducted a variety of outreach and can take Council\ndirection to step up outreach; staff continuously talks about outreach, vigilance and promoting\nvaccines.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft requested the Assistant City Manager provide clarification about City-\nspecific data.\nThe Assistant City Manager stated staff is working with County Health to dig deeper on how\nAlameda is doing; general information is available at the zip code level; staff is looking to dig\ndeeper to target outreach as part of the vaccination efforts; noted COVID-19 testing is still\nhappening in the City.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated testing is happening on a regular basis for Alameda Unified School\nDistrict (AUSD) students and staff as part of the reopening plan; the City's Mayor Vaccine Task-\nForce was able to schedule vaccine appointments for roughly 400 seniors and individuals with\ndisabilities; discussed the clinic; stated vaccination is part of protecting everyone; the\nvaccination rates are good, but not good enough to qualify as immunity; new variants are\ndeveloping; many states are still in trouble.\nCouncilmember Daysog moved approval of duly noting the elements of the Council Referral.\nVice Mayor Vella stated making parks as accessible as possible during the pandemic and how\nto ensure different services are provided has been discussed at EBPRD Liaison meetings; that\nshe is trying to ensure there is access and programs, while taking into account a higher use of\nfacilities; she has been working diligently with EBRPD.\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer expressed support for the matter; stated that she is happy the\nparking lot on McKay Avenue is open; expressed support for being safer outside; stated having\nthe parking lot open will allow for a feasible and safe outside option; she wants to thank EBRPD\nand business districts for having and maintaining hand sanitizer dispensers.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n5\nApril 20, 2021", "path": "CityCouncil/2021-04-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2021-04-20", "page": 11, "text": "Councilmember Herrera Spencer seconded the motion.\nUnder discussion, Councilmember Knox White inquired whether the motion is to acknowledge\nthat everything in the Referral was already being done and to appreciate staff's efforts.\nCouncilmember Daysog responded in the affirmative; expressed support for new ways to step\nup outreach; stated outreach needs to be done in addition to what has already been done; he\nhopes the outreach steps up even more in the coming month due to target dates.\nVice Mayor Vella stated park access and programming being performed is regularly updated on\nEBRPD's webpage: ebparks.org; there is a specific page on COVID-19 park information;\nEBRPD is also trying to provide access to water facilities for the summer; the City website can\nlink to the EBRPD webpage.\nCouncilmember Daysog stated a more precise motion would be: the City should get its\ndashboard up and running on the website with new information being discussed at the detailed\nzip code level; noted Council can either work with the more detailed motion or a general motion\nencouraging the City Manager to continue working in the same manner, especially in the month\nof May for target dates in June and July.\nCouncilmember Knox White stated that he will not be supporting the motion due to providing\ndirection to staff on matters currently being completed; a signal is being sent that had Council\nnot provided direction, staff would not be working on matters; expressed support for a motion to\nappreciate and acknowledge efforts; stated that he does not want to support something that\nseems as though Council is giving direction on things that are already being worked on.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated Alameda has consistently had the third lowest COVID-19 rates per\ncapita in the County; Alameda is now the third highest vaccination rate in the County; staff and\nCouncil have been proactive for the past year; expressed support for using the opportunity to\nacknowledge staff efforts; stated the Assistant City Manager has worked to provide COVID-19\ntesting facilities; she is not prepared to support the circuitous direction.\nCouncilmember Daysog amended his motion to appreciate the hard work and advances that the\nCity Manager, staff and Councilmembers have made with regard to COVID-19, which has\nresulted in lower rates, and that efforts be stepped up even more for the month of May in an\neffort to meet the June and July targets set forth by the Governor and President.\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer seconded the motion.\nUnder discussion, Councilmember Herrera Spencer stated that she appreciates the efforts of\nstaff and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft; expressed support for continuing and stepping up efforts; stated\nCOVID-19 variants may be present; expressed support for a discussion about COVID-19; stated\nthere have been comments from Councilmembers and the referral has been the first opportunity\nfor her to speak on COVID-19 matters.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft outlined the weekly Mayor's COVID-19 town halls; stated the town halls\nare posted on the City website.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n6\nApril 20, 2021", "path": "CityCouncil/2021-04-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2021-04-20", "page": 12, "text": "On the call for the question, the motion failed by the following vote: Councilmembers Daysog:\nAye; Herrera Spencer: Aye; Knox White: No; Vella: No; and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft: No. Ayes: 2.\nNoes: 3.\nCONSENT CALENDAR - CONTINUED\n(*21-269) Resolution No. 15760, \"Amending the Management and Confidential Employees\nAssociation (MCEA) Salary Schedule to Increase the Salary Range for the Job Classification of\nBase Reuse Manager Effective the First Full Pay Period Following Approval.\" Adopted.\nNote: Councilmember Herrera Spencer voted no on the resolution, which carried by the\nfollowing vote: Councilmembers Daysog: Aye; Herrera Spencer: No; Knox White: Aye; Vella:\nAye; and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye. Ayes: 4. Noes: 1.\n(*21-270) Resolution No. 15761, \"Preliminarily Approving the Annual Report Declaring the City's\nIntention to Order the Levy and Collection of Assessments and Providing for Notice of Public\nHearing on June 1, 2021 - Maintenance Assessment District 01-01 (Marina Cove) Adopted.\n(*21-271) Resolution No. 15762, \"Preliminarily Approving the Annual Report Declaring the City's\nIntention to Order the Levy and Collection of Assessments and Providing for Notice of Public\nHearing on June 1, 2021 - Island City Landscaping and Lighting District 84-2 (Various\nLocations). Adopted.\nNote: Councilmember Daysog recused himself and the motion carried by the following vote:\nCouncilmembers Daysog: Absent; Herrera Spencer: Aye; Knox White: Aye; Vella: Aye; and\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye. Ayes: 1. [Absent: Councilmember Daysog - 1.]\nREGULAR AGENDA ITEMS\n(21-272) Resolution No. 15763, \"Appointing Philly Jones as a Member of the Recreation and\nParks Commission\"; and\n(21-272A) Resolution No. 15764, \"Appointing Alice Nguyen as a Member of the Recreation and\nParks Commission.\"\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer moved adoption of the resolutions.\nCouncilmember Knox White seconded the motion, which carried by the following roll call vote:\nCouncilmembers Daysog: Aye; Herrera Spencer: Aye; Knox White: Aye; Vella: Aye; and Mayor\nEzzy Ashcraft: Aye. Ayes: 5.\nThe City Clerk administered the Oath of Office to Ms. Jones and Ms. Nguyen.\nMs. Jones and Ms. Nguyen made brief comments.\n(21-273) Public Hearing to Consider Resolution No. 15765, \"Approving the Central Avenue\nSafety Improvement Project Final Concept and Adoption of Environmental Findings.\" Adopted.\nThe Planning, Building and Transportation Director gave a Power Point presentation.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n7\nApril 20, 2021", "path": "CityCouncil/2021-04-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2021-04-20", "page": 13, "text": "Councilmember Herrera Spencer inquired whether the closure of Sherman Street and the four\nroundabouts were included in the initial Council approval, to which the Planning, Building and\nTransportation Director responded in the negative.\nIn response to Councilmember Herrera Spencer's inquiry, the Planning, Building and\nTransportation Director stated a supplemental memorandum is included with the report; the\nCalifornia Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) categorical exemptions are clarified in the\nmemorandum and reinforces staff's findings that the project as-designed is categorically exempt\nunder CEQA from further environmental review with the four roundabouts and the street\nclosure.\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer inquired how many parking spaces will be lost due to\ndaylighting.\nThe Planning, Building and Transportation Director responded roughly 50 parking spaces of the\n130 will be lost due to daylighting, which is about 37%; stated the spaces need to be removed\ndue to local and State requirements to have adequate visibility at corners.\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer inquired whether homeowners have been notified about any\nimpacts of daylighting.\nThe Planning, Building and Transportation Director responded in the negative; stated under the\nCouncil policy and direction about daylighting neighbors will be notified when resources have\nbeen identified to perform repainting of curbs; notices will be sent out as a courtesy closer to the\nactual curb painting; notification and noticing for the process has been extensive, repetitive and\nconsistently done over the last eight years.\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer inquired whether any red spaces will be lost, separate from\ndaylighting, due to the roundabouts.\nThe Planning, Building and Transportation Director responded that he can work with staff;\nstated the entire project loses approximately 135 spaces; 50 are due to daylighting and the\nbalance will be along the corridor for protected bicycle lanes and standard travel lanes; staff will\nparse out the breakdown specific to roundabouts.\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer expressed support for information related to the two unfunded\nroundabouts; inquired whether there is a diagram showing the two roundabouts at Encinal High\nSchool and Ballena Boulevard.\nThe Planning, Building and Transportation Director stated the presentation includes a slide\nshowing all four roundabouts; stated the two at Encinal High School and Ballena Boulevard are\na few blocks apart; stated staff has diagrams for the two roundabouts.\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer stated that she would like staff to discuss pedestrian and\nbicycle access to the roundabouts; discussed a fatality at a roundabout in Lafayette; expressed\nsupport for information being provided about the differences in roundabouts and background on\nsafety.\nThe Planning, Building and Transportation Director stated the City's roundabouts are designed\nto separate bicyclists from automobiles; automobiles use the roundabout, bicyclists are\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n8\nApril 20, 2021", "path": "CityCouncil/2021-04-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2021-04-20", "page": 14, "text": "separated from the automobile path; the design is different from Lafayette, which has where\ncars and bicycles share the lane inside the roundabout.\nStated the project has numerous shortcomings and oversights and will not meet the needs of\nthe majority of Alameda citizens; bicyclists will be put on a highway near large trucks; the project\nwill remove parking spaces needed for Webster Street businesses and Sherman Street\nresidents; the loss of a bus stop will likely be revisited; the closure of Sherman Street is the\nultimate in ignoring the needs of most drivers; other cities roundabouts do not close off street\nsegments; roundabouts will slow Police, Fire and ambulance services; urged Council not to\npass the current design: Jim Strehlow, Alameda.\nStated the project is fantastic in many ways; the roundabouts will improve safety; studies show\na reduction in crashes by 35%, injuries by 76%, and fatalities by 90%; the roundabouts will help\nthe City reach climate goals and will shave off four minutes of travel time across the corridor;\nthere is a lower lifecycle cost to roundabouts over traditional intersections; roundabouts provide\na civic beautification opportunity; expressed support for the roundabout at Sherman Street;\nurged Council support the safety improvement project: Pat Potter, Alameda.\nStated that she regularly uses the corridor as a pedestrian, bicyclist and vehicle driver;\ndiscussed her experience commuting across the Island to use the ferry; stated many people\nlament the strict enforcement of the 25 mile per hour speed limits, which can be achieved by\nroad design; the road design is wonderful; discussed a false choice between safety and the\nability for bicyclists and pedestrians to navigate efficiently and safely; stated the design achieves\nboth; urged Council to support the project: Ashley Lorden, Alameda.\nStated that her family will be excited about project implementation; the areas are dangerous for\nchildren to cross; the project is important for safety; many people have died due to car accidents\nin the past years: Grover Wehman-Brown, Alameda.\nDiscussed the loss of a parking space in front of her home; stated the turn lanes are\nunnecessary for a dead-end court; expressed support for allowing a left turn and keeping the\nparking space; suggested the Hoover Court street sign be placed on the Fifth Street side and\nparking medallions to be provided: Laura Alviar, Alameda.\nStated there is no consensus on the merits or design of the project; that she is opposed to the\nproposed closure of Sherman Street; the roundabout provides no reason to close Sherman\nStreet; discussed Berkeley street configurations and the closure of Sherman Street; stated the\nre-route will add travel time; an alternative slip lane does not address the re-route; Sherman\nStreet will no longer be used if it is not a through street; traffic will be moved from one street to\nanother; urged Council not to approve the project as presented or the closure of Sherman\nStreet: Karen Miller, Alameda.\nStated the project is fantastic; urged Council to approve the project; stated the project will have\na positive impact on local businesses, the economy and increase biking; the increase in biking\nwill be a positive development for businesses; customers on bicycles tend to spend more\nregularly and more overall at local businesses than customers in cars; out of town tourists will\nlikely use the Bay Trail; there will be benefits for Webster Street; the Central Avenue project will\nfurther humanize the district by bringing more people into the area on bikes and foot: Tim\nBeloney, Alameda.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n9\nApril 20, 2021", "path": "CityCouncil/2021-04-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2021-04-20", "page": 15, "text": "Stated that she is excited about the Central Avenue Safety Improvement project; urged Council\nto support the project; stated the project is important for students and families; discussed\nschools affected by the project; stated keeping kids safe on their way to school is important; the\nproject will encourage students to walk and bike to school; discussed the Safe Routes to\nSchools program; stated the project will reduce the number of cars doing drop-offs: Cameron\nHolland, Alameda.\nExpressed support for the Central Avenue Safety Improvement project; stated the project will\nenhance the protected bikeway network; separated, protected bike lanes are superior to\nstandard, painted bike lanes due to physical separation; physical separation prevents cars from\nparking in the bike lane; double parking has increased due to an increase in delivery services;\nthe project recommendations are used in countries with high bicycle use; due to climate change,\npeople need to have an easier choice of less damaging ways to get around; urged Council to\napprove the project: Cyndy Johnsen, Alameda.\nStated the project is fantastic; urged Council to approve the project; stated repurposing parking\nis a difficult discussion; there are competing demands for road space; making equitable choices\nto use assets for the greatest public good and making roads as safe as possible is the right\nthing to do; parking competing with safety improvements is a clear choice; the project will\nreduce the number of collisions by 35%; taking away parking might inconvenience some;\nhowever, the tradeoff is safety over convenience; discussed parking tradeoffs; stated streets are\npublic; no one has special claim to local roads: Denyse Trepanier, Alameda.\nUrged Council to support the project; stated the project is wonderful; the project will create a\nmode shift to allow more people to use bicycles for ferry access; discussed riding bicycles with\nher children and her experience with dangerous Alameda bike lanes; stated the project solves\nthe problem of keeping bikes separate from commercial areas: Katherine Van Dusen, Alameda.\nExpressed support for the project; discussed his previous requests for roundabouts; stated\nmodern roundabouts are a great way to improve traffic while improving safety; expressed\nsupport for traffic calming; stated it is difficult to cross at Sherman Street and Central Avenue;\nexpressed concern about the lack of funding for all four roundabouts; urged Council to vote yes\non the project: Zac Bowling, Alameda.\nExpressed support for the project; stated the project has had a few tricky design challenges and\nareas which needed close attention; the process has been collaborative over many years;\nexpressed support for City staff addressing disability access to the roundabouts: Susie\nHufstader, Alameda.\nExpressed support for the project; stated living on the West End feels as though Central Avenue\nis a barrier between herself and the parks and beaches of Alameda; urged Council to support\nthe project: Rebecca Wernis, Alameda.\nExpressed support for the project; stated Alameda is pointed to as a shining example of a City\nredesigning streets for active transportation; the project will allow people to get around the\nIsland; urged Council to support the project: Dave Campbell, Bike East Bay.\nExpressed support for the project; discussed parking; stated the road diet proposed will improve\nspeed limit compliance; urged Council to recognize scientific consensus and information from\nexperts and approve the project: Morgan Bellinger, Alameda.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n10\nApril 20, 2021", "path": "CityCouncil/2021-04-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2021-04-20", "page": 16, "text": "Expressed support for the project; urged Council to approve the project; stated the project\ndelivers the kind of street design needed to meet the City's safety and climate goals while\nenhancing livability; a protected, separated bike lane along Central Avenue will fix a big gap in\nthe Bay Trail network; the protected bikeway will open up many possibilities for completely car-\nfree recreation; there are many upsides to the project; the issues posed are dwarfed by the\nbenefits: Michael Sullivan, Alameda.\nStated transportation represents 70% of greenhouse gas emissions; the project will improve\nsafety, decrease greenhouse gas emissions, promote resilience and contribute to the\ncommunity well-being: Ruth Abbe, Community Action for a Sustainable Alameda.\nStated that he is a fan of the project and roundabouts; discussed roundabouts funding and his\nuse of the corridor; stated the dead-end at Sherman Street is a non-starter; the crossing at Bay\nStreet and Morton Avenue is not for the faint of heart; urged staff talk to people at the Mobile\nstation: Christopher Seiwald, Alameda.\nStated that she strongly opposes the roundabout at Sherman Street; the project loses 23% of\nparking and 19 of the spaces are for the Sherman Street roundabout; the loss will affect\nresidents in apartments buildings and three businesses; expressed concern about the changes\nto Sherman Street; stated roundabouts are a great idea at most intersections; however, the\nSherman Street intersection is not the right space for a roundabout: Jeannine Gravem,\nAlameda.\nUrged Council vote in favor of better bicycle infrastructure on Central Avenue; discussed his\nexperience riding a bicycle on Fruitvale Bridge; stated Central Avenue has problems to Tilden\nWay; there is not adequate space between parked cars, bicycles and moving cars; the design\nprovides no barriers for protection; Police do not protect bicyclists; safe and protected bicycle\ninfrastructure is needed; the project is far safer than the status quo: James Johnston, Alameda.\nExpressed support for the project; stated the mode shift for the project is important; the shift is\nimperative if the City welcomes thousands in new residents over the next few decades; allowing\na few residents to get out of their cars will create an easier time for all to get around town;\nAlameda is already a great place to bike; important access will be provided across the Island;\nurged Council to vote yes on the project: Doug Letterman, Alameda.\nDiscussed the increase in cars from Alameda Point; stated more housing is being built; it is\nunrealistic to believe there will not be additional cars; a new iteration might be needed; urged\nCouncil to look at other ways to get people in and out of Alameda as opposed to cars;\nexpressed support for ferries; stated parking is an issue; expressed support for purchasing paint\nover a roundabout: Gerald Bryant, Alameda.\nStated the improvements to Otis Drive make biking easier; he is looking forward to having bike\nlanes on Central Avenue; the current design is a disaster waiting to happen; he does not want to\nhave to see a ghost bike installed at Central Avenue: Don Porteous, Alameda.\nQuestioned the methodology for traffic analysis in Section 3.1 of the report; stated much of the\ndata provided was from 2020; many of the measurements were performed during a pandemic\nyear; it is unrealistic to gather data during said time; expressed support for reliable and useful\ndata; expressed concern about weekend traffic: Matt Reid, Alameda.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n11\nApril 20, 2021", "path": "CityCouncil/2021-04-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2021-04-20", "page": 17, "text": "Stated that he prefers not to drive his car given the opportunity; expressed support for the\nproject with all four roundabouts; stated electric cars are significantly heavier than standard cars\nmaking collisions with cyclists and pedestrians more deadly; the project calms traffic and\nimproves safety for pedestrians and cyclists; one life saved should be worth more than parking\nspaces; discussed his vehicle use in Alameda; stated cargo and electric bikes are becoming an\nexcellent choice; urged Council approve the project: Joshua Hawn, Alameda.\nExpressed support for the project; stated the overall project configuration is not new; stated\nBroadway Street is not a perfect road for those on foot or bike; however, the road is safer; he\nwould like to see this type of road configuration along Central Avenue; the project can tie\ntogether some missing connections in Alameda's bike network; expressed support for\nconnecting the missing bits: Drew Dara-Abrams, Alameda.\nStated that he likes the project concept; expressed support for safety; expressed concern about\ndelivery trucks blocking driveways and loss of parking spaces in the area: Ruben Quezada,\nAlameda.\nDiscussed concerns about roundabouts for the visually impaired; stated crossing streets at\nroundabouts is frightening; pedestrians do not have the right of way in crossing a roundabout;\nquestioned whether there will be flashing beacons at the roundabouts for pedestrians and\nwhether information will be provided to school children on safe roundabout crossing; stated the\nmost dangerous time for pedestrians is when a car exits the roundabout; urged Council consider\nthe safety of pedestrians: Candace Gutleben, Alameda.\nStated that she is against the roundabouts; she is unsure how staff will be able to make\nroundabouts accessible for not just the blind community; proposed Council try being in a visually\nimpaired person's shoes and feeling safe and able to confidently navigate at roundabouts:\nMichaela Tsztoo, Alameda.\nStated that she is excited about the project; noted that she is familiar with roundabouts; stated\nthe current situation is unsafe; discussed feeling unsafe pushing a stroller in the area; stated\nthere will be a 90% improvement in fatal accidents; the project will be a benefit for the entire\ncommunity; the project has come before the Commission on Persons With Disabilities\npreviously: Beth Kenny, Alameda.\nExpressed concern about the approach to a roundabout; stated traffic in a roundabout does not\nstop; without a stop light, there is no way to know whether someone will want to turn while she\nis attempting to cross the street; hybrid cars become silent when travelling under 25 miles per\nhour: Sheri Albers, Alameda.\nStated that he opposes the project due to the closure of Sherman Street and the roundabouts;\nSherman Street is an essential arterial; its closure would have adverse effects; discussed the\nrecommendation to close Sherman Street; stated the cul-de-sac could violate codes and the\nturning radius will be too narrow for long vehicles; discussed the traffic study; stated the project\nwould violate the Transportation Element: Ken Phares, Alameda.\nStated the project is scary to have launched due to her being visually impaired; the project will\nbe dangerous because cars will not be expected to stop and there will be no way to know\nwhether pedestrians are seen; it is difficult to cross streets with trucks and hybrids; expressed\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n12\nApril 20, 2021", "path": "CityCouncil/2021-04-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2021-04-20", "page": 18, "text": "support for a flashing, talking sign; questioned safety precautions in place for the project: Katie\nPhan, Alameda.\n***\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft called a recess at 9:47 p.m. and reconvened the meeting at 10:09 p.m.\n***\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired how people with disabilities will safely cross and navigate the\nroundabout and whether any consultation was conducted.\nThe Senior Transportation Coordinator responded staff and consultants have met with several\nmembers of the blind community who requested a tactile map of the roundabouts be created; a\nmap was created for the roundabout at Third Street; staff created seven hard copies, three sets\nare at each Alameda Library and can be checked out.\nStefan Schuster, CDM Smith, stated that his team reached out to and met with the blind\ncommunity and developed tactile maps; noted as designs are finalized, more specific and\naccurate models of the roundabouts will be created; stated the safety benefits are similar;\ndisplayed a Power Point presentation slide; stated the slide illustrates design component\nconsiderations for the blind and visually impaired; the roundabouts have shorter crossings and\nprovide a center refuge; there is a traffic calming element to the roundabouts with significantly\nlower vehicle speeds; the landscape and buffer areas keep pedestrians and cyclists separated\nfrom traffic lanes; other physical elements, such as fencing, may be used; tactile domes and\nguide strips would be used to help signal the transition to a travel lane; the use of flashing and\nauditory signals will help guide people across certain legs of intersections and will also warn\nmotorists about pedestrians; considerations will be made on a case by case basis; all features\nwill not be on every leg of the roundabout; motorists may become de-sensitized to too many\nflashing beacons; there is no guarantee of a safe crossing at any intersection; overall\nroundabouts benefit all users and are a safer option than a signalized intersection.\nErin Ferguson, Kittelson & Associates, stated her firm has been involved with National research\nfor visually impaired and disabled users; the research has found consistency with the comments\nprovided by Mr. Schuster related to design; it is important to provide the protected refuge island;\nthe crosswalks are setback about one car length from the circulatory roadway; giving more\nspace allows visually impaired users the ability to hear better to the left; flashing beacons\nactivated by push buttons can also be implemented.\nCouncilmember Knox White stated that he appreciates the additional outreach performed due to\nconcerns being raised; inquired whether the roundabout as-deigned would be safer than the\ncurrent situation.\nMr. Schuster responded in the affirmative; stated that he has looked at several variations for\nSherman Street; the design closing Sherman Street provides much greater flexibility in the\nroundabout design, which will truly calm traffic.\nCouncilmember Knox White stated that he anticipates the need to have an option to keep\nSherman Street open; expressed support for a motion supporting approval of all four\nroundabouts, with a condition that an option to keep Sherman Street open return for\nconsideration; stated keeping Sherman Street open is a less safe option; it is important to\nrealize that up until Marina Village was built, Atlantic Avenue was similar to other streets; streets\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n13\nApril 20, 2021", "path": "CityCouncil/2021-04-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2021-04-20", "page": 19, "text": "will be reconfigured along Atlantic Avenue near Clement Street that will travel down to Grand\nStreet; the designs expect that traffic will drop; staff has done a great job of explaining why\nroundabouts are going to help traffic flow through the Central Avenue corridor; the roundabouts\nwill help to improve cut through traffic; expressed support for the staff recommendation.\nCouncilmember Daysog inquired whether maps showing an open Sherman Street are available.\nThe Planning, Building and Transportation Director responded the presentation includes\nalternative designs; stated slide 31 shows different ways of providing access to Sherman Street;\nstaff has taken Council direction from 2016 as well as the Vision Zero policy and has come\nforward with the safest alternative; staff has looked at a number of different ways to design the\nroundabout at Sherman Street; the City does not currently have the money to build the\nroundabout at Sherman Street; with the funding available, the City can currently build two of four\nroundabouts; staff recommends building two roundabouts at the most dangerous locations first;\nCouncil may have a discussion at a later time regarding the two other roundabouts.\nCouncilmember Daysog inquired whether the other roundabouts are considered safe in terms of\nprofessional engineering standards.\nThe Planning, Building and Transportation Director responded the safest option is proposed;\nstated the other options provided are safe, but not as safe as the one recommended; the worst\ncase scenario is to leave the intersection as-is.\nVice Mayor Vella stated the project has been before the Council a number of times and has\nbeen through numerous renditions with public input and comment; there have been a number of\nworkshops on the matter with many designs; there is an eye specifically for safe multimodal\ntransit; the project is the embodiment for Vision Zero; if Council is serious about implementing\nthe policy, roads and infrastructure must be made safer for everyone, including pedestrians and\nother modes of transit; the inclusion of roundabouts is important; outlined living in London and\nthe experience of bicycling through roundabouts; stated that she experiences more fear pushing\na stroller down Central Avenue than her time spent in London; Central Avenue is essentially a\nfreeway; the goal for the roundabouts is to calm traffic; roundabouts will reduce vehicle speed\nand improve safety; expressed support for the recommendation; stated that she is proud of the\nwork being done; Council needs to value human life and safety; Council must support and\nimplement the project as presented.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she is mostly behind the project and is fully behind Vision Zero;\nshe loves roundabouts and the Central Avenue project; expressed support for the roundabout at\nEncinal High School; stated that she likes three of the four roundabouts; expressed concern\nabout the roundabout at Sherman Street; stated that she cannot support the closure of Sherman\nStreet; the intersection being closed had the lowest amount of accidents; the design shows\nclosure of the street as not possible due to the triangular parcel; questioned whether the City\ncould acquire more land in order to create a proper roundabout; expressed concern about\npeople using the two nearest parallel streets, which are next to a school, in the event of\nSherman Street closure; stated the Sherman Street roundabout is not ready for prime time; she\nis ready to support the project without the Sherman Street closure; an extreme treatment for an\nintersection that is unwarranted is not something that she can support.\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer stated that she has many concerns; expressed concern about\nthe lack of roundabout simulations; expressed support for consultants using simulations, not\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n14\nApril 20, 2021", "path": "CityCouncil/2021-04-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2021-04-20", "page": 20, "text": "static pictures; outlined an engineering firm providing simulations in Lafayette; stated other cities\noffer video simulations for projects; stated 1,400 students come out of Encinal High School at\n3:00 p.m.; expressed support for a simulation video; stated the project is not ready to go;\nexpressed concern about staff responses to daylighting outreach; stated the outreach should\nhave already happened; the specifics are missing from the project; she cannot support a project\nwhich does not have daylighting addresses identified by phase; the public has a right to have\npublic conversation; discussed bicycling through Alameda and Central Avenue; expressed\nconcern about cars coming out of roundabouts; stated data provided from only 2020 is not\nrealistic; she cannot support any of the roundabouts without being shown a simulation; a project\nof this magnitude needs to be phased; community members need to be identified and provided\ninformation if a parking space will be lost; many renters cannot afford a house with a driveway\nor garage; there is a problem for the visually impaired; videos show audio cues need to be\nheard; she does not want just a flashing light at the roundabout, she wants cars to stop; people\ndo not know if cars are going to stop; it is Council's job to make dangerous intersections safer;\ncars do not always stop at crossings with flashing lights; she is disappointed there was not more\nwork done before coming to Council.\n***\n(21-274) Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated a vote is need to consider new items after 11:00 p.m.\nCouncilmember Knox White inquired whether there are time sensitive items.\nThe City Manager responded the American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) [paragraph no. 21-276\ncould be heard at the May meeting.\nCouncilmember Knox White moved approval of hearing the Long Term Financial Plan\n[paragraph no. 21-275 tonight and deferring the remaining items.\nVice Mayor Vella seconded the motion, which carried by the following roll call vote:\nCouncilmembers Daysog: Aye; Herrera Spencer: No; Knox White: Aye; Vella: Aye; and Mayor\nEzzy Ashcraft: Aye. Ayes: 4. Noes: 1.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft requested clarification about the data collection methods.\nThe Planning, Building and Transportation Director stated staff did no traffic counts or analysis\nof existing conditions during the COVID-19 pandemic.\nVice Mayor Vella discussed the Sherman Street and Central Avenue intersection; stated the two\ncrossings are barely able to be completed in time; questioned the proposal for Mayor Ezzy\nAshcraft to support the roundabout at the intersection; stated there are currently no audio cues\nor safety measures in place; she would like to understand the vision for the intersection based\non current concerns.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated one thing would be to time the signal lights to allow longer crossing\ntimes; outlined intersections with ample crossing times; stated the intersection could be made\nsafer with audio cues; there have been major improvements to the design; the street closure is\nan extreme remedy and could be addressed in other ways; expressed support for acquiring\nmore land in order for a logical roundabout design.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n15\nApril 20, 2021", "path": "CityCouncil/2021-04-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2021-04-20", "page": 21, "text": "Vice Mayor Vella questioned whether the inclination is to direct staff to look at the intersection\nfurther and come up with another option.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she cannot support the matter as designed with a cul de sac at\nSherman Street.\nThe Planning, Building and Transportation Director stated if Council does not approve the\nroundabout at Sherman Street, staff will look at ways to improve the intersection; the\nintersection will not be taken out of the project; signal timing and striping options will be\nreviewed to try and make existing conditions safer.\nCouncilmember Knox White stated the intersection does not work well for anyone at this stage;\ninquired how bicyclists coming down Central will get to the other side of Sherman Street if\nCouncil decides to keep the intersection the same; questioned whether cyclists will need to\ncross the travel lane into a special slip lane.\nThe Senior Transportation Coordinator responded slide 30 of the presentation depicts the\nintersection; noted the slip lane is depicted on slide 31.\nCouncilmember Knox White stated the option will make Sherman Street a higher volume street;\nthe design will indicate people should continue down Sherman Street and is not a great\noutcome for the project; the option shown is an improvement to current conditions; the\nintersection is convoluted, complicated and is cause for concern among many; inquired whether\nstaff has looked at the impacts on traffic if Sherman Street closes.\nThe Planning, Building and Transportation Director responded GPS already re-routes people\naround the intersection; there is currently diversion from the area; staff's goal is to make the\nintersection work better and reduce the current diversion; creating a Sherman Street cul de sac\nwill no longer allow north-south users of Sherman Street; drivers will use an alternate north-\nsouth street; there will be a change for 20 residents of the street; the network and Central\nAvenue works better with the roundabout and less people will re-route through the Gold Coast\nwith the changes.\nCouncilmember Daysog stated travelers coming down Santa Clara Avenue get to see Alameda\nat a desired pace; Alameda is a City built to the individual, pedestrian and bicyclist; Alameda is\nnot suburbia, which is built to accommodate a fast-moving vehicle; Alameda does have fast-\nmoving vehicles; residents should be proud of the fact that there is an abundance of 25 mile per\nhour signs; previously, he has not supported the Central Avenue project; Otis Drive has many\ncul de sacs which connect and have transformed it into a place that has slowed down; the\nproject presented has some good coming out of it; expressed support for three of the four\nroundabouts; stated that he cannot support the roundabout at Sherman Street due to a feeling\nthat Sherman Street should not be a closed cul de sac and should remain open; staff has\nprovided and evaluated options; the other options provided also meet professional standards\nand are safe; staff needs to look at other ways of designing Sherman Street; the roundabouts\ncan beautify different parts of Alameda and can be signature points; expressed support for\nseeing redesigned streets; stated the decision does not come without difficulty; some will lose\nparking due to the project; the bigger picture must be taken into consideration.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she is hearing some consensus on the project; expressed\nsupport for enough attention being given to people with disabilities, visual impairments and\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n16\nApril 20, 2021", "path": "CityCouncil/2021-04-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2021-04-20", "page": 22, "text": "specialized situations.\nThe Planning, Building and Transportation Director stated staff already designed in the disabled\nparking space along Hoover Street; there will be another level of detail and design; staff has\nheard Council and the speakers; there is a general consensus for the plan and the fourth\nroundabout is yet to be determined; staff is ready to move to the next phase with Council\ndirection.\nCouncilmember Knox White stated that he would be interested in understanding the\nconsequences of Council sticking with the status quo and problematic design; expressed\nsupport for negotiating with property owners to have a better designed roundabout and for a\nvote on the safest solution staff has provided; stated the project has been kicked back and\nneeds to move forward; he would consider approving what staff has come up with direction to\ntry something even better and meeting goals, rather than rejecting the project and hoping\nsomething else fits in.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft expressed support for compromise; stated that she will support approval of\nthree out of four roundabouts and bringing back Sherman Street with funding and an option that\ndoes not require creation of a cul de sac; the direction gives staff time for creative thinking,\nnegotiation and outreach.\nCouncilmember Knox White expressed concern about kicking the decision further down the line.\nThe Senior Transportation Coordinator stated without Council selection of an option, there is\ndifficulty in moving forward with CEQA.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she does not remember the closed street option being\ndiscussed by Council for eight years.\nThe Planning, Building and Transportation Director stated it appears Council is okay with a\nroundabout; however, there is disagreement about the cul de sac; an option has been provided\nfor a slip lane, which could be the alternative; the slip lane is not as safe as the proposed\nrecommendation; however, the slip lane is safer than the current situation; the slip lane allows\npeople to enter Sherman Street from the roundabout and to exit onto Encinal Avenue; Sherman\nwill not work as a north-south corridor; if the goal is simply get into and out of Sherman Street,\nthe alternative option will work; the slip lane was created to avoid conflicts.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the design would accommodate safety vehicles.\nThe Planning, Building and Transportation Director responded in the affirmative; stated safety\ncan enter from the north and exit from the south.\nCouncilmember Daysog stated that he sees Sherman Street as a major thoroughfare for people\nto get to Marina Village towards the Posey Tube; the design alternative presented would cause\ndifficulties.\nCouncilmember Knox White moved approval of substituting page 31 [Two-way on Sherman\nStreet and Slip Lane] of the presentation as the Sherman Street alternative, with direction that if\nstaff feels as though they can come up with an even better design, the design can be brought\nfor Council consideration at the time when funding is available for the project.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n17\nApril 20, 2021", "path": "CityCouncil/2021-04-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2021-04-20", "page": 23, "text": "Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft expressed support for exploring other options, including the acquisition of\nland.\nCouncilmember Daysog stated Sherman Street is a natural funnel; the design requires people\nto use Paru or Morton Streets; cars still need to funnel out of the Gold Coast to get to the Tube\nthrough Marina Village; the alternative design does not accomplish doing so.\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer stated she disagrees that the changes are minor; the\nresolution should have articulated that Council is adding four roundabouts as well as closing a\nstreet.\nVice Mayor Vella seconded the motion.\nUnder discussion, Councilmember Daysog inquired whether there will be a separate vote on the\nthree roundabouts from the fourth.\nThe Planning, Building and Transportation Director responded Council may vote on the entire\nproject with just the three roundabouts with a second vote to add-in the fourth.\nCouncilmember Daysog expressed support for two votes.\nThe City Attorney stated that he has no objections to how the Council wishes to perform the\nvote; noted the resolution will need to be modified if the Council only approves three\nroundabouts.\nCouncilmember Knox White stated that his motion stands; he is happy to acknowledge that\nCouncilmember Daysog supports three of the four roundabouts, but will vote no based on the\nfourth roundabout.\nCouncilmember Daysog stated the problem is that Sherman Street is a natural corridor to get\npeople out of the Gold Coast to Marina Village; he would prefer separate votes.\nOn the call for the questions, the motion carried by the following roll call vote: Councilmembers\nDaysog: No; Herrera Spencer: No; Knox White: Aye; Vella: Aye; and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye.\nAyes: 3. Noes: 2.\n(21-275) Recommendation to Accept the Report on the Long-Term Financial Forecast for the\nGeneral Fund and Special Revenue Funds.\nJames Morris, Urban Futures Inc., gave a Power Point presentation.\nStated looking at long-term investment and value allows better chances for putting together\ninfrastructure in Alameda; what is best for local funding must be thought about; projections are\nlong-term; businesses should not be shut down; discussed businesses in Alameda: Gerald\nBryant, Alameda.\nCouncilmember Knox White stated Council has discussed creating a forecast and identifying\nissues and strategies; inquired whether the model is the first step in the process and the next\nsteps to identify the issues and potential solutions.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n18\nApril 20, 2021", "path": "CityCouncil/2021-04-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2021-04-20", "page": 24, "text": "The City Manager responded the model will be used for scenarios; stated the model helps staff\nunderstand where the City is at today, where it will be moving and which factors affect positives\nand downsides; the model has shown, in the immediate term, the General Fund's susceptibility\nis not the General Fund itself, but more funds adding pressure due to needing support over\ntime; pensions overall are a huge issue; the model shows pensions as a pinch point to continue\nmonitoring through pension management.\nMr. Morris stated long-term financial decisions will be helped by the model; the aggregation of\nthe General Fund with a Special Revenue Fund helps provide the big picture; when a baseline\nforecast is complete at the end of the fiscal year, there will be more refinement; the model can\nthen be used to show the various financial benefits and risks, Other Post-Employment Benefits\n(OPEB) and pension liabilities.\nJulio Morales, Urban Futures Inc., stated it is not always the General Fund; Special Revenue\nFunds are also a focus; pensions are a problem for everyone; staff can only help Council when\nthe issue is recognized and ready to be addressed.\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer inquired whether assumptions used to come up with the\nnumbers can be specified.\nMr. Morris responded that he can provide the information; stated the assumptions are the\ndrivers that go into the forecasting algorithms; he relies on Moody's Analytics to provide\neconomic data; he is not an economist; Moody's Analytics goes down to the metropolitan\nstatistical area level in creating economic forecast data for the long-term, which is beneficial due\nregions of California varying; the algorithms are developed by the economic data, the City's\nproprietary data, statistical analysis of the City's historic financial data and trend lines; there are\ncustomizable controls based on local knowledge to ensure the forecast represents\nunderstanding of the local economic outlook.\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer stated that she would like to see the assumptions; requested\nthe annual operating surplus deficit page be displayed; expressed concerns about the forecast;\nnoted that she will not be supporting the matter.\nMr. Morris presented slide page 9.\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer expressed concern about the deficit showing an increase until\n2023 with the amount decreasing until a surplus is shown in 2028; stated that she is concerned\nabout the accuracy and the public thinking the City can spend money based on the turn in\nfunding; she does not know what the assumptions were for revenue streams; the problem could\nbe a longer and bigger issue, which will impact the City's revenue; she is unsure the City will\ncome out of a deficit by 2024; the City has been using reserves significantly for pensions and\nOPEB; she has not supported using reserves; the report is a good start; however, she would\nhave liked to see more information.\nMr. Morris stated that he will share the information and provide the examples from the control\npanel; economics is a social science and is not a physical science; there is room for debate on\nthe use of various revenue sources and whether to be aggressive, moderate or conservative;\nthe City's reserve goes into a trust for OPEB liabilities and pensions; the use of reserves is not\nincluded in the forecast; part of the pension management strategy is to set money aside for said\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n19\nApril 20, 2021", "path": "CityCouncil/2021-04-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2021-04-20", "page": 25, "text": "liabilities; the key is to look at long-term liabilities and utilize opportunities and management\nstrategies to knock down long-term liabilities and better assure the fiscal future.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated a previous Council looked at the high percentage of funding\nreserves being held; a percentage is still always held, with half of the remaining overage paying\ndown the pension and OPEB liabilities; the result has saved the City carrying costs on the debt;\nit is not accurate to state that the City is drawing down on reserves.\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer stated that she disagrees with Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft's\ncomments; anyone can look at the numbers to see what has happened in the past; she\nsupports the assumptions being provided in order to see how aggressive it is and in which\ncategories; as the forecast unfolds over time, people will see where adjustments should have\nbeen and how much the forecasts will be impacted; hopefully, all assumptions are correct.\nMr. Morris stated that he tends to begin conservatively.\nCouncilmember Daysog stated it is important to look at historic trends for expenditure analysis;\nit is also important to look at the budget from a performance standards perspective; outlined the\npossible breakdowns of City personnel and Capital Improvement Projects (CIP); stated a budget\nis crafted from the expenditure side based on spending and Council values or expectations and\nactual spending; the sustainability on the revenue side will be shown; expressed support for\nbudgeting from a performance measure angle; another area to consider is actual capacity; the\nanalysis needs to be factored in.\nCouncilmember Knox White moved approval of accepting the model and report.\nVice Mayor Vella seconded the motion, which carried by the following roll call vote:\nCouncilmembers Daysog: Abstention; Herrera Spencer: No; Knox White: Aye; Vella: Aye; and\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye. Ayes: 3. Noes: 1. Abstention: 1.\n(21-276) Recommendation to Provide Direction to Staff Regarding the Allocation of an\nAnticipated $28.95 Million of Funding from the Federal Government through the American\nRescue Plan Act (ARPA) of 2021 to Assist with Recovery from the Impacts of the COVID-19\nPandemic. Not heard.\n(21-277) Adoption of Resolution Adopting a Tier-Structured Annual Rent Program Fee for the\nCity's Rent Control Ordinance and Implementing Regulations, which Establishes the Proposed\nAnnual Rent Program Fee for Fiscal Year 2021-22 of $148 for Fully Regulated Units and $100\nfor Partially Regulated Units; Allocates General Fund Money to Pay the Rent Program Fee for\nFiscal Year 2021-22 on Behalf of Landlords Participating in the Section 8 Program; and Extends\nthe Due Date for Rent Program Fees for Fiscal Year 2021-22 from July 31, 2021 to September\n30, 2021, with Penalties and Interest on Any Late Fees Not Accruing Until September 30, 2021.\nNot heard.\n(21-278) Introduction of Ordinance Amending the Alameda Municipal Code by Amending Article\nXV (Rent Control, Limitations on Evictions and Relocation Payments to Certain Displaced\nTenants) to Adopt and Incorporate Provisions Concerning Capital Improvement Plans (CIP) for\nRental Units in the City of Alameda. Not heard.\nCITY MANAGER COMMUNICATIONS\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n20\nApril 20, 2021", "path": "CityCouncil/2021-04-20.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2021-04-20", "page": 26, "text": "Not heard.\nORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA\nNot heard.\nCOUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS\n(21-279) Mayor's Nominations for Appointments to the Golf Commission and Housing Authority\nBoard of Commissioners. Not heard.\nADJOURNMENT\nThere being no further business, Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft adjourned the meeting at 12:00 a.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\n21\nApril 20, 2021", "path": "CityCouncil/2021-04-20.pdf"}