{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2022-05-17", "page": 1, "text": "MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING\nTUESDAY- - MAY 17, 2022--7:00 P.M.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft convened the meeting at 7:06 p.m.\nROLL CALL -\nPresent:\nCouncilmembers Daysog, Herrera Spencer, Knox White,\nVella, and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft - 5. [Note: Vice Mayor\nVella arrived at 7:18 p.m. The meeting was conducted via\nZoom.]\nAbsent:\nNone.\nAGENDA CHANGES\n(22-334) Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft announced that City Manager Communications would be heard\nnext.\nCITY MANAGER COMMUNICATIONS\n(22-335) The Interim City Manager discussed the Fourth of July parade and pre-parade 5K\nbenefitting the Midway Shelter; announced new parking enforcement service starting on May 23\nand National Public Works Week; noted the COVID-19 case numbers are increasing; urged\npeople to wear high quality masks; expressed his appreciation for the ability to serve Alameda.\nPROCLAMATIONS, SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY AND ANNOUNCEMENTS\n(22-336) Proclamation Declaring May 2022 as Jewish American Heritage Month.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft read the proclamation.\nORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA\n(22-337) Paul Foreman, Alameda, expressed concerns over the draft Housing Element (HE)\ndocument; discussed Assembly Bill (AB) 215's requirement for Council consideration of all\npublic comment before submission of the draft HE.\n(22-338) Zac Bowling, Alameda, expressed support for the HE work being done.\nCONSENT CALENDAR\nExpressed concern about the proposed Interim City Manager: Erin Fraser, Alameda.\nExpressed concern about the proposed Interim City Manager: Marilyn Rothman, Alameda.\nThe Human Resources director stated the comments were not identified during background\nprocess.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether anyone from the public reached out with concerns, to\nwhich the Human Resources Director responded in the negative.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nMay 17, 2022\n1", "path": "CityCouncil/2022-05-17.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2022-05-17", "page": 2, "text": "Councilmember Herrera Spencer recorded a no vote on the teleconference findings [paragraph\nno. 22-341 and the resolution continuing the emergency declaration [paragraph no. 22-349\nand requested the Interim City Manager contract [paragraph no. 22-342], homeless housing\nassistance and prevention grant [paragraph no. 22-350 and Metropolitan Transportation\nCommission grant [paragraph no. 22-351 be withdrawn for discussion.\nCouncilmember Knox White moved approval of the remainder of the Consent Calendar.\nVice Mayor Vella seconded the motion.\nUnder discussion, Councilmember Daysog recorded a no vote on the teleconference findings.\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. [Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk preceding the\nparagraph number.]\n(*22-339) Minutes of the Special City Council Meeting and the Continued April 5, 2022 Meeting\nHeld on April 12, 2022, and the Special and Regular City Council Meetings Held on April 19,\n2022. Approved.\n(*22-340) Ratified bills in the amount of $4,647,168.48.\n(22-341) Recommendation to Approve Findings to Allow City Meetings to be Conducted via\nTeleconference.\nNote: Since Councilmembers Daysog and Herrera Spencer recorded note votes, the matter\ncarried by the following vote: Councilmembers Daysog: No; Herrera Spencer: No; Knox White:\nAye; Vella: Aye; and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye. Ayes: 3. Noes: 2.\n(22-342) Recommendation to Approve Agreement Appointing Dirk Brazil as Interim City\nManager for a Term of No More Than 960 Hours in a Fiscal Year at a Salary of $133.85 Hourly,\nCommencing on May 23, 2022, and Authorize the Mayor to Sign the Agreement on Behalf of\nthe City.\nThe City Attorney briefly announced and summarized the terms and employment agreement.\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer stated that she would like guidance on appropriate public\ndiscussion topics.\nThe City Attorney stated Council is able to speak about anything which is not confidential closed\nsession material; anything received solely through closed session remains confidential; anything\nwithin public record, comments raised or staff report is permissible to discuss.\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer inquired whether it is permissible to allow the proposed\nInterim City Manager to respond to Council publically.\nThe City Attorney responded Council may ask the candidate to respond to questions; stated the\nresponses are voluntary and the candidate does not have to respond.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nMay 17, 2022\n2", "path": "CityCouncil/2022-05-17.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2022-05-17", "page": 3, "text": "Councilmember Daysog stated his vote on the matter does not reflect the candidate; the City\nshould have had a number of candidates and more time should be spent on finding more\ncandidates; expressed concern over the process.\nCouncilmember Knox White stated that he is uncomfortable with starting a dialogue with the\nproposed Interim City Manager in a public forum; allegations have been brought forth which\nhave not yet been a part of any discussion; expressed support for the proposed Interim City\nManager being able to address the issue which has been raised; stated that it is unfair to ask\nopen up an additional discussion with the candidate.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft concurred with Councilmember Knox White; stated that she finds it\ntroubling for individuals to come forward with unsubstantiated allegations; expressed support for\nallowing an opportunity to address allegations.\nTo allow time, Council addressed other pulled Consent Calendar items.\n(*22-343) Recommendation to Authorize the Interim City Manager to Accept the Work of G & G\nBuilders, Inc. for Godfrey Park Recreation Building Renovations, No. P.W. 02-21-08. Accepted.\n(*22-344) Recommendation to Authorize the Interim City Manager to Accept the Work of G & G\nBuilders, Inc. for the Maintenance Service Center Interior Improvements, No. P.W. 02-21-10.\nAccepted.\n(*22-345) Recommendation to Authorize the Interim City Manager to Partially Accept the\nImprovements Completed by Alameda Point Partners for Tract 8336, Site A, Phase 1, at\nAlameda Point. Accepted.\n(*22-346) Recommendation to Authorize the Interim City Manager to Execute an Agreement\nwith Suarez & Munoz Construction Inc. for Alameda City Hall Lawn Conversion, Project No.\nP.W. 02-22-05, for a Not to Exceed Amount of $204,445. Accepted.\n(*22-347) Resolution No. 15904, \"Preliminarily Approving the Annual Report Declaring the City\nof Alameda's Intention to Order the Levy and Collection of Assessments and Providing for\nNotice of Public Hearing on June 21, 2022 - Maintenance Assessment District 01-01 (Marina\nCove).' Adopted.\n(*22-348) Resolution No. 15905, \"Preliminarily Approving the Annual Report Declaring the City\nof Alameda's Intention to Order the Levy and Collection of Assessments and Providing for\nNotice of Public Hearing on June 21, 2022 - Island City Landscaping and Lighting District 84-2\n(Various Locations). Adopted.\n(22-349) Resolution No. 15906, \"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.\nNote: Since Councilmember Herrera Spencer recorded a no vote, the motion 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.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nMay 17, 2022\n3", "path": "CityCouncil/2022-05-17.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2022-05-17", "page": 4, "text": "(22-350) Recommendation to Authorize the Interim City Manager to Execute a $285,767 Grant\nAgreement with Alameda County for Homeless Housing Assistance and Prevention Grant, and\nAuthorize the City Manager, in the Future, to Extend the Term of the Contract up to December\n31, 2023; and\n(22-350 A) Resolution No. 15907, \"Amending the Grants Fund (222) Budget to Appropriate\n$285,767 for the Homeless Housing Assistance and Prevention Grant Project.\" Adopted.\nThe Economic Development made brief comments.\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer stated some of the funds requested were not approved; the\nCounty has not approved using funds to support outreach, mental health support or flexible\nfunds; inquired how much funding is needed or whether alternate funding can be allocated.\nThe Economic Development Manager responded $50,000 is for the flexible funds; stated\n$85,000 is for the mental health funds; staff has put all funding towards the overnight day\ncenter; staff is able to house the unhoused for a longer period of time.\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer stated the City could consider alternate funding for the\nprograms; inquired the cost for outreach.\nThe Economic Development Director responded the $50,000 for flexible funds includes\noutreach.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the discussion remains within the agendized parameters.\nThe City Attorney responded that he believes Councilmember Herrera Spencer is trying to\nestablish whether or not the grant should move forward; stated\nthe wisdom of the underlying action is not being debated; members of Council may ask\nquestions in order to understand whether or not a grant should be pursued.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether Council is not currently directing staff to explore other\nfunding opportunities, to which the Economic Development Manager responded in the\naffirmative.\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer stated her inquiry appropriately falls under the grant;\ndiscussed using parking spaces for the overnight day center; inquired how many parking spaces\nare being used.\nThe Economic Development Manager responded that she does not have the exact count; stated\nthere are only few remaining spaces not being used at the day center when she last checked;\nthe count is up from the past.\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer stated the spaces were not being fully utilized in the past;\nexpressed support for the increase in count.\nCouncilmember Knox White moved approval of the staff recommendation [including adoption of\nthe resolution].\nVice Mayor Vella seconded the motion.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nMay 17, 2022\n4", "path": "CityCouncil/2022-05-17.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2022-05-17", "page": 5, "text": "Under discussion, Councilmember Daysog stated that he voted against the matter in 2019; he is\nwilling to be flexible and will support the matter; however, putting people in cars is not the best\nidea; if the City combats homelessness, available funding should be used to find shelter.\nOn the call for the question, the motion carried by the following roll call vote: Councilmembers\nDaysog: Aye; Herrera Spencer: Aye; Knox White: Aye; Vella: Aye; and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft:\nAye. Ayes: 5.\n(22-351) Resolution No. 15908, \"Authorizing the Interim City Manager to Submit a Request to\nthe Metropolitan Transportation Commission for the Allocation of $126,618 in Fiscal Year 2022-\n23 for Two Grand Street Transportation Safety Projects per Transportation Development Act\nArticle 3 for Pedestrian/Bicycle Project Funding, and to Execute All Necessary Documents.\"\nAdopted.\nThe Senior Transportation Coordinator gave a brief presentation.\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer stated the matter includes two projects; the Grand Street\nbicycle and pedestrian safety improvements have not come to Council for approval yet; inquired\nwhether the matter will be heard by the Transportation Commission later in May.\nThe Senior Transportation Coordinator responded in the affirmative; stated there have been two\npublic workshops on the project.\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer stated the funds will be flexible to meet needs; inquired\nwhether other approved projects could have been submitted.\nThe Senior Transportation Coordinator responded staff considered other projects; stated the\nscope has expanded as the project has moved forward; originally, the project was solely for\npaving; rectangular flashing beacons have been added.\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer stated that she is happy to support the first project, but not the\nsecond project until it has been approved.\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer moved approval of bifurcating the two projects to allow her to\nsupport the first project.\nCouncilmember Knox White made a substitute motion to approve the staff recommendation\n[including adoption of the resolution].\nVice Mayor Vella seconded the motion.\nUnder discussion, Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether Councilmember Herrera Spencer's\nmotion is to bifurcate the vote, to which Councilmember Herrera Spencer responded in the\naffirmative.\nCouncilmember Daysog seconded Councilmember Herrera Spencer's motion to bifurcate the\nvote.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nMay 17, 2022\n5", "path": "CityCouncil/2022-05-17.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2022-05-17", "page": 6, "text": "On the call for the question, Councilmember Herrera Spencer's motion failed by the following\nroll call vote: Councilmembers Daysog: Aye; Herrera Spencer: Aye; Knox White: No; Vella: No;\nand Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft: No. Ayes: 2. Noes: 3.\nCouncilmember Knox White moved approval of the staff recommendation [including adoption of\nthe resolution].\nVice Mayor Vella seconded the motion.\nUnder discussion, Councilmember Daysog stated there is virtue in understanding the plan; it is\npossible that the Shoreline Drive project will be fine; however, it is good to know the details and\nunderstand the public first; noted that he will abstain from the vote.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she feels Council will have ample time to weigh in on the two\nproposed projects; expressed support for the proposed motion.\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer stated the second project could be changed entirely; inquired\nwhether the motion is to fund the Grand Street bicycle project.\nThe Senior Transportation Coordinator responded in the affirmative; stated approval would go\ntowards the $2.5 million that has already been allocated to the project; the project has an\n$827,000 grant from the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) as well as local paving\nfunds; approval will supplement the project.\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer inquired whether there is a reason the project could not have\nbeen brought to Council after being approved by the Planning Board.\nThe Senior Transportation Coordinator responded the grant application must be submitted to\nthe County in June prior to the next Council meeting.\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer stated that she will not support the motion; expressed concern\nabout the motion not being bifurcated.\nOn the call for the question, the motion carried by the following roll call vote: Councilmembers\nDaysog: Abstain; Herrera Spencer: No; Knox White: Aye; Vella: Aye; and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft:\nAye. Ayes: 3. Noes: 1. Abstentions: 1.\n(22-342 CONTINUED) Recommendation to Approve Agreement Appointing Dirk Brazil as\nInterim City Manager for a Term of No More Than 960 Hours in a Fiscal Year at a Salary of\n$133.85 Hourly, Commencing on May 23, 2022, and Authorize the Mayor to Sign the\nAgreement on Behalf of the City.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft requested clarification about the statements made during public comment.\nDirk Brazil discussed an incident at an annual Picnic Day; stated undercover Officers pulled\nover individuals in a van; a confrontation occurred causing people to leave the scene; an\ninvestigator was hired; shortly after the investigator's hiring, reports about concerning comments\narose; the contract was severed with the investigator; McGregor Scott was hired to take over\nthe investigation; the result of the investigative report was the creation of a larger, more robust\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nMay 17, 2022\n6", "path": "CityCouncil/2022-05-17.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2022-05-17", "page": 7, "text": "Police Oversight Operation, Auditor and Commission; the switch was made quickly once\nconcerns arose.\nIn response to Councilmember Knox White's inquiry, Mr. Brazil stated the City of Davis has an\nexcellent Police Chief; he relied on the Police Chief in selecting the initial investigator.\nVice Mayor Vella inquired whether changing course would be a problem if an issue or cause for\nconcern is raised.\nMr. Brazil responded in the negative; stated the investigator had been recommended by the\nPolice Chief who is still working with the City of Davis and is highly respected; the\nrecommendation was the wrong call.\nVice Mayor Vella inquired whether the hiring would have still occurred if the concerning\ncomments had been known.\nMr. Brazil responded in the negative; stated the field is specialized; he relied on law\nenforcement for recommendations; staff quickly figured the recommendation was not proper;\nstaff brought in a credible replacement to produce the report.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft expressed concern about the allegations being made; expressed support\nfor the clarification provided.\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer stated that she does not plan to support the matter; expressed\nsupport for the public comments.\nCouncilmember Knox White discussed a link to an op-ed being shared with select\nCouncilmembers; stated mistakes made were quickly identified and corrected.\nCouncilmember Knox White moved approval of the contract as presented.\nVice Mayor Vella seconded the motion, which carried by the following roll call vote:\nCouncilmembers Daysog: No; Herrera Spencer: No; Knox White: Aye; Vella: Aye; and Mayor\nEzzy Ashcraft: Aye. Ayes: 3. Noes: 2.\n(*22-352) Ordinance No. 3321, Concerning Rent Control and Limitations on Evictions Applicable\nto Maritime Residential Tenancies including Floating Homes. Finally passed.\nCONTINUED AGENDA ITEMS\nNone.\nREGULAR AGENDA ITEMS\n(22-353) Recommendation to Approve Proposed Term Sheet for Development of Alameda\nPoint Site A and Direct Staff to Negotiate a Sixth Amendment to the Disposition and\nDevelopment Agreement with Alameda Point Partners (APP) Based Substantially on the Term\nSheet, as well as Directing Staff to Negotiate Amendments to Ancillary Project Agreements.\nThe Community Development Director gave a Power Point presentation.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nMay 17, 2022\n7", "path": "CityCouncil/2022-05-17.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2022-05-17", "page": 8, "text": "Councilmember Knox White stated the plan proposes a significant increase in the number of\ntownhomes; inquired the percentage of units, which are visitability and universal design\ncompliant.\nThe Planning Building and Transportation Director responded staff has been discussing the plan\nwith APP; stated City ordinances require 30% of every project to have universally designed\nunits where someone with a disability could live; 100% of the units must be visitable where\nsomeone with disabilities can comfortably visit the units; City ordinances recognize the\nrequirement and establishes a process by which Council and the City can grant waivers;\ntownhomes are particularly difficult and are a product type that does not lend itself to universal\ndesign or visitability due to the amount of stairs; there are ways to modify townhome units to\nmeet the visitability standard; Site A has a lot of multi-family housing that is elevator served and\nis doing well with universal design standards; APP will be able to meet and exceed the universal\ndesign standard by 100%; Site A has almost doubled the requirement for universal design; the\nvisitability standard has been a problem for every project with a large number of townhomes;\nAPP believes a 70% compliance rate can be reached by modifying the townhome design;\nCouncil may choose to include terms in the Development and Disposition Agreement (DDA).\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer inquired how Council will know the affordable housing will be\nbuilt; and whether the cost for affordable housing is significantly higher than $50,000.\nThe Community Development Director responded one of the milestone schedule requires is that\nthe affordable housing provider has to be identified fairly early in the planning process; the\nprovider will be able to work with the development partner to plan for the affordable housing\nproject; $50,000 will be paid by APP incrementally throughout the project and will not be paid as\na lump sum; the incremental payments help assure investment in the affordable housing project;\nthe provider will be in a position to apply for and raise funding; the $50,000 provides great\nassistance.\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer inquired the cost per unit.\nThe Planning, Building and Transportation Director responded the cost varies from site to site;\nstated the affordable units are part of land and infrastructure that had been provided for free; the\ndeveloper is providing a finished pad; the site has many advantages; discussed a housing\nproject near Eagle Avenue and Everett Street with separate buildings and lower density with a\nhigher cost per unit; stated building the units cost $900,000 each.\nThe Community Development Director stated the Eden Housing project cost was approximately\n$700,000 per unit.\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer stated the City previously tethered the affordable housing\nunits to ensure affordable units were built before market rate units; inquired whether Site A was\nthe first project to untether the affordable housing units from the market rate units, to which the\nCommunity Development Director responded in the affirmative.\nDavid Doezema, Keyser Marston Associates, stated the $700,000 per unit cost is a good\nnumber; a portion of the cost would be paid by the project's operating income; the cost does not\nnecessarily need to be covered by a subsidy source; rents can cover some of the costs for\namortizing a mortgage; tax credits are generally able to help offset a portion of the costs; the\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nMay 17, 2022\n8", "path": "CityCouncil/2022-05-17.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2022-05-17", "page": 9, "text": "cost gap can be reduced to roughly $300,000.\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer stated except for the affordable housing, the units being built\nare not rentals; the market rate units are for sale; inquired about the rental income.\nThe Community Development Director responded a final determination has not yet been made;\nstated the units for sale and for rent will be established by the market condition at the time the\nunits come online; the developer is committed to putting a condominium map on every parcel to\nallow for either option; a final determination will be made as the market shows itself.\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer stated the determination contradicts an earlier meeting held\nwith staff; rentals would be provided for affordable housing units and market rate units would be\navailable for purchase.\nThe Community Development Director stated that she was referring to the market rate units; the\naffordable housing units are planned to be for rent.\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer inquired whether all market rate units will be for sale and not\nfor rent, to which the Community Development Director responded in the affirmative.\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer stated the plan could change; discussed rental income from\naffordable housing; inquired the financial guarantee for the affordable housing to be built.\nThe Community Development Director responded there is not a guarantee; stated the terms set\na pot of money to supplement associated costs; Phase 1 project has the affordable housing on\nBlock 8 come online first; an experienced developer will be selected with enough time to secure\nfunds; the free land and $50,000 will provide enough to get the project started.\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer inquired whether there is a reason the proceeds from the\nmarket rate units will not be put into a trust that can be used for affordable housing.\nThe Project Manager stated the developer contributed approximately $30,000 per unit for the\nfirst phase; $50,000 per unit is an increase from past contributions; the expectation is the\nconstruction of affordable housing units will not be fully funded; the contribution helps the\naffordable housing developer secure future financing in the form of tax credits.\nThe Community Development Director responded the proceeds from market rate being put into\na trust would create an impractical environment to proceed with the balance of development;\nstated funds will need to flow out of the project to the developer as the project moves forward.\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer inquired whether a contribution of more than $50,000 per unit\nhas been considered; stated the City used to require affordable housing units to be built before\nany market rate units could be sold; she is surprised that the City is not recommending money\nto be set aside or another form of guarantee.\nThe Planning, Building and Transportation Director stated Alameda Point is different from the\nrest of the City; Alameda Point has a 25% affordable housing requirement, the rest of the City\nhas a 15% requirement; projects are structured differently between Alameda Point and the rest\nof the City; the City is the property owner and project partner at Alameda Point; staff is satisfied\nand believes the project will work for the reasons outlined by the Project Manager; staff has\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nMay 17, 2022\n9", "path": "CityCouncil/2022-05-17.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2022-05-17", "page": 10, "text": "successfully built 128 units of affordable housing with the partner and a lower subsidy per unit;\nstaff is confident the City has been set up to meet the 25% affordable housing requirement; APP\nwill not be building the affordable housing units; an affordable housing developer will be brought\nin to partner with the City and APP to build the affordable housing; the term sheet has a high\nlikelihood of success; the 25% affordable housing units is a City requirement; staff cannot\nguarantee the success; however, the term sheet puts the City in the best possible position to\nmeet the requirement.\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer inquired why the City does not put money from the sale of\nmarket rate units into a trust until the affordable housing units are built; expressed support for\ncovering 15%.\nThe Planning, Building and Transportation Director responded the investors for the project need\nto invest millions of dollars to make the project move forward and build infrastructure to prepare\nthe property for vertical developers; investors need to have a return; if the City requires a trust,\nthe project will no longer be financially viable.\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer inquired whether for sale units might end up being rentals.\nThe Community Development Director responded the determination has not yet been made;\nstated a mix of market rate and affordable housing units is the current plan; the developer could\nreconsider if there is a dramatic shift in the market.\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer inquired whether the for sale market rate units could end up\nbeing market rate units for rent.\nThe Community Development Director responded that the approach is not the current plan.\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer stated the matter provides a sixth amendment to the DDA;\ninquired the reason the developer has been unable to perform the prior amendments.\nKaren Tiedemann, Goldfarb and Lipman, responded it is not accurate to state the developer has\nbeen unable to perform the various amendments; stated the developer has performed on most\nof the amendments; previous amendments revised the agreement, but have not released the\ndeveloper from obligations; the fourth and fifth amendments related to affordable housing and\ntiming; the amendments related to performance of obligations and schedules needed to be\nrevised; a project of significant size and multi-phases typically has a variety of amendments;\nchanges occur over time, many things cannot be predicted and adjustments must be made.\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer stated inflation is at a current 40-year high; inquired how the\nhigh inflation rates will impact the ability to complete the project and perform the sixth\namendment.\nMr. Doezema responded inflation is not a favorable factor and does not help the project;\ninflation can drive interest rates up placing downward pressure on sales prices; the project is\nfeasible at this time; a guarantee cannot be made about changes to future conditions.\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer inquired why staff is not recommending tethering the\naffordable housing units to market rate units.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nMay 17, 2022\n10", "path": "CityCouncil/2022-05-17.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2022-05-17", "page": 11, "text": "Mr. Doezema responded staff pursued the concept with the developer and was met with strong\nconcerns; stated tethering the units would result in the inability to finance the project; the\ndeveloper is investing millions into infrastructure; tethering the affordable housing to an\nuncontrollable aspect would prevent financing of the larger project due to unpredictability.\nThe Interim City Manager requested staff to expand on the complications associated with\nfinancing affordable housing projects and tethering concepts.\nMr. Doezema stated getting funding for affordable housing projects is a process; tax credits\nmust be obtained; there are different layers of funding from the County, State or other\nopportunities; time is needed to make the project work.\nThe Interim City Manager stated the market is competitive; many projects in different\njurisdictions are competing for the same affordable housing funding; the competitiveness adds\nto the uncertainty; projects must be competitive; affordable housing is tricky; tethering in the\ncurrent environment becomes challenging; staff is recommending the amendment since seeding\nthe project with $50,000 will allow the affordable housing developer to move forward.\nThe Project Manager stated the goal is to have the developer identify a potential affordable\nhousing developer to work with and begin the process of finding affordable housing project\nfunding.\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer stated the current market rate housing units for purchase are\nup to 3,300 square feet; expensive monthly rentals exist; inquired whether market rate prices\nare similar and the proposed square footage.\nThe Community Development responded APP indicated the current proposal is in the 1,900 to\n2,200 square foot range; 2,200 square foot units would be the universal design townhomes.\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer inquired if staff has an idea of the purchase price.\nThe Community Development Director responded in the negative; stated the price will vary\nbased on the unit's finishes and details; the price will be available later in the planning.\nMr. Doezema stated although it is not a figure from the developer, the average cost of\ntownhomes in the area is $1 to $1.4 million.\nCouncilmember Daysog requested clarification of Phase 1B; stated the City is planning to build\nan additional 199 housing units; inquired the original land use that is being replaced with\nhousing and the community facility; noted the community facility sounds exciting.\nThe Community Development Director responded APP will complete the infrastructure and\ndevelopment pad for the community facility; stated staff will put out a request for proposals\n(RFP) to make a determination of what will be placed on the pad.\nThe Planning, Building and Transportation Director stated that he does not have the exact\nnumbers; Block 10 is being proposed for residential and is currently planned for three existing,\nsmall, Navy buildings to be adaptively reused for commercial space with the construction of a\nfourth building to be used for commercial; the four buildings add up to less than 100,000 square\nfeet; the plan has become a non-viable option; Phase 2 has approximately 400,000 square feet\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nMay 17, 2022\n11", "path": "CityCouncil/2022-05-17.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2022-05-17", "page": 12, "text": "of adaptive reuse for commercial purposes in existing warehouses; a 2018 amendment included\nthe remaining commercial and 128 housing units; the amendment replaced commercial with\nhousing to support the Housing Element.\nStated that he is proud of the work the APP team has achieved; the partnership with the City\nhas achieved progress around a comprehensive scope and $90 million investment; a lot has\nbeen delivered to-date; decisions for the proposal are critical to maintain momentum and\ncomplete Site A: Joe Ernst, APP.\nStated Eden Housing has worked with APP to deliver the Starling and Corsair flats; many units\nare rented at affordable rates; expressed support for the proposed term sheet; stated Eden\nHousing considers APP a great partner; urged Council approve the term sheet: Louis Liss, Eden\nHousing.\nStated that he has championed a performing arts center at Alameda Point for many years;\nexpressed support for the new phase of the project and the performing arts center; stated\nputting in the infrastructure will help; discussed parking and traffic concerns: Christopher\nSeiwald, Alameda.\nStated MidPen Housing is working with partners to expand existing supportive housing at\nAlameda Point; expressed support for Council approving the proposed term sheet: Sarah\nMclntire, MidPen Housing.\nExpressed support for the amended term sheet; stated the additional units will be vital for\nAlameda to meet the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA); discussed access to new\ntransit; expressed concern over the maximum amount of parking spaces; discussed impacts on\nlow-income residents: Zac Bowling, East Bay YIMBY.\nDiscussed difficulties hosting the first Animate Dance Festival (ADF) event; stated the recent\nADF event was fantastic and successful due to infrastructure and density brought by\nconstruction; supporting the project continues the development and potential for performing arts:\nTara Pilbrow, West End Arts District.\nUrged Council to approve the term sheet; stated that she has been working towards a\nperforming arts center in the area; a performing arts center would serve as an important\nentertainment anchor; expressed support for increasing the density of the area: Rachel Campos\nde Ivanov, Alameda.\nUrged Council to approve the development plan and term sheet for Site A in order to continue\nredevelopment; stated APP is the right developer for Alameda Point and have installed critical\ninfrastructure to allow future development; development at Alameda Point is challenging; APP\nunderstands the challenges and constraints of Alameda Point: Karen Bey, Alameda.\nStated there is dire need for housing at the low-income level; urged Council to support the\nproject; expressed concern about the term sheet containing a waiver of universal design without\nconsultation from the Commission on Persons with Disabilities as required; stated Council is\nmaking decisions for persons with disabilities without consulting the Commission on Persons\nwith Disabilities: Beth Kenny, Commission on Persons with Disabilities.\nStated housing is a tremendous need in the community for employers and employees; urged\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nMay 17, 2022\n12", "path": "CityCouncil/2022-05-17.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2022-05-17", "page": 13, "text": "Council to support the Site A project and approve the term sheet: Madlen Saddik, Chamber of\nCommerce.\nExpressed support for the Phase 1B and Phase 2 proposals; stated the work has been\nimpressive; the proposed phases will build on the success to-date and infrastructure will be\nexpanded; the affordable housing requirements across the site will be met; noted the units will\naid the City's RHNA; urged Council to approve the term sheet: Bill Pai, Alameda.\nStated the developments made to-date have provided a vastly improved quality of life for\nAlameda Point residents; expressed support for Waterfront Park being a resource for refugees;\ndiscussed access to transportation and parks; stated infrastructure remains the biggest threat;\nexpressed support for the completion of West Tower Avenue infrastructure: Doug Biggs,\nAlameda Point Collaborative.\nExpressed support for the proposal and for keeping momentum; stated the proposed housing\nunits are key to the City meeting its RHNA numbers; urged Council to move ahead with the\nproposal: Drew Dara-Abrams, Alameda.\nStated approving Site A is important for positive economic growth; urged Council to approve the\nproposal for Site A; discussed infrastructure further supporting master developments; expressed\nsupport for continuing the reuse of Alameda Point: Joann Guitarte, Caf\u00e9 Jolie, Alameda.\nIn response to Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft's inquiry about universal design, the Planning, Building and\nTransportation Director stated the matter relates to a term sheet which sets forth the basic\nparameters upon which the City will negotiate a final DDA; the DDA will come before Council for\napproval at a later date; staff is laying out a road map; staff understands the project will require\nwaivers; it is important to bring the discussion early and create awareness; the project will need\nto go to the Commission on Persons with Disabilities for input prior to staff returning to Council\nfor any final approvals; if Council moves forward with the term sheet, staff will have a lot of work\nto do with APP to negotiate the final DDA amendments; before returning to Council, staff will\nmeet with both the Planning Board and the Commission on Persons with Disabilities.\n***\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft called a recess at 9:14 p.m. and reconvened the meeting at 9:27 p.m.\n***\nCouncilmember Knox White stated the journey has been long and arduous; he hopes the term\nsheet will include a commitment for universal design and visitability; expressed support for the\ncommitment being developed with input from the Commission on Persons with Disabilities;\nstated that he supports the comments provided by Ms. Tiedemann related to the project\namendments; expressed support for the matter moving forward.\nCouncilmember Daysog discussed Jimmy Doolittle and Pearl Harbor; stated that he is\nconvinced that the accomplishments at Alameda Point and Site A proudly protect the military\npast of the former Alameda Naval Air Station (NAS); the amended project continues to honor\nthe military past and helps to build inclusive neighborhoods; some of the proposed sites would\nbe job generating commercial space; the City will need to remain flexible; the City is receiving a\ncommitment to help with the community facility; expressed support for the community facility\nbeing a performing arts center and for people enjoying the area; stated the City is fulfilling the\nobjectives of the former NAS Alameda; expressed support for the matter; stated staff has\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nMay 17, 2022\n13", "path": "CityCouncil/2022-05-17.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2022-05-17", "page": 14, "text": "worked through details to provide a good deal for Alameda.\nCouncilmember Knox White moved approval of the staff recommendation.\nCouncilmember Daysog seconded the motion.\nUnder discussion, Vice Mayor Vella stated the City has worked hard to get where it is today; the\nCity has gone through several renditions of the DDA and has had to amend it over the years in\norder to adjust to changing conditions and the market; expressed support for the work that has\nbrought the project to its current state; stated that she will be supporting the matter.\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer stated that she supported the project in 2015; expressed\nconcern about the project building units for the middle class to purchase; stated the possibility\ncontinues not to occur; affordable housing units being offered are rentals, not for purchase;\nhousing units for sale are very expensive; homes will cost over $1 million and will not provide\nhousing for the middle; discussed the cost of rental units at Alameda Point; stated inflation is the\nhighest it has been in 40 years; Council is being asked to trust that staff will confirm affordable\nhousing units will be built since the units are not being tethered to market rate or requiring a\nfinancial investment; the approach is wrong; expressed concern about aspects of the project;\nstated members of the armed forces will not be able to afford the housing units; the middle class\nwill not be able to rent or purchase at Alameda Point; affordability is a problem; the City needs\nto offer housing for the middle to purchase; expressed concern about the units lacking rent\ncontrol; stated rents will increase; the City continues to leave the middle behind, which is\na\nproblem; expressed support for a public arts center; stated the matter is related to finding ways\nto house the middle; she will not continue to support the matter.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft discussed the former Alameda NAS being active, operating military base;\nstated people who were not active military did not visit the base; Alameda Point did not feel like\na part of the rest of the City; an important part of redeveloping Alameda Point is making it a\nplace that seamlessly feels like a part of Alameda; the opening of Waterfront Park joined\nhundreds of Alameda residents at a place with potential; the City has been able to accomplish\nso much; discussed the ribbon cutting for Corsair Flats and Starling; stated APP has worked\nwith the City to accomplish so much; she has every faith APP will move forward and reach the\nfinish line; discussed a meeting with the Veterans Administration (VA) related to the Alameda\nColumbarium; stated that she has been able to share the developments at Alameda Point and\nthe progress made to help veterans; the stakes are high; the City would lose much if it does not\nmove forward in keeping the project alive; changes to conditions and demands are occurring;\nprojects must adapt; expressed support for the project.\nOn the call for the question, the motion carried by the following roll call vote: Councilmembers\nDaysog: Aye; Herrera Spencer: No; Knox White: Aye; Vella: Aye; and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft:\nAye. Ayes: 4. Noes: 1.\n(22-354) Recommendation to Provide Direction on a Proposal to Develop a Guaranteed Basic\nIncome Pilot Program; and\n(22-354 A) Resolution No. 15909, \"Appropriate $4,600,000 of American Rescue Plan Act of\n2021 Funds for a Guaranteed Basic Income Pilot Program.\" Adopted.\nThe Development Managers gave a Power Point Presentation.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nMay 17, 2022\n14", "path": "CityCouncil/2022-05-17.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2022-05-17", "page": 15, "text": "Councilmember Herrera Spencer stated the recommendation is to serve 150 low income\nhouseholds; inquired how many low income households exist in Alameda.\nThe Development Manager responded the amount depends on the definition of low income;\nstated staff has performed preliminary estimates based on median area income; the amount is\nconsiderable.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she would like a range of information provided in order to\ndefine low income.\nThe Development Manager stated that he does not currently have the numbers, but can provide\nthem after public comment.\nUrged enactment of a pilot Guaranteed Basic Income (GBI) program; stated pilot program test\ngroups of single mothers with school aged children have been performed elsewhere: Marilyn\nRothman, Alameda.\nExpressed support for the proposed program; stated GBI is an important step in a transition the\nCity can make towards justice and meeting basic needs; GBI ensures the City makes a\ncommitment to high quality and standards of living for everyone; urged Council to approve the\nprogram: Savanna Cheer, Alameda.\nDiscussed her Native American Tribe's basic income program; stated the pilot program will be a\ngreat start in providing for basic needs; the program can change people's lives; urged Council to\nfollow through with the program and fund it as fully as possible; expressed support for a higher\ndistribution amount: Jenice Anderson, Alameda.\nExpressed support for the proposed program; stated GBI works and moves beyond old patterns\nof paternalism and outdated anti-poverty programs; the program provides autonomy to people\nto\nmeet their needs and have stability; urged Council to pursue the program and staff\nrecommendations: Jennifer Rakowski, Alameda.\nStated the program is a wonderful idea; the goal is for people to sustain themselves; the\nprogram could mean self-sufficiency; urged Council to approve the program: Melodye\nMontgomery, Alameda.\nThe Development Manager stated based on data from 2019 American Community Survey\n(ACS) approximately 11,000 households in Alameda are under $75,000 in household income;\ndepending on how the City decides to define low income, the number of households can vary; a\nsignificant number of households are eligible for the program.\nCouncilmember Knox White stated that he appreciates how much work went into the proposed\nprogram; expressed support for GBI; stated City staff have performed outstanding work; he is\nconfident in following the recommendations; expressed support for the program being\nmeaningful and providing the necessary data and for program efficiency; stated that he is\nconfident staff will keep administration costs down; the subcommittee requested a meaningful\nprogram evaluation; the pilot should not be short term and forgotten; the program should add to\nthe volume of knowledge that is being developed and collected; the program can change over\nthe years and is a way to provide some of the money received to families struggling through the\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nMay 17, 2022\n15", "path": "CityCouncil/2022-05-17.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2022-05-17", "page": 16, "text": "pandemic; expressed support for the staff recommendation.\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer stated there is a lot of work still to be done; expressed\nconcern about offering aid to 150 homes when 11,000 homes qualify under the identified\ncriteria; inquired how the 150 homes will be chosen.\nThe Development Manager responded staff will work with a research partner to develop a\nlottery or pool; staff will promote and publicize the program and allocation process.\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer stated that she does not plan to support the matter; she has\nconcerns; the program helps 1.5% of eligible people; she would be comfortable providing less\nfunding to more people in order to help people get to and from work; $1,000 per month for 150\npeople is not the type of program that meets the needs of Alamedans; expressed concern about\nthe program funding not continuing in the future; stated the City would never have the money to\nserve 11,000 people at the proposed rate; the pool will need to be changed; the funds could be\nused better; expressed support for funding being put towards mental health services; expressed\nconcern about serving only 1.5% of the eligible population; stated it is important for Council to\ncome up with a better way to serve people with needs; mental health and other needs matter as\nwell; the City can go farther with the amount of funding to serve more people than the proposed\n150 people.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft requested clarification about the program process and research\ncomponents.\nThe Development Manager stated the pilot program will allow impacts to be felt locally; the\nfindings from the research component will help support policy design and implementation.\nThe Development Manager stated the research also provides a narrative which illustrates how\nthe programs work and impact people's lives in providing resources; the program is developing\nand changing the narrative of how to fund poverty.\nCouncilmember Daysog stated it is not proper for City Hall to throw $4.6 million at a limited\nhandful of 150 households; he will not be supporting the matter.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated there is a need to establish an amount that is meaningful to help lift\npeople out of poverty and make a difference; more people could receive a lower amount; she\nwould like more details on how staff arrived at the proposed recommendation.\nThe Development Manager stated pilot programs range in the number of participants; staff\ndebated internally over smaller payments for more recipients versus larger payments to a\nsmaller number of recipients; staff's recommendation reflects a belief that providing larger\nbenefits, given the high cost of living in Alameda, may allow for more transformational impacts\nthan a smaller monthly payment; the group of participants would be smaller; however, the\nimpacts would be profound.\nThe Development Manager stated the bottom number of $400 was based off of Federal\nReserve information that 40% of the population could have trouble paying an unexpected\nexpense of $400 or more in one month; staff moved just above due to the Bay Area's high cost\nof living.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nMay 17, 2022\n16", "path": "CityCouncil/2022-05-17.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2022-05-17", "page": 17, "text": "Vice Mayor Vella stated that she supports the matter; a number of cities are piloting GBI for\ngood reason; the cost of living is extremely high; child care facilities have closed during the\npandemic; child care and living costs are increasing; the amount is an investment in members of\nthe community to ensure that people are able to stay in Alameda and meet rising costs.\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer stated tax payer dollars come from the same families; the\n11,000 low income households struggle and have to buy necessities, which include sales tax;\ntaxes have been placed on homes that are rented; low income households pay taxes; it is\ninappropriate to ask people paying taxes to give funding to 150 people out of 11,000; the\nfunding may be transformational to the 150; however, many people do not have money for\nnecessities; she is saddened that the City will be taking money from other families to provide\nmoney to 150 households; many families are struggling and will be left behind.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she has been excited about the concept of GBI since the City\nof Stockton's Mayor spoke at an Alameda County Mayor's conference; staff has put together an\nexcellent report; expressed support for the program having a chance to make a direct impact on\npeople's lives; stated the program can be leveraged to provide more or similar benefits to more\npeople; there is a time to be bold and transformative; expressed support for doing something\nthat creates happiness for other people; stated GBI allows people opportunities; Alameda has\nbeen moving forward with a lot of transformative programs; inquired whether the proposed\ntimeline is realistic; stated the program has been discussed with Alameda Housing Authority\n(AHA); expressed support for AHA residents being eligible to participate in the program; the\nprogram is new to Alameda, but not new to the state; discussed GBI programs in Canada being\nlong-standing with positive results.\nThe Community Development Director stated staff is juggling quite a bit; the Development\nManagers has done an admirable job of getting the complicated research and reporting\ncompleted; the program will take a bit to implement with the help of consultants; there is\npossibility for a longer timeline due to unknown variables; staff will return to Council with any\ndelays; as staff determines the complexity of the project, there could be a need for part-time\nstaff; staff will return to Council if it is determined that the program is more time consuming.\nCouncilmember Knox White moved approval of the staff recommendation, with understanding\nthat staff may return to Council and amend the timeline; stated the program is another value\nstatement made by the City.\nVice Mayor Vella seconded the motion.\nUnder discussion, Councilmember Herrera Spencer stated the program is a value statement;\nthe City is stating that it values taking money from people that cannot afford and are being\npushed out of the City in order to provide funding to 150 people; she does not support the\nmatter.\nOn the call for the question, 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(22-355) Introduction of Ordinance Amending Alameda Municipal Code Chapter Four to Comply\nwith Assembly Bill 1276 Regarding Single-Use Foodware Accessories and Standard\nCondiments. Introduced.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nMay 17, 2022\n17", "path": "CityCouncil/2022-05-17.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2022-05-17", "page": 18, "text": "The Program Specialist gave a brief presentation.\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer inquired whether an establishment can provide items without\npenalty if a customer makes the request, to which the Program Specialist responded in the\naffirmative.\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer inquired whether the establishment can advertise the\nprovision.\nThe Program Specialist responded in the affirmative; stated the law allows food facilities to put\nitems out on a counter in a single use dispenser so customers can have access without having\nto make a request.\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer inquired whether online orders can have a check box to\nrequest single use items, to which the Program Specialist responded in the affirmative.\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer further inquired whether enforcement would occur only due to\ncomplaints.\nThe Program Specialist responded in the affirmative; stated the City currently enforces the\ndisposable food serve law via complaints; staff recommends utilizing the same strategy.\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer noted complaints should not be made against an\nestablishment if a person has requested the permitted items.\nExpressed support for amending the City's foodware ordinance; stated the business districts'\nsupport for the ordinance; compliance has been delayed due to COVID-19; stated communities\nin the area are beginning to comply; expressed support for SeeClickFix being used for\ncompliance; discussed reasonable foodware projects: Ruth Abbe, Community Action for a\nSustainable Alameda.\nCouncilmember Knox White moved introduction of the ordinance.\nVice Mayor Vella 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.\n(22-356) Introduction of Ordinance Authorizing the Interim City Manager to Execute a Lease\nwith Rhoads Property Holdings, LLC, a California Limited Liability Company, dba CSI Mini-\nStorage for Thirty-Six Months for Buildings 338, 608, and 608A-C, Located at 50 and 51 West\nHornet Avenue, at Alameda Point. Introduced.\nThe Management Analyst gave a brief presentation.\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer inquired how many storage units are at the property.\nThe Management Analyst responded the storage facility has a diverse offering with smaller and\nlarger warehouse units and additional outside space.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nMay 17, 2022\n18", "path": "CityCouncil/2022-05-17.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2022-05-17", "page": 19, "text": "Councilmember Herrera Spencer stated that she would like to know the number of units; people\nin the community use the facility for storage; expressed concern about where current customers\nwill store items after the three year term is up; inquired whether staff will be offering storage\nspace at another facility.\nThe Management Analyst responded currently, staff does not plans to do so; stated the timeline\nhas not been determined; staff can take direction from Council to consider alternatives.\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer stated that she would have liked to know how many\nAlamedans are being impacted and the plan for the future; there is a need for storage facilities;\nexpressed concern about terminating the tenancy; stated some customers might have been\nrenting storage space for almost 20 years.\nThe Interim City Manager stated the matter is a lease extension recommendation; the use has\nbeen in place since 2005; staff is providing additional time; redevelopment at Alameda Point\ncomes with twists and turns; staff would like to preserve flexibility as the landlord; the intent is\nnot to terminate the tenancy, but to extend the term by three years.\nVice Mayor Vella stated a new storage facility is being constructed not far from the facility; the\nunits could be factored into the nearby, new, storage facility; Council tries to grapple with job\ncreation and building adequate housing; neither job creation or adequate housing are\naccomplished with using the space as a storage facility; expressed support for direction being\nprovided, while keeping larger goals in mind.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the new storage facility is near Mariner's Square, to\nwhich Vice Mayor Vella responded in the affirmative.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated Council balances many interests and desires to ensure properties\nhave the highest and best use; the area is currently suitable for storage; however, the lease\nextension has been structured to allow for another use when the opportunity arises; the storage\nfacility nearby is a larger, multi-level alternative.\nCouncilmember Daysog stated it is time to begin planning the Enterprise District; he will not\nsupport the matter.\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer expressed support for Council being briefed in advance;\nstated similar items in the future should not exclude briefings; the number of units and alternate\nlocations should have been considered; questioned whether the owner of both storage facilities\nis the same; stated that she will support the matter because she would like the tenants to have\nthree years versus no extension; expressed support for exploring alternate sites for the tenant.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft requested clarification about Council briefings.\nThe Interim City Manager stated staff generally provides an overview or briefing for Council to\naddress any questions; the matter relates to the City acting as landlord; any negotiation related\nto price and terms is heard in closed session; the lease extends a pre-existing use of a facility\npaying market rate rents; staff can provide more in-depth discussions; staff provides as much\ninformation as possible while acting as both the landlord and land use authority.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she often has questions about staff reports and reaches out to\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nMay 17, 2022\n19", "path": "CityCouncil/2022-05-17.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2022-05-17", "page": 20, "text": "staff for clarification; inquired whether Councilmembers can reach out to staff for additional\nclarifying information.\nThe Interim City Manager responded in the affirmative; stated staff is available to answer\nquestions and will typically review the agenda with Councilmembers the week of the meeting;\nnot every Councilmember has the availability for a briefing prior to each meeting.\nCouncilmember Daysog inquired whether the matter requires four affirmative votes; expressed\nsupport for Councilmember Herrera Spencer's inquiry about unit amounts being answered prior\nto approval.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft responded Councilmember Herrera Spencer has indicated that she will\nvote in favor of the lease extension.\nCouncilmember Knox White stated the matter has been agendized for almost a month and\nquestions could have been made prior to the meeting; Council can request a briefing prior to the\nmeeting.\nCouncilmember Knox White moved introduction of the ordinance.\nVice Mayor Vella seconded the motion.\nUnder discussion, Vice Mayor Vella stated Council has been discussing the Enterprise District\nfor some time; the City needs to make the most of the property and not displace tenants while\nthe City is working on the Enterprise District plan; she will support the motion.\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer requested clarification about whether the matter needs three\nor four affirmative votes.\nThe City Attorney stated the lease requires four affirmative votes.\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer inquired what would happen to the tenant if the matter does\nnot pass.\nThe Management Analyst responded the existing lease has expired; stated the tenant is being\nheld over on a month-to-month tenancy; if the lease is not passed, staff will continue the month-\nto-month tenancy and could renegotiate further if Council desires; if renegotiation do not occur,\nstaff would make considerations to remove the tenant.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the tenant is paying the lower rent amount during month-\nto-month tenancy.\nThe Community Development Director responded the language provided in the holdover lease\ndictates the rent; stated holdover rent is typically 150% to 200% of the initial rent.\nThe Management Analyst stated the lease allows the City to charge 200% of the current rent\nduring the holdover period; staff has opted to maintain the current rate due to scheduling issues.\nThe City Attorney stated the City should charge the set amount of rent shown in the lease; staff\ncan implement the letter of the lease if Council does not approve the matter.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nMay 17, 2022\n20", "path": "CityCouncil/2022-05-17.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2022-05-17", "page": 21, "text": "Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the holdover amount is more than amount proposed in\nthe lease amendment.\nThe Community Development Director responded in the affirmative; stated the holdover amount\nis double the existing rent as opposed to a 10% increase.\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer inquired whether Council could have met in closed session to\ndiscuss options for extending the lease and finding and alternate location.\nThe City Attorney responded the matter is a real property transaction and Council could direct\nstaff to agendize a closed session item at a future meeting in order to discuss price and terms.\nThe Interim City Manager stated agendas have become congested; staff is trying to move\nmatters through; closed session agendas have been lengthy due to labor negotiations; the lease\nextension is relatively straight forward; there is opportunity to see lease extensions in closed\nsession; the approach creates a backlog since the City owns a lot of land and has many\ntenants; expressed support for clear Council direction on which matters staff should bring to\nclosed session versus open session; stated the extension provides continued flexibility; the\nEnterprise District is not ready to be built yet; the lease language provides flexibility for the City\nin the future.\nVice Mayor Vella stated that she is not supportive of having every lease extension come before\nCouncil for consideration; the City should not negotiate alternative space for the tenant; stated\nthat she would like to be reasonable and go with the staff recommendation.\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer stated the lease is an extension as well as a termination; the\ntenant has three years at most; the termination aspect is different from other lease extensions\nwhich often include multiple options; she plans to support the extension to keep the tenant as\nlong as possible; expressed support for consideration of alternate locations.\nOn the call for the question, the motion carried by the following roll call vote: Councilmembers\nDaysog: No; Herrera Spencer: Aye; Knox White: Aye; Vella: Aye; and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft:\nAye. Ayes: 4. Noes: 1.\nORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA\nNot heard.\nCOUNCIL REFERRALS\n(22-357) Consider Having the City Council Address the Zoning of the Harbor Bay Club.\n(Councilmember Herrera Spencer) Not heard.\n(22-358) Consider Having the City Council Review Recreation and Parks Department\nCommunity Events. (Councilmember Herrera Spencer) Not heard.\n(22-359) Consider Directing Staff to Develop an Ordinance Setting Fines for Injury-Collisions\nInvolving Non-Commercial Vehicles that Do Not Meet Federal Design Standards or Have Been\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nMay 17, 2022\n21", "path": "CityCouncil/2022-05-17.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2022-05-17", "page": 22, "text": "Lifted/Altered in a Manner that Increases the Likelihood of Severe Injury or Death in Collisions\nwith Pedestrians and Bicyclists. (Councilmember Knox White) Not heard.\n(22-360) Consider Supporting Assembly Bill 1445. (Councilmember Herrera Spencer) Not\nheard.\nCOUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS\nNot heard.\nADJOURNMENT\nThere being no further business, Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft adjourned the meeting at 11:05 p.m.\nRespectfully submitted,\nLara Weisiger\nCity Clerk\nThe agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Sunshine Ordinance.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nMay 17, 2022\n22", "path": "CityCouncil/2022-05-17.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2022-05-17", "page": 23, "text": "MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING\nTUESDAY- - MAY 17, 2022- -5:15 P.M.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft convened the meeting at 5:16 p.m.\nRoll Call -\nPresent:\nCouncilmembers Herrera Spencer, Knox White, and Mayor\nEzzy Ashcraft - 4. [Note: Councilmember Daysog was\nabsent. The meeting was held via Zoom.]\nAbsent:\nNone.\nConsent Calendar\nCouncilmember Knox White moved approval of the Consent Calendar.\nVice Mayor Vella seconded the motion, which carried by the following roll call vote:\nCouncilmembers Herrera Spencer: Aye; Knox White: Aye; Vella: Aye; and Mayor Ezzy\nAshcraft: Aye; Ayes: 4. [Absent: Councilmember Daysog - 1.]\n(22-329) Recommendation to Approve Lisa Maxwell, Community Development Director,\nLen Aslanian, Assistant City Attorney, and Nanette Mocanu, Assistant Community\nDevelopment Director, as Real Property Negotiators for 950 West Tower Avenue,\nAlameda, CA. Accepted.\nThe meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider:\n(22-330) Conference with Real Property Negotiators (Pursuant to Government Code\nSection 54956.8); Property: 950 West Tower Avenue (Building 39, Alameda Point,\nAlameda, CA; City Negotiators: Community Development Director Lisa Maxwell,\nAssistant Community Development Director Nanette Mocanu, and Assistant City\nAttorney Len Aslanian.\n(22-331) Conference with Labor Negotiators (Government Code Section 54957.6); City\nNegotiators: Nancy Bronstein, Human Resources Director, Nico Procos, General\nManager Alameda Municipal Power, Jessica Romeo, Human Resources Manager, and\nSteve Woo, Senior Human Resources Analyst; Employee Organizations: Alameda City\nEmployees Association (ACEA), Management and Confidential Employees Association\n(MCEA), Electric Utility Professionals Association (EUPA), International Brotherhood of\nElectrical Workers (IBEW), Alameda Police Officers Non-Sworn (PANS), Alameda\nMunicipal Power Unrepresented Employees (AMPU), Alameda Police Management\nAssociation (APMA); Under Negotiation: Salaries, Employee Benefits and Terms of\nEmployment.\n(22-332) Public Employee Appointment/Hiring (Pursuant to Government Code Section\n54957); Title/Description of Positions to be Filled: City Manager.\nSpecial Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nMay 17, 2022", "path": "CityCouncil/2022-05-17.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2022-05-17", "page": 24, "text": "Following the Closed Session, the meeting was reconvened and the City Clerk\nannounced that regarding the Labor Negotiators, staff provided information and Council\nprovided direction by the following roll call vote: Councilmembers Herrera Spencer: Aye;\nKnox White: Aye; Vella: Aye; and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye; Ayes: 4. [Absent:\nCouncilmember Daysog - 1.]; regarding Property Negotiators, staff provided information\nand Council provided direction by the following Councilmembers Herrera Spencer: Aye;\nKnox White: Aye; Vella: Aye; and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye; Ayes: 4. [Absent:\nCouncilmember Daysog - 1]; regarding Employee Appointment/Hiring staff provided\ninformation and Council provided direction, including forming a subcommittee of Mayor\nEzzy Ashcraft and Vide Mayor Vella with no vote taken.\nAdjournment\nThere being no further business, Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft adjourned the meeting at 6:00\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\nMay 17, 2022", "path": "CityCouncil/2022-05-17.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2022-05-17", "page": 25, "text": "MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL JOINT MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND\nSUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE\nCOMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION (SACIC)\nTUESDAY-MAY 17, 2022- -6:59 P.M.\nMayor/Chair\nEzzy\nAshcraft\nconvened\nthe\nmeeting\nat\n7:04\np.m.\nCouncilmember/Commissioner Daysog led the Pledge of Allegiance.\nROLL CALL -\nPresent:\nCouncilmembers/Commissioners Daysog,\nHerrera\nSpencer, Knox White, and Mayor/Chair Ezzy Ashcraft\n- 4. [Note: The meeting was held via Zoom.]\nAbsent:\nVice Mayor/Commissioner Vella - 1.\nCONSENT CALENDAR\nCouncilmember/Commissioner Knox White moved approval of the Consent Calendar.\nCouncilmember/Commissioner Daysog seconded the motion, which carried by the\nfollowing roll call vote: Councilmembers/Commissioners Daysog: Aye; Knox White: Aye;\nSpencer: Aye; and Mayor/Chair Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye. Ayes: 4. [Absent: Vice Mayor Vella\n- 1.] [Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk preceding the paragraph\nnumber.]\n(*22-07 SACIC) Minutes of the Joint City Council and SACIC Meeting Held on May 3,\n2022. Approved.\n(*22-333 CC/22-08 SACIC) Recommendation to Accept the Investment Transactions\nReport for the Period Ending March 31, 2022. Accepted.\nADJOURNMENT\nThere being no further business, Mayor/Chair Ezzy Ashcraft adjourned the meeting at\n7:06 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\n1\nto the Community Improvement Commission\nMay 17, 2022", "path": "CityCouncil/2022-05-17.pdf"}