{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2021-11-16", "page": 1, "text": "MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING\nTUESDAY- -NOVEMBER 16, 2021--5:00 P.M.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft convened the meeting at 5:03 p.m.\nRoll Call - Present:\nCouncilmembers Daysog, Knox White, Oddie, Vella and\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft - 5. [Note: Vice Mayor Vella arrived at\n5:18 p.m. The meeting was held via Zoom.]\nAbsent:\nNone.\n(21-721) Councilmember Knox White announced that the certain section of Lincoln Park\nis within 120 feet of his house and he will need to recuse himself; inquired whether the\nmatter can be placed at the end of the agenda.\nCouncilmember Daysog moved approval of hearing the Lincoln Park property\nnegotiations [paragraph no. 21-727 at the end of the agenda.\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer seconded the motion, which carried by the following\nroll call vote: Councilmembers Daysog: Aye; Herrera Spencer: Ayes; Knox White: Aye;\nand Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye. Ayes: 4. [Absent: Vice Mayor Vella - 1.]\nCouncilmember Daysog moved approval of the Consent Calendar.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft seconded the motion.\nUnder discussion, Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the Consent Calendar matter\ncould be heard later.\nThe City Attorney responded that Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft may call the item at a later time;\nstated Council will need to come back to open session to conduct the Consent Calendar\nvote.\nThe meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider:\n(21-722) Conference with Real Property Negotiators (Pursuant to Government Code\nSection 54956.8); Property: Grandview Pavilion; City Negotiators: Eric Levitt, City\nManager; Nanette Mocanu, Assistant Community Development Director; and Amy\nWooldridge, Recreation and Parks Director; Negotiating Parties: City of Alameda and\nAlameda County and Greenway Golf; Under Negotiation: Price and Terms\n(21-723) 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 Organization: Alameda Police\nOfficers Association (APOA), Alameda Police Managers Association (APMA) and\nSpecial Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nNovember 16, 2021", "path": "CityCouncil/2021-11-16.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2021-11-16", "page": 2, "text": "Alameda Fire Chief's Association (AFCA); Under Negotiation: Salaries, Employee\nBenefits and Terms of Employment\n(21-724) Conference with Legal Counsel - Existing Litigation; Request for the City to\nParticipate in Proposed Multistate Settlements (Pursuant to Government Code \u00a7\n54956.9); Case Name: In Re: National Prescription Opiate Litigation; Court: United\nStates District Court Northern District of Ohio Eastern Division; Case Number: MDL\n2804 Case No. 1:17-md 2804\n(21-725) Conference with Legal Counsel - Existing Litigation (Pursuant to Government\nCode \u00a7 54956.9); Case Name: Mali Watkins V. City of Alameda, et al.; Court: United\nStates District Court, Northern District of California; Case Number: 4:21-CV-06080-KAW\nFollowing the Closed Session, the meeting was reconvened and the City Clerk\nannounced that regarding the Mali Watkins V. City of Alameda, the lawsuit filed by\nplaintiff Mali Watkins against the City of Alameda and various Alameda Police\nDepartment (APD) Officers alleges: 1) unlawful detention, 2) unlawful seizure, 3)\nexcessive force, 4) violation of Civil Rights under California Civil Code Section 52.1, 5)\nbattery, 6) assault, 7) negligence, and 8) intentional infliction of emotional distress; the\nclaims generally relate to APD Officers' detention and interactions with Mr. Watkins on\nMay 23, 2020; in order to avoid the expense and uncertainty of litigation, the City\nCouncil ratified/authorized the City Attorney to settle the matter, with no admission of\nliability by the City or its Officers, with Mr. Watkins in an amount not to exceed\n$110,000, by the following roll call vote: Councilmembers Daysog: Aye; Herrera\nSpencer: Aye; Knox White: Aye; and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye; Ayes: 4; [Absent: Vice\nMayor Vella - 1]; regarding the Opiate Litigation, the case involves litigation against\nprescription opioid manufacturers and distributors; nationwide settlements have been\nreached to resolve the cases brought by States and local political subdivisions against\nthree largest pharmaceutical distributors: McKesson, Cardinal Health and\nAmerisourceBergen and manufacturer Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and its parent\ncompany Johnson & Johnson; the settlements provide that in return for a release of\nclaims against the defendants, the States and local political subdivisions shall receive\nup to a combined total of $26 billion; the City of Alameda is eligible to participate in the\nsettlements although it is not a named plaintiff in the litigation; the City's share of the\nsettlement funds could be up to $1,062,000 over 18 years; the Council authorized the\nCity Attorney to resolve the litigation on behalf of the City by consenting and\nparticipating in the settlements; after electing to consent/participate in the settlements,\nthe City may later choose to receive its share of the settlement funds to be used to\ndesignated opioid abatement purposes, or can instead allow its share of the funds to be\ndirected to the County of Alameda; the Council approved doing so by the following roll\ncall vote: Councilmembers Daysog: Aye; Herrera Spencer: Aye; Knox White: Aye; Vella:\nAbsent; and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye; Ayes: 4; Absent: 1; regarding Grandview\nPavilion, staff provided information and Council provided direction with no vote taken;\nregarding Labor Negotiators, staff provided information and Council provided direction\nfirst by the following roll call vote: Councilmembers Daysog: No; Herrera Spencer: No;\nKnox White: Aye; Vella: Aye; and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye; Ayes: 3; Noes: 2, and by\nSpecial Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nNovember 16, 2021", "path": "CityCouncil/2021-11-16.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2021-11-16", "page": 3, "text": "the following second roll call vote: Councilmembers Daysog: No; Herrera Spencer: No;\nKnox White: Aye; Vella: Aye; and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye; Ayes: 3; Noes: 2.\nConsent Calendar\nCouncilmember Knox White recused himself and left the meeting.\nCouncilmember Daysog moved approval of the Consent Calendar.\nVice Mayor Vella seconded the motion, which carried by the following roll call vote:\nCouncilmembers Daysog: Aye; Herrera Spencer: No; Vella: Aye; and Mayor Ezzy\nAshcraft: Aye. Ayes: 3. Noes: 1. [Absent: Councilmember Knox White - 1]. [Items so\nenacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk preceding the paragraph number.]\n(*21-726) Recommendation to Approve Eric Levitt, City Manager, Amy Wooldridge,\nRecreation and Parks Director and Elizabeth Mackenzie, Chief Assistant City Attorney,\nas Real Property Negotiators for the Potential Grant of a Revocable License for a\nCertain Section of Lincoln Park at 1450 High Street in Alameda. Accepted.\nThe meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider:\n(21-727) Conference With Real Property Negotiators (Pursuant to Government Code\nSection 54956.8); Property: Certain Section of Lincoln Park at 1450 High Street\n(between ballfield and 9 residences located on Central Avenue); City Negotiator: Eric\nLevitt, City Manager; Amy Wooldridge, Recreation and Parks Director; and Elizabeth\nMackenzie, Chief Assistant City Attorney; Negotiating Parties: City of Alameda and\nProperty Owners at 3283, 3281, 3275, 3273, 3271, 3267, 3265, 3261 and 3257 Central\nAvenue; Under Negotiation: Price and Terms of Revocable License\nFollowing the Consent Calendar vote, the Closed Session reconvened and the City\nClerk announced that regarding Lincoln Park, staff provided information and Council\nprovided direction with no vote taken.\nAdjournment\nThere being no further business, Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft adjourned the meeting at 7:13\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\nNovember 16, 2021", "path": "CityCouncil/2021-11-16.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2021-11-16", "page": 4, "text": "MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL JOINT MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND\nSUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE\nCOMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION (SACIC)\nTUESDAY--NOVEMBER 16, 2021--6:59 - P.M.\nMayor/Chair Ezzy Ashcraft convened the meeting at 7:39 p.m. Councilmember Herrera\nSpencer led the Pledge of Allegiance.\nROLL CALL -\nPresent:\nCouncilmembers/Commissioners Daysog, Herrera\nSpencer, Knox White, Vella and Mayor/Chair Ezzy\nAshcraft - 5. [Note: The meeting was held via Zoom.]\nAbsent:\nNone.\nCONSENT CALENDAR\nCouncilmember/Commissioner Herrera Spencer moved approval of the Consent\nCalendar.\nCouncilmember/Commissioner Knox White seconded the motion, which carried by the\nfollowing roll call vote: Councilmembers/Commissioners Daysog: Aye; Herrera Spencer:\nAye; Knox White: Aye; Vella: Aye; and Mayor/Chair Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye. Ayes: 5. [Items\nso enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk preceding the paragraph number.]\n(*21-728 CC/21-21SACIC) Minutes of the Special Joint City Council and Successor\nAgency to the Community Improvement Commission Meeting Held on November 2,\n2021. Approved.\nAGENDA ITEM\n(21-729 CC/21-22 SACIC) Recommendation to Authorize the City Manager to Execute\na Memorandum of Understanding between DignityMoves, Five Keys Schools and\nPrograms, Successor Agency to the Community Improvement Commission and the City\nof Alameda to Participate in the State of California Homekey Program to Develop the\nBottle Parcel Located at 2350 5th Street, Alameda, California; and\n(21-729A CC) Resolution No. 15834, \"of The Governing Body of City of Alameda, A\nMunicipal Corporation Authorizing Joint Application to and Participation in the Homekey\nProgram.\" Adopted; and\n(21-22A SACIC) Resolution No. 21-13, \"of the Governing Body of the Successor\nAgency to the Community Improvement Commission of the City of Alameda, A Public\nBody Corporate and Politic Authorizing Joint Application to and Participation in the\nHomekey Program.\" Adopted; and\nSpecial Joint Meeting\nAlameda City Council and Successor Agency\nto the Community Improvement Commission\n1\nNovember 2, 2021", "path": "CityCouncil/2021-11-16.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2021-11-16", "page": 5, "text": "(21-729B CC) Resolution No. 15835, \"to Increase Expenditure Appropriations in the\nAmerican Rescue Plan 2021 Project (C99300) in the Capital Projects Fund (310) by\n$4,640,000 and to Encumber $1,200,000 in General Funds (10061833) to Operate\nInterim Supportive Homeless Housing at the Bottle Parcel Located at 2350 5th Street,\nAlameda, California, for Fiscal Years 2021-22 through 2027-28\". Adopted.\nThe Community Development Director gave a Power Point presentation.\nElizabeth Funk, DignityMoves, and Steve Good, Five Key, gave a brief presentation.\n***\n(21-730) Councilmember/Commissioner Herrera Spencer moved approval of allowing\nan extra 5 minutes for the presentation.\nCouncilmember/Commissioner Knox White seconded the motion, which carried by the\nfollowing roll call vote: Councilmembers/Commissioners Daysog: Aye; Herrera Spencer:\nAye; Knox White: Aye; Vella: Aye; and Mayor/Chair Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye. Ayes: 5.\n***\nMr. Good completed the presentation.\nCouncilmember/Commissioner Herrera Spencer inquired whether the population being\nserved will be all unhoused Alamedans.\nThe Community Development Director responded staff will attempt to give an Alameda\npreference; stated there is potential County funds and the Coordinated Entry process\nwill be used.\nIn response to Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft's request for clarification of Coordinated Entry, the\nCommunity Development Director stated Coordinated Entry is the County system where\neach individual is registered; once registered, individuals are prioritized based on need;\nneeds are based on medical, age and different vulnerabilities; individuals are prioritized\nfor housing based on need; there is possibility for Alameda to receive individuals from\noutside of the City but still within Alameda County.\nMr. Good stated that he spoke with the Alameda County Director of Services; the City\ncan prioritize services for Alamedans; anyone living in Alameda would be the first\npriority; if the services are for permanent supportive housing, the prioritization for\nAlamedans would not be possible; since the program being is interim housing, Alameda\ncan prioritize for Alamedans; if there are not enough eligible participants, the City can\nlook outside of Alameda for participants.\nCouncilmember/Commissioner Herrera Spencer inquired whether outreach will be\nprovided to ensure all of the unsheltered would be eligible for the Continuum of Care\nprogram.\nSpecial Joint Meeting\nAlameda City Council and Successor Agency\nto the Community Improvement Commission\n2\nNovember 2, 2021", "path": "CityCouncil/2021-11-16.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2021-11-16", "page": 6, "text": "The Community Development Director responded in the affirmative; stated staff will\nreach out to the unhoused community members and will often try to have members\nmove into the housing opportunity; the program is low-barrier and has minimal\nqualifications, with the exception of being a registered sex offender.\nMr. Good stated that he will work with the Continuum of Care system and the\nCoordinated Entry system; Five Key will work to do everything possible to fulfil the\nobligation to address encampments and unsheltered individuals, including working with\nnon-profits and other City agencies.\nCouncilmember/Commissioner Herrera Spencer inquired about the general response to\nthe program and what percentage agree to be on the list to be housed.\nMr. Good responded there are reasons why people do not wish to be housed; stated the\nsame situation exists in San Francisco; it helps if the City provides a place that is clean,\nwelcoming, treats people as guests, not numbers, and where safety is paramount; the\nprogram is unique in that people get what they want, including their own individual\nspace; the program is a great opportunity and will show an immediately significant\ndifference.\nCouncilmember/Commissioner Herrera Spencer stated the report shows insufficient\nfunds for the program, which will need General Fund money in year five; the contract is\nfor 15 to 20 years; the City will be the backstop for future years; inquired the estimate\nfor the backstop amount per year.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether there are any additional funding sources aside\nfrom the General Fund.\nThe Community Development Director responded staff does not currently have the\nfunding identified after year five; stated there is a requirement to identify funding through\nyear five in order to apply; it will be important for staff to begin pursuing other grant\nopportunities and funding sources once the application is submitted; staff will be diligent\nin efforts to pursue funding opportunities.\nCouncilmember/Commissioner Herrera Spencer inquired whether there is an estimate\nof the annual operating budget for the program for years five through fifteen or twenty;\nstated the annual operating budget is the maximum amount the City would be forced to\nbackstop.\nThe Community Development responded the cost is roughly $1.5 million per year.\nMr. Good stated that he has already applied for State grant funding and other funding\nopportunities; the program is a commitment to get people off the street; paying for the\nprogram now is cheaper than other services in the long-run.\nSpecial Joint Meeting\nAlameda City Council and Successor Agency\nto the Community Improvement Commission\n3\nNovember 2, 2021", "path": "CityCouncil/2021-11-16.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2021-11-16", "page": 7, "text": "Expressed support for the needed project; stated the bottle parcel is an odd site, which\nis difficult to develop; the program is a great use of the parcel; the project Homekey\ngrants have weird timelines; modular construction makes sense; the program is\nnecessary for Alameda to try to help with the homeless crisis; the units are able to be\ncounted toward the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA): Zac Bowling,\nAlameda.\nExpressed support for the project; stated that he would like to see the project go in so\nthat people can be moved into housing and away from the business district: Steven\nChabre, Alameda.\nExpressed support for the project; stated the parcel should not be vacant when people\ncan be housed; people will have their own space, a roof over their head, their own\nbathroom and access to services; he is sympathetic to others' suffering and wants\npeople to be in their own space: Josh Geyer, Alameda.\nStated the opportunity to build projects like this is a moral imperative; many crises are\ndealt with every day; no single project can build the housing needed for homeless\nneighbors; the projects should be moved forward as quickly as possible; the matter is\nurgent; the project is special and does many things right, including using modular\nconstruction and strong innovation; each member of the team is a proven entity:\nNicholas Nagle, Housing Action Coalition.\nStated that he has been tracking housing in Alameda since the 1990s; the program\ntakes a needed housing first approach; the wraparound services will reduce the amount\nof money spent; the project is encouraging; expressed concern about sea-level rise and\npermanent housing; stated modular housing is a good investment: William Smith,\nAlameda.\nStated it is a struggle to be homeless in Alameda; people do not take the time to\nunderstand that everyone is one Alameda; expressed support for available programs\nand providers; stated that he has been sleeping near the Alameda Police Station for\none year and nine months; he is deeply affected by being homeless and is supported by\nVillage of Love: Kareem Williams, Alameda.\nStated that she previously worked with the community based organizations; housing is\nthe solution; expressed support for the project: Ana Bagtas, Alameda.\nExpressed support for the project; stated there has been an emphasis on prioritizing\nAlamedans; expressed support for also helping people from outside Alameda: Jenice\nAnderson, Alameda.\nExpressed support for the program; stated housing is a human right; Alameda needs to\ndo something to support those who are unhoused and provide a safe space for people\nSpecial Joint Meeting\nAlameda City Council and Successor Agency\nto the Community Improvement Commission\n4\nNovember 2, 2021", "path": "CityCouncil/2021-11-16.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2021-11-16", "page": 8, "text": "November 2, 2021", "path": "CityCouncil/2021-11-16.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2021-11-16", "page": 9, "text": "funding as much as possible to help in the later years; the location is good and is close\nto services; noted the location is close to College of Alameda; stated there are\nunhoused college students; participants of the program might be able to take advantage\nof courses offered by the College of Alameda; the location is also close to public\ntransportation; noted that she will not support any tax efforts for program funding.\nVice Mayor/Commissioner Vella stated housing and lack of housing is a problem for all,\nregardless of location; costs continues to escalate; everyone pays the price when\npeople need social services and assistance due to not being provided with routine and\nbasic human necessities; the first basic human necessity is shelter; there have been\nconcerns and comments related to interference with college students; many of her\nstudents face housing insecurity; housing insecurity creates adverse effects in many\ndifferent ways; society pays a high price for housing insecurity; the program is a step in\nthe right direction; expressed support for more similar projects; stated the State will\nhave discussions about whether or not the project will count towards the Housing\nElement; the program is the right thing to do; Council should find funding for the\nprogram; the future cost is to the General Fund is trivial in order to see the project\nthrough; expressed support for compassion through actions; stated compassion is\nwhere the biggest difference can be made; the City depends on the network of County\nservices for the overall social welfare of the community; the City needs to do its part;\nexpressed support for the City's ability to move quickly and seeing the program come to\nfruition.\nCouncilmember/Commissioner Daysog stated the City needs to seize the opportunity to\ndo something bold; the project will potentially put 46 to 60 individuals back onto a path\nof stability; the program will significantly the homeless population numbers; expressed\nsupport for American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) funds; stated City staff will be creative in\nfuture years if General Fund monies are needed; the project is exciting due to the\nmodular characteristics and ability to be quickly implemented; expressed support for the\nproject.\nCouncilmember/Commissioner Knox White expressed support for the project; stated\nthat he would like to provide direction to staff to work with providers to ensure housing is\nmaximized over parking; providing parking is needed to run a successful program;\nexpressed support for 48 to 49 units on the parcel and extending the ability to provide\nservices and support and for engaging with the neighborhood Homeowners\nAssociations ; stated concerns and questions are arising; the earlier discussions occur,\nthe better and more successful the program will be.\nMayor/Chair Ezzy Ashcraft discussed a center in Berkeley and a facility in Mountain\nView; stated results are possible and within the City's grasp; the housing is modular and\ncan be stood up quickly; inquired whether the Mountain View project contains more\nhousing than what is proposed for Alameda, to which Mr. Good responded in the\naffirmative.\nSpecial Joint Meeting\nAlameda City Council and Successor Agency\nto the Community Improvement Commission\n6\nNovember 2, 2021", "path": "CityCouncil/2021-11-16.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2021-11-16", "page": 10, "text": "Mayor/Chair Ezzy Ashcraft stated the Mountain View project has multiple wings with a\ncommon area and was put up within six months; the fast timeline is promising and\nencouraging; ARPA funds are available; the direct allocation of funding is exciting;\nhowever, the funding is one-time, not for operating and ongoing expenses; State\nHomeless Emergency Aid Program (HEAP) funds and Homekey funds are going to be\nutilized; the City will pay for the program one way or another; there is a cost to having\nsomeone sleep in a business's doorway; the program is a way for the City to help\npeople with dignity; the housing is transitional; some participants of the program will\nmove onto a more permanent housing situation; the wrap-around services will help; the\nwork being done is life-changing; the City has not yet had a place where an unsheltered\nindividual could go at any time; the Friends of the Alameda Animal Shelter (FAAS)\ndeveloped a mobile unit which provides veterinary care for homeless individual's pets;\nthe FAAS mobile unit will come to the bottle parcel as well; she understands the desire\nto help Alameda residents; however, if there are openings, the City will reach out to the\nCounty to fill the spaces; many times the County has provided help for people to get\nvouchers to go elsewhere; the City will have to abide by the regulations which govern\nthe funding received; the City will likely be starting with many, if not all, Alameda\nresidents for the program.\nCouncilmember/Commissioner Knox White moved approval of the staff\nrecommendation [including adoption of the resolutions].\nVice Mayor/Commissioner Vella seconded the motion.\nUnder discussion, Councilmember/Commissioner Herrera Spencer\nstated\na\nMemorandum of Understanding and two other documents are being recommended for\nCouncil approval; requested clarification for the true ask of the matter.\nThe City Clerk stated the motion is understood as approving all of the actions, including\nadoption of the three resolutions and approval of the two MOUs; noted the staff\nrecommendation is to approve all matters.\nCouncilmember/Commissioner Knox White stated that his understanding of the motion\nis the same.\nCouncilmember/Commissioner Herrera Spencer stated that she would like confirmation\nthat the program will be prioritizing Alamedans.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she and Mr. Good have confirmed Alamedans will be\nprioritized.\nOn the call for the question, the motion carried by the following roll call vote:\nCouncilmembers/Commissioners Daysog: Aye; Herrera Spencer: Aye; Knox White:\nAye; Vella: Aye; and Mayor/Chair Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye. Ayes: 5.\nSpecial Joint Meeting\nAlameda City Council and Successor Agency\nto the Community Improvement Commission\n7\nNovember 2, 2021", "path": "CityCouncil/2021-11-16.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2021-11-16", "page": 11, "text": "ADJOURNMENT\nThere being no further business, Mayor/Chair Ezzy Ashcraft adjourned the meeting at\n8:43 p.m.\nRespectfully submitted,\nLara Weisiger, City Clerk\nSecretary, SACIC\nThe agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Sunshine Ordinance.\nSpecial Joint Meeting\nAlameda City Council and Successor Agency\nto the Community Improvement Commission\n8\nNovember 2, 2021", "path": "CityCouncil/2021-11-16.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2021-11-16", "page": 12, "text": "MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING\nTUESDAY- -NOVEMBER 16, 2021--7:00 - P.M.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft convened the meeting at 7:31 p.m.\nROLL CALL -\nPresent:\nCouncilmembers Daysog, Herrera Spencer, Knox White,\nVella, and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft - 5. [Note: Vice Mayor\nVella arrived at 7:35 p.m. and the meeting was conducted\nvia Zoom]\nAbsent:\nNone.\nPROCLAMATIONS, SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY AND ANNOUNCEMENTS\n(21-731) Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft read a proclamation honoring Wilma Chan.\n***\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft called a recess 7:39 p.m. and reconvened the meeting at 8:43 p.m.\nAGENDA CHANGES\n(21-732) The City Clerk announced items Recreation Fees [paragraph no. 21-759 and meeting\nschedules [paragraph no. 21-760 could move to December 7, 2021.\nCouncilmember Daysog moved approval of hearing the license plate reader referral [paragraph\nno. 21-762 first.\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer seconded the motion, which failed by the following roll call\nvote: Councilmembers Daysog: Aye; Herrera Spencer: Ayes; Knox White: No; Vella: No; and\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft: No. Ayes: 2. Noes: 3.\nCouncilmember Knox White moved approval of continuing the Recreation fees and the meeting\nschedules matters to December the 7th Council meeting under the Continued Items agenda\nsection.\nVice Mayor Vella seconded the motion.\nUnder discussion, Councilmember Herrera Spencer made a friendly amendment to include the\nparking management program [paragraph no. 21-757 under the Continued Items agenda\nsection of the December 7th Council meeting.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she would prefer to keep the original motion as-is and move the\nparking management program if needed.\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer inquired whether staff is waiting for the parking management\nprogram matter to be heard.\nCouncilmember Knox White responded the same staff is presenting for the General Plan\n[paragraph no. 21-756 matter.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nNovember 16, 2021\n1", "path": "CityCouncil/2021-11-16.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2021-11-16", "page": 13, "text": "The friendly amendment was not approved.\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.\nORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA\n(21-733) Zac Bowling, Alameda, announced the annual Alameda Peeps turkey drive; stated\ndonations for the drive can be made at alamedapeeps.com in an effort to help the Alameda\nFood Bank.\n(21-734) Denyse Trepanier, BikeWalk Alameda, discussed the death of Supervisor Wilma\nChan; stated the death is one of over 40,000; announced a BikeWalk Alameda safe streets rally\nand memorial bike ride as part of the World Day of Remembrance for traffic victims; stated the\nrally will also honor first responders; expressed support for City staff and event coordination;\nstated that she is commenting as someone who has been traumatized by the shocking increase\nin traffic violence; many proven remedies can be implemented at the City level; urged Council\nthink about the topic as budgets are prioritized.\n(21-735) Josh Altieri, Alameda Housing Authority (AHA), discussed affordable housing solution\nprojects being brought to the City; stated May 2021 57 emergency housing vouchers were\nprovided for individuals experiencing homelessness or attempting to flee a domestic violence\nsituation; noted vouchers have been issued as an effort between AHA, Alameda County and the\nOakland Housing Authority; announced 50% of an upcoming project is complete; stated the\nproject is on track for housing individuals starting summer of 2022; pre-application for\nprospective tenants will open November 30th via the AHA website; discussed the 2615 Eagle\nAvenue property project; stated affordable housing projects are expanding supportive services\nto program participants and tenants; announced a partnership with the Alameda Fire\nDepartment for a toy drive.\n(21-736) Jay Garfinkle, Alameda, suggested future reports from the Housing Authority to be\npresented as an agendized presentation; discussed Senate Bill (SB) 9; stated SB 9 allows\nsingle family lots to be split in two, divided in such a way that allows many housing units on an\nindividual family lot; a resolution is circulating which allows cities to adopt specific criteria and\ncontrol permitting; a draft resolution has been presented to the Planning, Building and\nTransportation Director and has a deadline of December 31st\n(21-737) Jenice Anderson, Alameda, stated that she is interested in getting Councilmembers\npaid; noted many potential candidates do not run for office due to the financial burden; stated\nanyone wishing to help volunteer with the effort can contact her via Alameda Peeps and Twitter;\nshe is opposed to license plate readers in the City due to privacy issues and the possibility of\nmisuse in domestic violence situations.\nCONSENT CALENDAR\nStated that he would like the findings to allow City meetings [paragraph no. 21-760] to be\ndiscussed; noted the vast majority of the emergency is gone; although infections are seen, the\npandemic is not an emergency; urged looking at all matters adopted by Council in the past year\nwhich no longer deserve an emergency exception: Jay Garfinkle, Alameda.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nNovember 16, 2021\n2", "path": "CityCouncil/2021-11-16.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2021-11-16", "page": 14, "text": "Stated the Open Government Commission (OGC) has sent a letter to Council discussing\npermanent Zoom and remote meeting options; expressed support for continuing accessibility\nwith government: Zac Bowling, Alameda.\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer requested the agreement with Terris Barnes Walters Boigon\nHeath Lester, Inc. [paragraph no. 21-746 and the findings to allow City meetings [paragraph no.\n21-747 be removed from the Consent Calendar for discussion; noted a no vote on final\npassage of the parking ordinance [paragraph no. 21-750].\nCouncilmember Daysog noted a no vote on the ordinance as well.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the agreement with Terris Barnes Walters Boigon Heath\nLester, Inc. can be continued to a future meeting date without repercussions, to which the\nAssistant City Manager responded in the affirmative.\n(21-738) Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft moved approval of hearing the findings to allow City meetings,\nand continuing the agreement with Terris Barnes Walters Boigon Heath Lester, Inc. to the end\nof the agenda.\nCouncilmember Knox White seconded the motion, and provided a friendly amendment to the\nmotion to continue the agreement with Terris Barnes Walters Boigon Heath Lester, Inc. to the\nContinued Agenda Items section of the December 7th Council meeting agenda.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft accepted the friendly amendment.\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.\nCouncilmember Knox White moved approval of the remainder of the Consent Calendar.\nVice Mayor Vella 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(*21-739) Minutes of the Special and Regular City Council Meetings Held on October 19, 2021.\nApproved.\n(*21-740) Ratified bills in the amount of $744,756.89.\n(*21-741) Recommendation to Authorize the City Manager to Execute an Agreement with NBC\nConstruction and Engineering, Inc. for the Harbor Bay Isle Lagoon Improvement Project, No.\nP.W. 07-21-28, in a Total Amount Not to Exceed $344,683. Accepted.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nNovember 16, 2021\n3", "path": "CityCouncil/2021-11-16.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2021-11-16", "page": 15, "text": "(*21-742) Recommendation to Authorize the City Manager to Execute an Agreement with G & G\nBuilders, Inc. for Maintenance Service Center Interior Improvements, No. P.W. 02-21-10, in a\nNot to Exceed Amount of $402,962, Including a Ten Percent Contingency. Accepted.\n(*21-743) Recommendation to Authorize the City Manager to Execute a Five-Year Agreement\nwith Nute Engineering for Engineering Design Services for Cyclic Sewer Rehabilitation Project,\nPhase 19, in a Total Amount Not to Exceed $2,388,446. Accepted.\n(*21-744) Recommendation to Authorize the City Manager to Execute a Water Line Easement\nto East Bay Municipal Utility District Across City-Owned Property and Any and All Ancillary\nDocuments and Direct the Recording of the Grant of Easement for Installation of the Oakland\nInner Harbor Pipeline Crossing. Accepted.\n(*21-745) Recommendation to Authorize the City Manager to Negotiate and Execute a Thirty-\nTwo Month Agreement with All City Management Services Inc. for School Crossing Guard\nServices in a Total Amount Not to Exceed $1,083,456; and a Memorandum of Understanding\nwith the Alameda Unified School District for Partial Reimbursement of the City's Fiscal Year\n2021-22 Costs in an Amount Not to Exceed $90,000. Accepted.\n(21-746) Recommendation to Authorize the City Manager, or Designee, to: 1) Execute an\nAgreement with Terris Barnes Walters Boigon Heath Lester, Inc. (TBWBH) in an Amount Not to\nExceed $132,000 for Strategic Support, Research, Ballot Measure Development, Informational\nOutreach and Other Steps Necessary to Prepare a Potential Revenue Measure for the\nNovember 2022 Ballot; and Execute an Agreement with Fairbank, Maslin, Maullin, Metz &\nAssociates (FM3) in an Amount Not to Exceed $37,000 for Survey Development,\nImplementation, and Associated Analysis Related to a Potential Revenue Measure for the\nNovember 2022 Ballot; and\n(21-746 A) Adoption of Amending the Fiscal Year 2021-22 Budget by Increasing Appropriations\nin the City Manager's Office by $169,000 to Enter Into Agreements With Terris Barnes Walters\nBoigon Heath Lester, Inc. (TBWBH) and Fairbank, Maslin, Metz & Associates (FM3) for\nServices Related to a Potential Revenue Measure for the November 2022 Ballot. Continued to\nDecember 7, 2021.\n(21-747) Recommendation to Approve Findings to Allow City Meetings to be Conducted via\nTeleconference.\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer inquired the required findings needed from Council in order to\ncontinue allowing City meetings to be conducted via teleconference.\nThe City Attorney responded stated the findings to be made by the Council are contained in the\nstaff report; Council must find that the City is still in a state of emergency as declared by State of\nCalifornia and the Governor, which remains true; Council must also find that local officials\ncontinue to recommend measures to promote social distancing.\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer stated some people have a different opinion of whether\nmeetings should be in person; noted the City of Hayward is providing a hybrid meeting option\nwhere members can participate in person and via Zoom; stated Hayward requires proof of\nvaccination in order to be in person; City of Vallejo has resumed in person meetings as of\nNovember 16th with the requirement of masking while inside; she has heard a preference from\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nNovember 16, 2021\n4", "path": "CityCouncil/2021-11-16.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2021-11-16", "page": 16, "text": "other people that in person meetings are preferred over Zoom; expressed support for the City\nproviding a hybrid meeting option; questioned the requirements for hybrid meetings; stated\nmany Councilmembers and City staff are in City Hall during the Council meetings; questioned\nwhether members participating remotely could use a room within City Hall to participate in the\nmeetings; she will vote no on the matter and would like more information provided about other\ncities the next time the matter is before Council; some people do not have the means and do not\nfeel comfortable attending Council meetings online via Zoom; some people have no or poor\ninternet service and are denied the opportunity to participate in the meetings; some people are\nnot comfortable calling into the meeting; it is important to include all members of the public in\nmeetings; the City needs to ensure all members of the public can participate; stated that she\nlooks forward to staff providing accommodations to all members of the public.\nCouncilmember Knox White moved approval of the staff recommendation with direction that the\nmatter remains on the Consent Calendar moving forward for the remainder of the year.\nVice Mayor Vella seconded the motion.\nUnder discussion, Councilmember Daysog stated that he will support the matter; noted the point\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer has brought forth is right-on and the City should be moving\ntoward a hybrid meeting model to the extent of safety of all.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated this may not be the time to rush into more indoor gatherings based\non reports from public health officials; COVID-19 cases have been surging and the holidays are\napproaching; the COID-19 cases and vaccination rate for the City are better than cities that\nhave switched to a hybrid or all in-person meeting model; public safety comes first and Council\nwill weigh all options; Boards and Commissions are waiting the matter out until the end of the\nyear and will reconsider in January.\nVice Mayor Vella stated the California Department of Public Health continues to raise the fact\nthat the COVID-19 surge of the year prior happened around the holiday season; cases began to\nspike around Thanksgiving; noted America's surges are different from the rest of the world while\ncoinciding with the holidays; stated now is not the time to say that the pandemic is over; the\ncase rates are increasing; the Governor has issued more emergency declarations while\nrequesting out of State health official aid; expressed support for the staff recommendation while\ntaking into account the comments about how the City will function in a post COVID-19 world.\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer stated that she has not stated the pandemic is over; many\npeople do not stay in their home 24 hours, 7 days a week; open government needs to be\nsupported; a hybrid model is a good compromise being conducted by other cities; the pandemic\nis not over.\nCouncilmember Daysog stated that he hopes the vaccine counts for something so that the\nupcoming holiday season and going forward is different from the holiday cases of 2020; he is\nputting faith in science; noted Congress is holding committee meetings with a lot of space;\nexpressed support for the City figuring out an option; stated that he thinks residents would like\nto see a path forward.\nCouncilmember Knox White stated the matter would be a great discussion for a Council\nworkshop.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nNovember 16, 2021\n5", "path": "CityCouncil/2021-11-16.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2021-11-16", "page": 17, "text": "On 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(*21-748) Recommendation to Authorize the City Manager to Execute an Agreement with\nAlameda County to Accept $60,000 in Funding for the Local Winter Warming Services Program;\nand Authorize the City Manager to Execute a First Amendment to the Agreement with Building\nFutures with Women and Children to Provide Winter Warming Services For $60,000, Resulting\nin a Total Contract Amount of $113,000; and\n(*21-748A) Resolution No. 15836, \"Amending the Budget to Increase Revenue and Expenditure\nAppropriations in the Homelessness Program by $60,000.\" Adopted.\n(*21-749) Resolution No. 15837, \"Authorizing Fiscal Year-End Budget Amendments to Facilitate\nClosing Fiscal Year (FY) 2020-21.\" Adopted.\n(*21-750) Ordinance No. 3309, \"Amending Alameda Municipal Code Chapter XXX to\nComprehensively Update Citywide Off-Street Parking and Loading Space Regulations and\nMake Conforming Changes to Other Zoning Code Sections, as Recommended by the Planning\nBoard.\" Finally passed.\n[Note: Councilmembers Daysog and Herrera Spencer recorded a no vote, so the ordinance was\nfinally passed by the following vote: Councilmembers Daysog: No; Herrera Spencer: No; Knox\nWhite: Aye; Vella: Aye; and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye. Ayes: 3. Noes: 2.\n(*21-751) Ordinance No. 3310, \"Amending the Alameda Municipal Code by Amending Chapter\n21 (Solid Waste and Recycling) to Comply with Senate Bill 1383, Conform with Franchise\nAgreement, and Implement Strategy Four of Alameda's Zero Waste Implementation Plan\nUpdate.\" Finally passed.\nCONTINUED AGENDA ITEMS\nNone.\nREGULAR AGENDA ITEMS\n(21-752) Recommendation to Authorize the City Manager to Execute an Agreement in an\nAmount not to Exceed $2,536,047 with Bay Area Community Services (BACS) for Emergency\nHomeless Housing Services for Up to Two Years; and Recommendation to Authorize the City\nManager to Negotiate and Execute an Agreement with Alameda County in an Amount Ranging\nfrom $30,000 to $45,000 in Homeless Emergency Aid Program Interest Funds to Assist with\nRemodel/Repair of City-Owned Housing for Use as Emergency Homeless Housing; and\n(21-752 A) Resolution No. 15838, \"Establishing a Budget to Appropriate $2,836,047 in 2021\nAmerican Rescue Plan Act Funds (C99300) to Receive Contractual Services from Bay Area\nCommunity Services and Funds to Remodel/Repair and Provide Fixtures, Furniture, Equipment,\na Vehicle, and Supplies for the Emergency Housing.\" Adopted.\nThe Economic Development Manager gave a brief presentation.\nStated that he is a residential tenant of Alameda Point; he supports assistance for unhoused\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nNovember 16, 2021\n6", "path": "CityCouncil/2021-11-16.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2021-11-16", "page": 18, "text": "individuals; however, other neighborhoods in Alameda should bear some of the risks and\nexternalities of the City's plan to combat homelessness and housing insecurity; questioned why\nthe efforts are concentrated almost entirely at Alameda Point; stated there is a large uptick in\ncrime and quality of life issues as a result of the City concentrating homeless outreach around\nAlameda Point; the proposed emergency shelters cause concern for himself and other\nneighbors; urged the City house families in the units instead; discussed his affordable housing\nwork; urged the decision be delayed until stakeholder input is received; stated reduced rent in\nexchange for taking on the additional risks would be fair: Curtis Thomas, Alameda.\nStated that she supports the matter; any and all options of housing are good for Alameda in\norder to address the issue of homelessness in the City; the deliberation of the matter is long\noverdue; urged Council to support the matter; stated Council should consider hiring more staff\nto run the City's social and homeless services programs; having one staff person handle the\nvarious projects is not sustainable; expressed support for Community Development Department\nstaff; other cities with similar programs dedicate entire divisions to homelessness; the solution is\ntemporary; the City will need to continue to work on permanent housing solutions for the\nunhoused; discussed government spending on unhoused individuals; urged Council continue\nthe priority of ending homelessness in Alameda: Ana Bagtas, Alameda.\nStated that she is a resident of Alameda Point; expressed concern about the project being\nclustered housing; stated Alameda Point is mixed housing community with more than 200 units\nof permanent supportive housing managed by the Alameda Point Collaborative; Alameda Point\nhas domestic violence shelter, transitional housing trailers and traditional family housing;\nAlameda Point has become disproportionately burdened; expressed concern about Alameda\nPoint being the focus on the need for housing and increased foot traffic due to encampments;\nexpressed concern about the lack of community input and involvement; urged Council delay the\nvote on the matter: Stephanie Chenard, Alameda.\nExpressed support for providing housing; stated housing and dignity are human rights; she is a\nresident of Alameda Point; expressed concern about 11 people living in one single family home;\nstated the amount of people does not seem to be set for success; expressed support for\nconsidering housing insecure families in the units; stated families would be a great fit for the\narea; expressed support for the bottle parcel project and considering the Bay Farm area: Dede\nLewis, Alameda.\nStated that she is a resident of Alameda Point; noted the neighborhood is family-oriented; stated\nmany children riding around the neighborhood; expressed concern about rotating people in the\nneighborhood not joining the community and not having the same sense of safety or well-being;\nstated family and refugee housing would be welcome; Alameda Point has a strong community;\ndiscussed the bottle parcel; stated the proposed program does not feel as put together; urged\nCouncil to delay the vote on the matter until further discussion is held: Amy Benjamin, Alameda.\nStated that he is a developer and advisor; discussed projects; stated that he does not support\nthe matter; the proposed district is within a historical district; the area should be preserved\naccording to policy; there is a segregation of services at Alameda Point; expressed support for\nseeing transitional services being provided throughout the City; stated that he would like to see\ngeospatial mapping; expressed concern over a lack of transparency; stated 11 people living in a\nsingle space is not realistic: Craig Miott, Alameda.\nStated emergency housing, which is not permanent, is being discussed; if the program does not\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nNovember 16, 2021\n7", "path": "CityCouncil/2021-11-16.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2021-11-16", "page": 19, "text": "work out at the proposed location, the location can be revoked; emergency housing is needed\nfor people now which calls for less consideration of other factors; concentration of services at\nAlameda Point is a problem; the proposed site is only three units; housing must be provided for\nsingle people, not just families; urged Council to move forward with the sites and provide\nadequate staffing: William Smith, Alameda.\nStated the Island needs to share in the responsibility to help the unhoused population; all of\nAlameda is a family neighborhood; concerns were raised about bringing in crime and unsafety;\npeople are part of the community when they receive services and care; expressed concern over\nthe comments: Jenice Anderson, Alameda.\nExpressed support for comments provided by speakers Smith and Anderson; stated that he is\nsympathetic to people who live at Alameda Point where services are being concentrated; people\neither have inherent value and the right to dignity or not; the determination of value is not\ndependent on being a member of a family or not; people have value and deserve dignity: Josh\nGeyer, Alameda.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft called a recess 9:42 p.m. and reconvened the meeting at 9:58 p.m.\n(21-753) Councilmember Herrera Spencer moved approval of allowing 5 minutes for Jonathan\nRussell, BACS, to give a presentation.\nCouncilmember Knox White seconded the motion, which carried by the following roll call vote:\nCouncilmembers Daysog: Aye; Herrera Spencer: Aye; Knox White: Aye; and Mayor Ezzy\nAshcraft: Aye. Ayes: 4. [Absent: Vice Mayor Vella - 1.]\nMr. Russell gave a brief presentation.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated concerns from residents have related to a lack of\ncommunication for the project; inquired how BACS will work with neighbors to\ncommunicate, and the anticipated communication model.\nThe Community Development Director responded staff has scheduled a community\nmeeting on November 29th to share ideas and answer questions; stated the information\nis posted on the City website; the meeting will be the initial opportunity for staff to\nengage with the community; staff can provide an additional community meetings if\nneeded; if the program moves forward, community members will have easy access and\na continued line to communicate concerns with BACS.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired when the meeting was scheduled, to which the\nCommunity Development Director responded staff just put the meeting together in order\nto address concerns.\nMr. Russell stated BACS believes the program is a community conversation and needs\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nNovember 16, 2021\n8", "path": "CityCouncil/2021-11-16.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2021-11-16", "page": 20, "text": "to have community investment; the community will contribute value to the program\nprocess and BACS will be available on an ongoing basis; 24 hour services for\nemergencies and residents are available; however, the line might not be available at all\nhours for neighbor concerns.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she understands a staff person will be on-site at all\nhours; inquired whether a concerned neighbor perceiving an emergency could access a\nBACS staff member to relay the concern; questioned who the neighbors should call in\nthe event of a serious concern.\nMr. Russell responded BACS will have staff on-site 24 hours; stated in order for BACS a\nmeeting for neighbors to discuss concerns will need to schedule during business hours.\nThe Economic Development Manager stated a BACS staff person will be on-site at\neach location 24 hours each day if an immediate emergency arises.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether there will be a phone number for neighbors, to\nwhich the Community Development Director responded phone numbers will be\navailable and can be shared.\nCouncilmember Daysog stated providing the contract has been helpful; the Program\nNon-Compliance Protocols section includes bases for discharge from the facility;\npossession of weapons, assault, behavior, theft and destruction of property are listed as\nbases for discharge; inquired the definition of assault, theft, and destruction of property\nin terms of the list; questioned whether the actions must be proven in a court of law;\ninquired how the bases are taken into account if the assault or theft is not targeted at\nother residents of the program, but neighbors instead.\nMr. Russell responded the non-compliance protocol process is relative to events that\nare internal to the program; BACS staff will manage the investigation; a discharge plan\nwould be developed for any determination of non-compliance; \\incidents do not have to\nbe defined in a court of law; the same standard would be held for incidents outside the\nprogram site; however, the determination of the incidents would need to involve local\nauthorities.\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer inquired whether Alameda's unhoused population\nwould solely be housed at he sites, to which the Economic Development Manager\nresponded in the affirmative.\nThe Community Development Director stated the program is allowed to house Alameda\nresidents only due to the use of American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) funding; the funds\ndo not come with an obligation to go through the Alameda County system or house\nindividuals from outside the City; staff's priority and focus will be on Alameda's\nunhoused population.\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer inquired whether any General Fund money will be\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nNovember 16, 2021\n9", "path": "CityCouncil/2021-11-16.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2021-11-16", "page": 21, "text": "used for the program, to which the Economic Development Manager responded in the\nnegative.\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer stated that she appreciates the organization has been\naround since 1953 and is community-based; inquired why a meeting with the neighbors\nhas not been conducted.\nThe Community Development Director responded staff was unsure a program was in\nplace to discuss with neighbors; stated staff wanted to ensure Council buy-in; noted a\nmeeting is scheduled for November 29th\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer expressed concern over the meeting occurring after\nthe Council vote; stated that she is unsure of the point in reaching out to neighbors after\nthe fact; she understands Council is currently being asked to approve the program.\nThe Community Development Director stated staff is recommending Council approve\nthe program; modifications can be considered following receipt of the input.\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer stated members of the community expressed concern\nabout having 11 individuals in one unit; inquired whether the amount of people is 11 per\nhome.\nThe Community Development Director responded in the affirmative; stated there will be\n10 to 11 individuals per home; staff talked to two different service providers; both came\nup with the same amount of individuals per home; rooms will be shared; the housing is\nnot considered dormitory style; BACS observes protocols for COVID-19 safety; the\nhomes are large and the layout will be dependent on the size of the rooms; BACS\nintends to use the living room as an additional sleeping area in order to maximize the\nnumber of individuals served.\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer stated that she understands the houses have three\nbedrooms; inquired how many bedrooms each home has.\nThe Community Development Director responded the two homes, referred to as Big\nWhites, have four bedrooms and will also utilize the living room; less people will be in\nthe townhome, which has three bedrooms.\nThe Economic Development Director stated the two Big Whites houses have four and\nfive bedrooms.\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer inquired whether there will be two or three people per\nroom.\nThe Community Development Director responded typically two people per room; stated\nthere is the potential for three people per room; however, two people per room is the\npreference; the living room is larger and will allow for an additional person.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nNovember 16, 2021\n10", "path": "CityCouncil/2021-11-16.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2021-11-16", "page": 22, "text": "Mr. Russell stated the living room is a large space that can be split into two rooms; the\ngoal is to have appropriate distancing with two individuals per room; the living room will\naccommodate three people.\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer inquired where the on-site BACS supervisor will be\nlocated.\nMr. Russell responded the staff person will not be living on-site; stated the staff\nmembers will work in three shifts each day between and in home; additional space\nbeyond the living quarters will accommodate staff and act as additional shared and\ncommon space; on-site staff will operate within a common area space; the majority of\nservices are community-based and care coordinators will be working with people in the\ncommunity as transitions are planned.\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer stated that she has heard comments about\npreferences for families; inquired whether family accommodations are included in the\nprogram.\nThe Community Development Director responded staff has investigated the need for\nfamilies; stated if there are three families, the townhome can be used; Building Futures\ninformed staff there is not a great number of unhoused families in Alameda; the\nAlameda Unified School District perspective is slightly different in relation to what\nconstitutes homelessness; people might be couch surfing and still have a roof\noverhead; there are not many truly unhoused families within Alameda; staff can leave\nopen the possibility of serving families.\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer stated the program includes three homes, each with\napproximately 11 individuals inside; inquired whether the distance between the three\nhomes is approximately half of a mile, to which the Community Development Manager\nresponded in the affirmative.\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer inquired whether BACS can provide other examples\nof three homes with 11 individuals within half of a mile of each other.\nMr. Russell responded BACS operates interim housing programs in varying sizes;\nstated programs are currently operating with a census of 25 up to a census of 160; none\nof the current programs have the exact same configuration as the Alameda proposal;\nthere are comparable programs with comparable room arrangements; the current non-\ninterim permanent housing scattered site program has roughly 20 homes in Alameda\nCounty; numerous programs with formerly homeless individuals are within half a mile of\neach other; BACS has operated a similar model for decades.\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer stated there have been requests for Council to delay\nthe matter and have community outreach first; inquired whether there is a reason to\nhave the decision made tonight as opposed to after the community outreach meeting.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nNovember 16, 2021\n11", "path": "CityCouncil/2021-11-16.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2021-11-16", "page": 23, "text": "The Community Development Director responded there is some urgency around the\nfact that the City currently does not have a single bed to offer unhoused community\nmembers; stated staff has been trying to move expeditiously in order to create an\nopportunity to have individuals housed, particularly due to the upcoming poor weather\nmonths; staffs goal is to have the houses made available for move-in; one house is\ncloser to move-in ready than the others.\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer inquired which house is closest to being move-in\nready, to which the Community Development Director responded one of the two Big\nWhites.\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer stated the homes have recently became vacant;\ninquired the average rent received by the City for the properties.\nThe Community Development Director responded the Big Whites are $2,800 per month\nand about $80,000 per year; stated only one is currently in a rentable condition.\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer stated Council has received complaints from current\nrenters in the Big Whites related to poor maintenance of the homes; one commenter\nhas recommended a reduction in rent; inquired whether the City would consider a\nreduction in rent for current residents.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether Council may conduct discussions related to rent\nreduction.\nThe City Attorney responded that he assumes Councilmember Herrera Spencer is\nasking the question to understand the amount of rent being foregone for the program\nopportunity; inquired whether the intent is assumed correctly, to which Councilmember\nHerrera Spencer responded in the affirmative.\nThe City Attorney stated as long as the Councilmember is considering the amount of\nrent being foregone as part of analysis, minimal questioning complys with the Brown\nAct.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft questioned whether asking about possibly reducing current tenant\nrent is permissible.\nThe City Attorney stated that he is assuming Councilmembers are trying to understand\nhow much rent revenue is at stake in approving the matter.\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer stated a speaker raised the concern; there have been\ncomments online about reduced revenue, which causes questions about the program\naffordability.\nThe City Attorney stated that he advises questions be tailored to how revenues will be\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nNovember 16, 2021\n12", "path": "CityCouncil/2021-11-16.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2021-11-16", "page": 24, "text": "lost if the program move forward.\nThe Community Development Director stated the rent range is $2,800 to $3,800 per\nmonth; the units are currently priced somewhat below-market; stated staff may have\nconcerns about further rent reductions.\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer stated roughly $80,000 annually should be higher for\nthree units priced at $3,800; inquired the last rent for the units.\nThe Community Development Director responded that she does not have the figures,\nbut can provide the information; stated two of the units have not been rented for some\ntime.\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer inquired whether the City has any other possible\nproperties across the Island and whether the City can decide to put the same type of\nhousing in another vacant property.\nThe Community Development Director responded in the negative; stated that she is not\naware of another option; it is rare for the City to have City-owned homes; there was not\nan intention to cluster the opportunities on the West End.\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer inquired whether the City has homes anywhere other\nthan Alameda Point, to which the Economic Development Manager responded in the\nnegative.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated the idea of a housing trust is something that would allow the\nCity to buy up a foreclosed property or a property for sale at a good rate anywhere\nwithin the City.\nCouncilmember Knox White stated that his son has been hired at BACS; it has been\ndetermined that there are no financial recusal required for his participation in the matter;\nhe is excited to support the program; expressed concern about the outreach not being\ncompleted ahead of time; Council is pushing staff to move forward as fast as possible to\naddress homelessness; sometimes the ball gets dropped; the process was not done\nright; the City can move forward and work on good neighbor agreements; he continues\nto be supportive of the matter moving forward; there have been a number of\nconversations about things happening and being concentrated on the West End;\nCouncil has given direction to staff to start looking more proactively at sites and how to\nfind potential sites; Council is aware that a lot of available space that provide\nopportunities to move quickly are at Alameda Point; ARPA money also provides\nopportunity; matters are landing heavily at Alameda Point; Council directed staff to find\nways to help move projects east.\nCouncilmember Daysog stated the focus should remain on the agreement; under the\nservices portion of the agreement, the site management section requires the provider to\nimmediately notify the City of any complaints received from the business community\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nNovember 16, 2021\n13", "path": "CityCouncil/2021-11-16.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2021-11-16", "page": 25, "text": "including, but not limited to, the businesses adjacent to the site or in the general vicinity;\ninquired whether or not there is a reason to include resident complaints; another\nrequirement is the provider agrees to notify the City should any of the following occur:\nviolence or credible threats against staff or other program clients; inquired about the\nprocedure.\nMr. Russell responded BACS is happy to provide notice to the City if it determines\nissues are -affecting the community; noted some of the language included in the\nagreement is boiler plate and should be modified.\nThe Community Development Director stated Council can include direction to modify\nthe contract in order to address concerns posed by Councilmember Daysog; staff can\nensure there is an opportunity to part ways with the program if excessive complaints\narise; staff can hold a discussion on procedure for termination.\nVice Mayor Vella stated questions have been raised relative to cost; the City might\nforego roughly $45,000 in rent revenue per unit annually; the units are currently not\nbeing rented; therefore, rent is not being collected; using empty houses at Alameda\nPoint for homeless housing was recommended during her first Council term; she would\nhave liked staff to have provided outreach to neighbors ahead of time; expressed\nsupport for outreach being conducted and for scheduling additional outreach meetings\nto allow for questions and answers; stated the proposed program has been\nrecommended by many over the years; the City now has the funding and space;\nCouncil understands that the number of people in need of housing is high and continues\nto grow; the proposed program provides units and beds within Alameda for emergency\nneeds; the program is critical; the weather is beginning to change; this is an opportunity\nto make sure emergency beds are available for those who reside in Alameda; she has\nsimilar concerns with the contract as noted by other Councilmembers; the language can\nbe kept general to state: \"neighbors\" or \"people within the vicinity;\" the contract has\nrequirements for documentation and reporting; the documents and reports will be official\nCity records; significant reporting requirements are listed for the contract; staff can\ncreate an opportunity for review if an incident be documented; she would like to see\ncommunity buy-in; the meetings are a good start to gaining said buy-in; the neighbors in\nthe area are compassionate; expressed support for the matter provided that\nopportunities are set up for community input beyond the one scheduled meeting and\nwith edits made to the agreement.\nCouncilmember Daysog inquired why the City cannot move ahead with one of the three\nunits in the first year and judge performance; stated the second and third units can be\nadded after the first year.\nThe Community Development Director responded that she has concerns relative to\neconomies of scale.\nMr. Russell stated BACS staff will need to look at the operational economies of scale to\ninvest in the infrastructure to operate the project; volume can create economic\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nNovember 16, 2021\n14", "path": "CityCouncil/2021-11-16.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2021-11-16", "page": 26, "text": "efficiencies; the cost structure and impact must be reviewed.\nCouncilmember Daysog inquired whether the City can put together language related to\nnotification threshold at the current meeting.\nThe Community Development Director responded it is possible; stated completing the\nlanguage will take time; staff can come up with language addressing problems;\nCommunity Development Department staff will need the assistance of the City\nAttorney's Office.\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer stated the non-compliance protocols section of the\nagreement lists the only reasons that may be used as a basis for discharge from a\nfacility as possession of a weapon at the facility, as opposed to possession of a weapon\nnot at the facility; the contract should require people not to possesses a weapon, illegal\ndrugs, assault or violent behavior, theft, etc. outside of the facility; the contract should\nbe modified prior to Council approving the matter; it is important for staff to hold the\ncommunity meeting prior to Council approval of the program; she thinks rents could be\nhigher than reported by staff.\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer moved approval of delaying the decision until the next\nCouncil meeting to allow for community outreach and input.\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer stated it is unfortunate the matter was brought forth\nwithout outreach; it is always important to reach out to the community prior to approval\nand allow the public to be part of the process.\nCouncilmember Daysog seconded the motion.\nUnder discussion, Councilmember Daysog stated the project is one that all can be\nproud of; 11 people per unit is a little too high; if the contract is tightened, he is willing to\ntry; the housing crisis is present; staff should measure twice before cutting once and a\ndelay until the next Council meeting would be in order to deal with the contract issues\nraised.\nVice Mayor Vella stated as of the last point-in-time count, over 200 individuals do not\nhave housing in Alameda; 200 people are being forced to sleep and shelter outdoors;\nCouncil has identified homelessness as a priority in its recent 5-year strategic plan;\nCouncil is making determinations from the safety and security of being housed; it is\nimportant to perform outreach with neighbors and have a contract in place; she does not\nwant to delay the matter and will not support the motion.\nOn the call for the question, the motion failed by the following roll call vote:\nCouncilmembers Daysog: Aye; Herrera Spencer: Aye; Knox White: No; Vella: No; and Mayor\nEzzy Ashcraft: No. Ayes: 2. Noes: 3.\n***\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nNovember 16, 2021\n15", "path": "CityCouncil/2021-11-16.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2021-11-16", "page": 27, "text": "(21-754) Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated a motion is needed to hear additional items past 11:00\np.m.\nCouncilmember Knox White stated November has a fifth Tuesday for the month; noted the\nDecember 7th Council meeting agenda will be full; there is no way for Council to get through the\nwork; expressed support for calling a special meeting to hear the rest of the agenda.\nCouncilmember Knox White moved approval of hearing the parking management program\n[paragraph no 21- 1 and any of the remaining Council Referrals, while ending the meeting at\nmidnight and continuing the remaining Regular Agenda items to a special meeting.\nCouncilmember Daysog seconded the motion.\nUnder discussion, Councilmember Daysog stated the Housing Element [paragraph no 21-\n1\nand General Plan [paragraph no 21-\nshould be heard at a special meeting.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft expressed concern about meeting near the Thanksgiving holiday.\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer stated that she will not support the motion; expressed support\nfor starting the Housing Element discussion.\nVice Mayor Vella expressed support for a special meeting.\nCouncilmember Knox White withdrew his motion.\nCouncilmember Knox White moved approval of finishing the current matter, directing staff to find\na time that works for the most Councilmembers possible between now and December 7th to hold\na special meeting.\nThe City Clerk stated the date must be specified and the matters must be continued to the date\nspecific due to noticing requirements.\nCouncilmember Knox White stated the 11:00 p.m. vote is for hearing new matters after 11:00\np.m.; inquired whether the vote to continue items can occur after 11:00 p.m., to which the City\nClerk responded in the affirmative.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether consideration can be given to the proposal from\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer related to starting the Housing Element discussion.\nCouncilmember Knox White responded that he does not see value in starting the discussion just\nto stop at a random time and having public comment coming in sporadically.\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer moved approval of continuing the meeting until midnight\nhearing the agenda as-presented.\nVice Mayor Vella stated that she would prefer not to start the Housing Element.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the Housing Element can be continued to the Continued\nItem section of the agenda on the next Council agenda, to which Vice Mayor Vella responded in\nthe affirmative.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nNovember 16, 2021\n16", "path": "CityCouncil/2021-11-16.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2021-11-16", "page": 28, "text": "Vice Mayor Vella moved approval of hearing the Housing Element under the Continued Agenda\nItems section of the next Council agenda.\nCouncilmember Knox White stated the next Council agenda will be multi-hour discussion.\nVice Mayor Vella inquired whether the Housing Element matter can be continued to a special\nmeeting.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated Council can agree to take one more matter after the current\ndiscussion; Council may then discuss the continued, date specific matters after.\nVice Mayor Vella moved approval of hearing the parking management plan [paragraph no 21-\nafter the current matter.\nCouncilmember Knox White 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.\nVice Mayor Vella stated unhoused individuals continue to grow in number year after year; the\nwinter months bring bad weather events; the project is economy of scale being phased in.\nVice Mayor Vella moved approval of the staff recommendation [including adoption of the\nresolution] with direction to staff to change the contract language and have more than one\ncommunity meeting.\nCouncilmember Daysog seconded the motion.\nUnder discussion, Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she has visited a site run by BACS; she has\ndiscussed BACS success with other mayors; the value of using an organization like BACS is the\ntrack record; there are many ways in which people become homeless; it would have been\npreferable to perform outreach ahead of time; Council stretches staff pretty thin; there are only\nso many hours in each day; the outreach portion is not a reason to delay the project; the\nhousing crisis is present and a long time coming; working with BACS, a trusted provider, gives\nmuch confidence; however, good communication with neighbors is critical; having a team and\nadvisory committee is needed for neighbors to feel that they are being heard; she fully expects\nneighbors to be open-minded and allow for further learning; communication is key; the City is\nlate to start; she is confident in City staff and BACS personnel; she expects staff to be on top of\nthe encampments in the area; she is pleased that the Day Center is open over-night and is\nmaking a difference; expressed support for staff working with those in encampments to reach\nout to Village of Love; the City of Riverside has an expansive homeless outreach program;\nRiverside has created a registry similar to a wedding or baby shower registry; the registry acts\nas a wish list of needed items in order to furnish units; community members can go online to\npurchase items; she does not support using ARPA funds to purchase a vehicle for the program;\nexpressed support for contracting with a local taxi company for vouchers; stated that she would\nnot like the purchase of a vehicle for the program to be included; expressed support for the\nprogram and for families to be part of a co-housing model.\nCouncilmember Daysog stated that he hears concerns raised by neighbors of the area; he\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nNovember 16, 2021\n17", "path": "CityCouncil/2021-11-16.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2021-11-16", "page": 29, "text": "believes that he has found shortcomings in the contract presented; he is putting trust in City\nstaff listening to Council comments and concerns in order to strengthen the contract; the\nopportunity is rare and will quickly address the homeless crisis; the City is able to do something\nit was unable to previously do by using ARPA funds; however, the contract must be\nstrengthened; expressed support for the matter; stated Alameda Point will be better in having a\nmixed community.\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer stated that she will not be supporting the motion; it is\nunfortunate that the City is not providing public outreach in advance of approving the program;\nthe community is already mixed; legitimate concerns have been raised; neighbors needed to\nhave been involved in the process before the matter came to Council.\nVice Mayor Vella restated her motion to approve moving forward with the staff recommendation\n[including adoption of the resolution] with direction to staff to change the contract language and\nhave more than one community meeting; amended her motion to include removal of funding for\nthe vehicle.\nCouncilmember Daysog accepted the amendment to the motion.\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(21-755) Workshop to Review and Comment on the Draft Housing Element Update to\nAccommodate the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) for the Period 2023-2031 in\nCompliance with State Law. Continued to November 30, 2021.\n(21-756) Public Hearing to Consider Adoption of Resolution Certifying the Final Environmental\nImpact Report, and Adopting Findings and a Statement of Overriding Considerations, Mitigation\nMeasures and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan for the General Plan Amendment to\nUpdate the Alameda General Plan; and\n(21-756 A) Adoption of Resolution Adopting Alameda General Plan 2040. Continued to\nNovember 30, 2021.\n(21-757) Recommendation to Reorganize the City's Parking Management Program and Parking\nFund;\n(21-757 / A) Resolution No. 15839, \"Amending the Fiscal Year 2021-22 Parking Fund Budget to\nRestructure the Parking Fund.\" Adopted; and\n(21-757 B) Resolution No. 15840, \"Amending the Salary Schedule for the Alameda City\nEmployees Association (ACEA) and the Alameda Police Officers Association, Non-Sworn\n(PANS) to Move the Two Parking Enforcement Positions from PANS to ACEA and Reassign\nTwo Full-Time Parking Enforcement Position Allocations from the Police Department to Public\nWorks.\" Adopted.\nThe Transportation Planner gave a Power Point presentation.\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer inquired what happens to the money collected for ferry\nparking.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nNovember 16, 2021\n18", "path": "CityCouncil/2021-11-16.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2021-11-16", "page": 30, "text": "The Planning, Building and Transportation Director responded if the City initiates parking fees at\nferry terminals, all revenue is received by the City; it is not split with the Water Emergency\nTransportation Authority (WETA).\nExpressed support for moving parking enforcement out of the Alameda Police Department\n(APD) and into Public Works and for ferry terminal parking fees: Zac Bowling, Alameda.\nExpressed support for moving parking enforcement from APD to Public Works; discussed the\ndeath of Mario Gonzales; expressed support for the matter tying into a larger transportation\nissue; urged traffic stops also be considered: Savanna Cheer, Alameda.\nExpressed support for parking management being part of the new program; stated that she is\nagainst the paid parking at ferry terminals; ferry tickets are expensive; expressed concern about\nincreasing the cost for commuters; urged Council take the cost and burden into consideration;\ndiscussed accessibility: Carmen Reid, Alameda.\nExpressed support for the proposed changes being in line with parking minimums; urged City\nstaff to think of a parking brokerage model for business districts; stated the City could make\nbusiness parking pools more straight-forward, such as a branded City facility; expressed\nsupport for moving parking management out of APD and for looking at traffic management in a\nholistic manner: Drew Dara-Abrams, Alameda.\nStated that he applauds the City's efforts to bring as many services as possible out from under\nthe purview of APD; questioned who should pay for parking; stated General Fund parking\nmaintenance payments are paid for by taxpayers; many pay for enforcement inactions; stated\nthe City needs to separate parking problems from housing problems; parking as a function of\nPublic Works is a great first step; urged Council to consider implementing street parking permits\nfrom 2:00 to 4:00 a.m. across the entire Island: Morgan Bellinger, Alameda.\nStated California Law Enforcement Telecommunication System (CLETS) does not allow non-\nsworn law enforcement officials access to vehicle data; illegally parked vehicles cannot be\nchecked; Public Works will be allowed to only ticket the vehicles and move along, when APD\ncould have run the vehicle for its history; Public Works staff and the public will be put at risk with\nthe inability to check license plates for crimes; staff will be at risk when approaching vehicles;\nquestioned whether Public Works will choose not to ticket illegally parked bicycles; expressed\nconcern about vehicles double-parking and the amount of staff needed for towed vehicles;\nstated that he is against paid parking at Sea Plan Lagoon Ferry Terminal: Jim Strehlow,\nAlameda.\nExpressed support for the matter; stated the fewer people on the street with guns in the\ncommunity, the better; she does not support paid parking at the ferry terminal: Jenice Anderson,\nAlameda.\nStated BikeWalk Alameda strongly supports the staff recommendation, especially for paid\nparking at the ferry terminal; paid parking will be during the week; urged support for anything to\nhelp capture costs of taxpayers subsidizing driving in Alameda: Denyse Trepanier, BikeWalk\nAlameda.\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer inquired whether sworn Officers currently check parking\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nNovember 16, 2021\n19", "path": "CityCouncil/2021-11-16.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2021-11-16", "page": 31, "text": "meters.\nThe Police Captain responded sworn Officers can enforce parking violations; stated APD tries\nnot to use sworn Officers for parking enforcement; however, APD Parking Technician staff is\nlow; Technicians are not sworn Officers.\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer inquired how APD knows whether a car is stolen; whether\nPublic Works staff will be able to run license plates to check for stolen vehicles; what follow up\nwill occur under Public Works.\nThe Police Captain responded a vehicle found by Public Works staff that is believed to be stolen\nwill require staff to reach out to APD; stated a stolen vehicle will necessitate a sworn Officer\nresponse; staff will also need to contact APD if a vehicle needs to be towed for blocking a\ndriveway or citation is needed for parking on private property, both of which require license\nplates to be run; Officers use CLETS to identify registered owners.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired how Public Works parking enforcement staff will suspect a vehicle\nis stolen.\nThe Public Works Director responded APD will be able to provide Public Works staff with a hot\nlist that can be loaded into the handheld device; Public Works parking technicians will not be\nable to see owner information; however, vehicle on the hot list will be seen for coordination with\nAPD.\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer inquired whether Amber Alerts will immediately be placed on\nthe list.\nThe Police Captain responded stolen vehicles are entered into CLETS by the initial reporting\nagency; the update is dependent on the originating agency; sometimes the update is immediate\nand other times the report updates after several hours.\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer stated the information normally goes to APD; however, will\nnow go to Public Works staff; inquired how the information will flow from APD to Public Works.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired the functions of the handheld devices.\nThe Public Works Director responded that she can speak generally on the devices but does not\nyet have detailed knowledge; stated that she does not have information about how long\ninformation updates will take; staff will work out the details; discussed a ride-along; stated\nlicense plate readers differs from the handheld device, which is able to scan the license plate for\nticket auto-generation; staff will work out the details of the how the hot list information ends up\non the handheld devices.\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer inquired whether the current enforcement vehicles have\ncameras, to which the Police Captain responded in the negative.\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer stated there is no loss of services; inquired whether Public\nWorks technicians will be trained by APD technicians related to unhappy ticket recipients.\nThe Public Works Director responded in the affirmative; stated staff will work with Dixon\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nNovember 16, 2021\n20", "path": "CityCouncil/2021-11-16.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2021-11-16", "page": 32, "text": "Consulting and develop a program manual with general and specific training in order to target\nissues of altercations while issuing a ticket.\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer inquired the City's plan for active parking meter hours going\nforward.\nThe Planning, Building and Transportation Director responded staff has not gotten to that level\nof detail; stated there are no plans to change the details in the immediate future.\nThe Public Works Director stated the immediate priority will be enforcement.\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer inquired whether Council is being asked to approve paid\nparking at the ferry terminals, to which the Planning, Building and Transportation and Public\nWorks Director both responded in the negative.\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer stated Council is being asked to approve the transfer of\nservices to Public Works from APD and a program budget; inquired how much the program will\ncost the City.\nThe Public Works Director responded Council is voting on the establishment of a new, umbrella,\nsingle parking fund; the fund will include three divisions; the program is intended to be self-\nsufficient and will not have money infused; the program will take time to constitute; the program\nwill generate sufficient revenue and will eventually provide excess revenue; a Council policy will\naddress excess revenue; any amount above and beyond operational expenses will be\nconsidered excess revenue; staff is seeking direction that the recommendation is acceptable for\nCouncil; there is more work in detailing the total cost of the program; staff anticipates needing\nadditional vehicles; however, staff will present a mid-year budget appropriation request.\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer inquired whether current parking rates will change, to which\nthe Public Works Director responded staff is currently not recommending any changes to meter\nrates.\nCouncilmember Knox White stated that he plans to support the matter; he wants to encourage\nstaff to put together the work program and think about how the City can use parking control\nofficers to address issues such as double parking; staff should issue double parking tickets to\naddress safety concerns being raised by parents near schools; he would like to encourage ways\nto deploy enforcement staff to address a wide range of issues similar to other cities; parking was\npreviously heavily impacted in the evenings; expressed support for utilizing parking prices at\npeak times to ensure spaces can be found and for looking at ways to have policies come back.\nCouncilmember Knox White moved approval of the staff recommendation [including adoption of\nthe resolutions].\nVice Mayor Vella seconded the motion.\nUnder discussion, Councilmember Daysog stated that he thinks parking enforcement is better\nleft in the hands of APD; the residents need people that are able to enforce parking laws in a\nneutral and unbiased manner; he will not be supporting the staff recommendation.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft expressed concern over comments alluding to City staff being biased.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nNovember 16, 2021\n21", "path": "CityCouncil/2021-11-16.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2021-11-16", "page": 33, "text": "Councilmember Herrera Spencer stated that she understands APD is agreeable to the transfer\nof responsibility to Public Works; inquired whether there are reasons APD supports the transfer.\nThe Police Captain responded APD supports the transfer; stated APD is happy to help\nsuccessfully transfer the program; APD has training outlines and programs which can be\nprovided to Public Works; APD has experienced difficulty hiring for the positions in the past;\ntransferring the program to Public Works will hopefully provide more success in staffing.\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer stated that she plans to support the staff recommendation.\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she supports the matter; noted the program is a better\nutilization of resources.\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.\n***\n(21-758) Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether Tuesday November 30th at 5:00 p.m. works for\nCouncilmembers to hold a special meeting; whether the Housing Element [paragraph no. 21-\nand the General Plan [paragraph no. 21- ] will be the matters continued for discussion,\nto which the City Clerk responded in the affirmative.\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer expressed support for limiting the special meeting to the\nHousing Element and the General Plan; stated that she would like staff to alert the public of the\nmeeting start time.\nCouncilmember Knox White moved approval of scheduling a special meeting for November 30th\nat 5:00 p.m. to hear the Housing Element and General Plan.\nCouncilmember Herrera Spencer seconded the motion, which carried by the following roll call\nvote: Councilmembers Daysog: Aye; Herrera Spencer: Aye; Knox White: Aye; Vella: Aye; and\nMayor Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye. Ayes: 5.\n***\n(21-759) Public Hearing to Consider Adoption of Resolution Amending Master Fee Resolution\nNo. 12191 to Add and Revise Recreation and Park Fees for Calendar Year 2022. Continued to\nDecember 7, 2021.\n(21-760) Recommendation that City Council, Boards and Commissions Annually Review\nMeeting Schedules for Possible Conflicts that Inhibit Maximum Public Participation. Continued\nto December 7, 2021.\nCITY MANAGER COMMUNICATIONS\n(21-761) The City Manager made an announcement regarding the Community Development\nDepartment Annual Community Service Awards and a Posey Tube closure November 17th from\n10:00 p.m. to 4:30 a.m.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nNovember 16, 2021\n22", "path": "CityCouncil/2021-11-16.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2021-11-16", "page": 34, "text": "ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA\nNone.\nCOUNCIL REFERRALS\n(21-762) Considering Directing Staff to Provide an Update on License Plate Readers.\n(Councilmember Herrera Spencer) Not heard.\n(21-763) Consider Directing Staff to Publicly Share Information on Parking Recreational\nVehicles. (Councilmember Herrera Spencer) Not heard.\n(21-764) Consider Directing Staff to Address Representation for Below Market Rate\nHomeowners on Homeowner Association (HOA) Boards and with Property Management.\n(Councilmember Herrera Spencer) Not heard.\n(21-765) Consider Directing Staff to Support Removal of the US Navy Constraints Limiting\nHousing Development at Alameda Point. (Councilmember Herrera Spencer and Councilmember\nDaysog) Not heard.\n(21-766) Consider Directing Staff to Address Identifying New Areas at Alameda Point to\nDevelop a Number of Housing Units Above the Originally-Agreed Upon Numbers of the 2023-\n2031 Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA). (Councilmember Daysog) Not heard.\n(21-767) Consider Directing Staff to Move Jean Sweeney Park Fencing. (Councilmembers\nHerrera Spencer and Daysog) Not heard.\n(21-768) Consider Reviewing and Updating the Previous City Council's Priorities at a Regular\nCity Council Meeting. (Councilmember Herrera Spencer) Not heard.\nCOUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS\n(21-769) Councilmember Herrera Spencer discussed an upcoming community Thanksgiving\ndinner at Christ Church.\n(21-770) Councilmember Daysog announced that he attended the 80th anniversary of the Flying\nTigers at the USS Hornet.\n(21-771) Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft discussed a briefing on the Howard Terminal ballpark proposal;\nstated that she attended a ribbon cutting for the Friends of the Alameda Animal Shelter (FAAS)\nmobile adoption center; discussed a Veterans Day Commemoration event; announced door-to-\ndoor vaccine outreach by Alameda High School's leadership class; discussed Scouting for\nFood, Starbucks grand opening and Signal Coffee Roasters ribbon cutting events.\nADJOURNMENT\n(21-772) There being no further business, Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft adjourned the meeting at 12:00\na.m. in memory of Supervisor Wilma Chan.\nRespectfully submitted,\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nNovember 16, 2021\n23", "path": "CityCouncil/2021-11-16.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2021-11-16", "page": 35, "text": "Lara Weisiger\nCity Clerk\nThe agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Sunshine Ordinance.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nNovember 16, 2021\n24", "path": "CityCouncil/2021-11-16.pdf"}