pages: CityCouncil/2009-04-21.pdf, 10
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
CityCouncil | 2009-04-21 | 10 | Partners (APCP) made by dragging out the processi Council stated that an initiative process would be needed if Measure A was ever to change that she is sorry that people are having bad experiences with signature gatherersi the proposed initiative is the democratic process at work; citizens would be able to vote on what matters most; every day of delay could result in a major breakdown that would cost taxpayers; that she is concerned with carrying costs. Councilmember Matarrese stated the study should be funded by the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority (ARRA) not SunCal: that he likes the idea of a two phase report; peer review information should be rolled into the summary; that he would like to have a legal analysis and explanation of the control mechanisms that the City retains under the DDA; the initiative mentions "developer", not SunCal; it is important to understand steps to identify the developer through the DA and DDA; existing information should be used regarding cleanup below the ground which the Navy would be responsible for and above the ground which would be the responsibility of the that he would like to build on existing traffic studies and have staff come back with a finer analysis than $60,000 to $100,000 before Phase II; other big events in Alameda history have occurred without voter input ; an independent study based on available information would ensure that issues are clear; that he endorses the staff recommendation for a two stage process with his additional comments, particularly the control aspect of what legislative control would remain and the impact of what would happen if it fails. Councilmember Gilmore stated that she assumes the Executive Summary would reference detailed documents. Mayor Johnson inquired whether Councilmember Matarrese is recommending adoption of staff recommendations 1 through 8 with additional referenced points. Councilmember Matarrese responded in the affirmative; stated the study would be funded by ARRA. The Redevelopment Manager inquired whether or not staff is directed to proceed with Phase 2. Councilmember Matarrese stated that he would like an interim report with a more refined estimate before proceeding. The Assistant City Manager stated ARRA approval would be needed. Vice Mayor deHaan stated that he has difficulty with staff performing a land use review; that he thinks outside counsel is Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 10 April 21, 2009 | CityCouncil/2009-04-21.pdf |