pages: CityCouncil/2012-03-07.pdf, 6
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
CityCouncil | 2012-03-07 | 6 | In response to Councilmember Johnson's inquiry about a shortened timeframe, the City Manager stated there is a balancing act that goes on with a finance measure; if the tax is closed off more quickly than 30 years, the bonding ratios become very different and yield much less money up front; since construction costs are lower and given the needs, staff thought a 30 year time horizon was advantageous; when he had a conversation with the City Treasurer, they discussed that the City does not want to buy something with a 15 year useful life since the tax is 30 years; the conversation led to the concept of having an Administrative Instruction on depreciation; to address non-profit fatigue, activating a community with specific interest in an activity is more likely to generate donations and volunteer time; spinning activities off to non-profits is cost effective and gives the groups a stake; the movement is to partner with people interested in specific services while having core services provided by government. Vice Mayor Bonta inquired what is the vision to make the measure pass; stated polling data looked at an issue that is not included in the package; the community expressed interest in public safety, parks and libraries; stated that he would like to see components for a sports field and the library. The City Manager stated an all-weather, lighted, multi-purpose field would cost $1.9 million; broke down costs; further stated if the Council desires, $1 million would be available from the bond; the City would partner with the youth sports foundation and require the foundation to come up with matching grant money; the structure would be the same as the pool and animal shelter; the library needs an elevator, computer upgrades and conversion to electronic books, which would cost $300,000 and would not come from the bond proceeds. Councilmember Johnson stated that she would love to include the library; requested information on the need for an elevator; inquired whether funds could be used on the collection. The Library Director responded a second elevator would provide back up; stated staff has to carry boxes of books upstairs if the elevator goes down; the elevator is very important; as for collections, e-book use is expanding and there can be a wait list of 40 people; computers are 5 years old. Councilmember Johnson stated that she is in favor of including the collection and electronic equipment; inquired whether the Library Director would choose to fund the collection and computers versus an elevator. The Library Director responded the elevator is on the Library Board's wish list. Councilmember Johnson inquired whether the collection is at the desired level, to which the Library Director responded in the negative. Special Meeting Alameda City Council 6 March 7, 2012 | CityCouncil/2012-03-07.pdf |