pages: CityCouncil/2016-03-01.pdf, 7
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
CityCouncil | 2016-03-01 | 7 | The Community Development Director stated that she understands the Council would like staff to return with a policy which reflects the actual interest rate. Mayor Spencer stated that is the consensus. In response to Councilmember Daysog's inquiry, the Community Development Director stated without doubling the rents, the 470 Central Avenue project would be upside down. Mayor Spencer stated Council needs to assume everyone is acting in good faith. Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated the issue falls along the same lines as documenting the actual construction work; these are the cases that are more appropriately handled in semi-private setting with mediation or arbitration, rather than at the RRAC. The Community Development Director stated the proposal is to have issues handled by a mediator or trained staff; the three key things should be accomplished by a CIP: 1) a mechanism for approving the work; 2) setting the allowable rent increase; and 3) resolving any relocation issues. In response to Mayor Spencer's inquiry, the Community Development Director stated the proposal states CIP issues would be handled by staff, but does not specify who the staff is; the Program Administrator should determine who the best qualified staff would be to handle the situations, based on training and expertise, which could be a skill set to search for in a staff person. Vice Mayor Matarrese stated the CIP is a technical exercise; the relocation is a negotiation; the two issues could be understandable if separated and described better. In response to Councilmember Oddie's inquiry, the Community Development Director stated that she understands the distinction being requested, but does not think there needs to be two separate people; she understands the Council's desire is to have mediation. Councilmember Oddie requested a recap of the Council direction, to which the Community Development Director responded staff would modify the proposal to include the eight word definition of a capital improvement, language on the interest rate being the actual rate of the loan secured, more guidance on whether or not the proposed work triggers the need for relocation, a negotiation process for discussing options for temporary relocation beyond just a vacant unit on site, and consider a cap on temporary relocation and fees if improvements would take longer to complete. In response to Councilmember Ezzy Ahscraft's inquiry, the Community Development Director stated staff would return to Council with a revised plan on April 5th to avoid a Continued February 16, 2016 Meeting Alameda City Council 7 March 1, 2016 | CityCouncil/2016-03-01.pdf |