pages: CityCouncil/2020-06-02.pdf, 19
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
CityCouncil | 2020-06-02 | 19 | occur before any ballot measure: Chris Buckley, Alameda Architectural Preservation Society (AAPS). The following public comment was read into the record: Urged Council to defer any further consideration of repeal or modification of Article 26 until after the restrictions related to COVID-19 are reduced; stated any consideration of changes to Measure A should be deferred until part of the City's comprehensive planning process: Dolores Kelleher and Floyd Brown, Alameda. Urged Council to reschedule the discussion of changes to Measure A to allow citizens to address Council in person; discussed the pandemic; noted there is a County-wide curfew in place; stated discussion and input should precede any City Council action regarding Measure A: Elizabeth Tuckwell, Alameda. Urged Council to support the delay of Section 26-3 until 2022; stated the delay will allow the Council and community to complete a planning and environmental review process prior to crafting a ballot measure; placing the repeal of Section 26-1 on the November 2020 ballot is premature: Karen Lithgow, AAPS. Urged Council to delay an election on a Charter Amendment eliminating Article 26; stated now is not the time to alter Article 26 due to pandemic, civil unrest, and economic downturn; the matter is significant and should not be considered without public attention and open discussion: Elizabeth Greene, Alameda. Expressed concern about the focus on removing Measure A; discussed population density and quality of life; stated Alameda is an Island; urged Council to keep Measure A: Maria Perales, Alameda. Urged Council to not take action to revise Article 26; stated the issues are complex and the process is not democratic at this time due to shelter in place and other issues; the Housing Element has been certified by the State to meet housing needs until 2023; a revision to Article 26 is not time-sensitive: Pat Lamborn, Alameda. Stated now is a time to exercise patience; involving members of the community in discussion is part of public duty; urged Council to be prudent, thoughtful and democratic; stated the matter is too important to rush a conclusion: Gretchen Lipow, Alameda. Stated it is inappropriate to ask citizens to consider changes to the development guidelines without presenting a thorough review and public discussion related to the impact and consequences of the changes; consideration of changes does not need to happen immediately; urged Council to postpone any decision on the matter until in- person attendance of Council meetings: Steve Aced, Alameda. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 6 June 2, 2020 | CityCouncil/2020-06-02.pdf |