pages: CityCouncil/2021-03-30.pdf, 21
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
CityCouncil | 2021-03-30 | 21 | Councilmember Herrera Spencer gave a brief presentation. The Recreation and Parks Director stated the public process conducted included high level concepts; outlined the grant application process; stated the opportunity was key in applying for funding to build out the western portion; the grant requires a public process; previous outreach was conducted prior to 2018; the grant process requires more current outreach to increase chances of qualifying with higher scores on the application; once a more detailed design is complete, the design will be brought forward for additional public process to the Recreation and Parks Commission and ultimately the City Council; the primary components in the plan remain the same from the original Master Plan; the primary components will still be funded by the grant regardless of the park arrangement. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft requested clarification about discussion parameters related to ongoing litigation. The City Attorney stated any matter being litigated is scheduled for Closed Session in front of the Council; Council cannot have conversations about what has happened in Closed Session unless otherwise directed in rare circumstances; staff is happy to take direction and provide information where needed; staff will continue to caution Council to not discuss anything from Closed Session. Councilmember Herrera Spencer requested a map of Jean Sweeney Park be displayed; stated after her Council Referral, the map was removed and replaced with a different map; noted the map conflicts with the Council approved plan. Councilmember Knox White inquired whether the discussion is related to pieces of land which the City does not currently own. The Recreation and Parks Director responded in the affirmative; stated the grant application requires staff to go after funding for title held, developable land. Councilmember Knox White inquired whether all planning for the park was done through the City Council; stated that he remembers the Recreation and Parks Commission working with subcommittees and the community on most of the planning; the matter did come to Council a couple times for final approval; inquired whether the same process is currently being followed. The Recreation and Parks Director responded in the affirmative; stated the bulk of the work for the original Master Plan was the done at the community level, then, Boards and Commissions and finally Council approval. Councilmember Knox White inquired whether there are two standing subcommittees. The Recreation and Parks Director responded in the affirmative; stated there was an overall steering committee and a community garden committee for the earlier phase; for the current process, a meeting was hold with the community garden committee. Continued March 16, 2021 Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 21 March 30, 2021 | CityCouncil/2021-03-30.pdf |