pages: CityCouncil/2021-10-19.pdf, 13
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
CityCouncil | 2021-10-19 | 13 | Stated that he submitted a letter; expressed support for the work of the Recreation and Parks Department staff; stated costs should be subsidized; renaming Jackson Park was relatively inexpensive and was a moral imperative; discussed the City's participation in the Shuumi Land Tax; stated the next step after acknowledging the role of colonialism and white supremacy is to take substantive steps to start to materially repair the harm done to people in the community; the issues are not fringe or boutique concerns; the decision between tacit acceptance or active rejection is fundamental to the collective conscience and the identity as a diverse, inclusive community on the right side of history; the circle of concern extends beyond the residents of a street; the concern is for all in the community; actions taken should make people whole: Josh Geyer, Alameda. Recommended the City include a financial outlook plan as part of the consideration to allow homeowners to understand potential financial impacts; the City can offer support if costs are more than nominal: Carmen Reid, Alameda. Discussed the imposition of moral imperatives and justice; stated the issue is for the entire City; name changes are not urgent and should be placed on the ballot for a vote; the approach is more equitable; he does not see why a handful of ideologues should be calling the shots: Jay Garfinkle, Alameda. Stated the City is discussing a finite list of street and park names, which are concerning; discussed a Planning Board meeting discussion about renaming a long street, concerns about Jackson Street and Jackson and Godfrey Parks and the process of naming Chochenyo Park; urged Council adopt the process to conduct renaming on an ongoing basis and focus on the three potential renaming efforts as opportunities to address concerns: Drew Dara-Abrams, Alameda. Stated a transition of a name change for someone includes the street name in their will, legal documents, driver license and mail; expressed concern about her elderly neighbor; stated that she understands changing park names; renaming streets can be a large toll on individuals: Megan Larson, Alameda. Vice Mayor Vella stated a lot of time has been spent discussing the naming and renaming processes; a process is being created to get street names on a list; not having enough names has been an issue; the process has been bureaucratic, which is unnecessary and cumbersome; Council is also balancing having an accessible process; she has learned a lot about naming in her time on the City Council and HAB; much effort has been put into the matter; she is comfortable with the process developed; she hears concerns about the expenses related to renaming; however, the concerns are reasonably addressed by the public process. Councilmember Knox White stated Council is not creating a new opportunity to rename streets; Council is clarifying a process; Council is deciding how to ensure people are plugged into the process; the item that jumps out to him is the focus on property owners, instead of residents; Alameda has 52% renters; renters voices are just as important as the people that live out of town; the majority of rental units are owned by people who do not live in Alameda; ensuring local input should include renters, not just property owners; expressed support changing the policy; stated the corporate naming makes the street essentially become a privately named road; the business should pay for the maintenance to the named street; branding public streets should not be City business; expressed concern about businesses named after a person; Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 12 October 19, 2021 | CityCouncil/2021-10-19.pdf |