pages: CityCouncil/2021-10-19.pdf, 15
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
CityCouncil | 2021-10-19 | 15 | Vice Mayor Vella inquired whether Councilmember Knox White's street renaming recommendation of having resident-only signatories gets rid of the option to have 50% plus 1 of property owners or 500 resident signatories; inquired whether Councilmember Knox White is amenable to the option of having either. Councilmember Knox White responded that he is okay with having the option; stated there is benefit to having 50% of the street concurring, which gets to the concern of people impacted by the name change; people affected by the change can sign-off on beginning the process; expressed concern about the requirement of 500 signatures approving the change when the signatories might not live on the street. Vice Mayor Vella stated that she would like clarification that the 50% plus 1 signatories of property owners would not be eliminated; inquired whether 500 Alameda resident signatories must include a certain percentage of street residents. Councilmember Knox White stated the 50% plus 1 signatories are not property owners, but people who live on the street to be renamed; expressed concern about property owners living in Southern California not knowing the City; stated there are large corporate land owners with hundreds of units in Alameda; questioned whether Council should allow large corporations to vote on the matter; stated that he would rather consider the residents of the street; the intention is to make sure that the people living on the street have an opportunity to say whether or not they would like the change. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired how Council will determine that the 500 Alameda signatories are actual residents. The City Planner responded staff has looked into the issue; stated initially, staff's approach was directed towards property owners due to having good property owner data; staff does not have good data on tenants, especially new tenants; based on input from Boards, Commissions and members of the public, staff added the possibility of either 50% plus 1 of property owners and residents or at least 500 Alameda resident signatures; petitions should include a name and address; staff does not have very good data to verify all 500 signers are actual Alameda residents or residents of the street in question; the signature requirements are a threshold to initiate the conversation; when staff schedules the hearing before the City Council, staff will formally notify the residents and occupants of the street to be renamed. Councilmember Knox White stated that he is okay with either the 50% plus 1 resident property owners or 500 Alameda resident signatures; the corporate name issue can include the City waiving fees in the future; Council should be careful not to start down a road where corporations name City streets. Councilmember Daysog inquired whether the petition with 500 signatures will be required to be a paper petition or whether the signatures can be electronic. The Recreation and Parks Director responded there is no requirements for the signatures; stated the signatures can be paper, electronic or a combination of both. Councilmember Herrera Spencer stated her understanding of the 500 signatures is there is no Regular Meeting Alameda City Council October 19, 2021 14 | CityCouncil/2021-10-19.pdf |