pages
18,746 rows sorted by page descending
This data as json, CSV (advanced)
date (date) >30 ✖
- 2019-09-12 78
- 2021-07-06 51
- 2021-03-11 47
- 2019-12-18 45
- 2016-01-05 40
- 2017-07-18 40
- 2021-09-07 40
- 2010-06-15 39
- 2018-07-10 39
- 2010-07-27 38
- 2016-02-16 37
- 2017-07-05 37
- 2018-06-05 36
- 2005-05-17 35
- 2012-06-06 35
- 2018-05-09 35
- 2020-07-21 35
- 2021-03-16 35
- 2021-11-16 35
- 2006-12-05 34
- 2007-01-02 34
- 2017-11-07 34
- 2021-07-20 34
- 2005-07-19 33
- 2020-05-19 33
- 2007-12-04 32
- 2009-10-20 32
- 2010-04-20 32
- 2016-02-02 32
- 2016-03-01 32
- …
body 19 ✖
- CityCouncil 8,920
- PlanningBoard 2,990
- TransportationCommission 1,099
- RecreationandParkCommission 1,002
- CommissiononPersonswithDisabilities 652
- GolfCommission 644
- SocialServiceHumanRelationsBoard 534
- LibraryBoard 488
- HistoricalAdvisoryBoard 487
- CivilServiceBoard 420
- OpenGovernmentCommission 420
- RentReviewAdvisoryCommittee 344
- PublicArtCommission 245
- AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority 225
- PensionBoard 157
- SuccessorAgencyOversightBoard 59
- SubcommitteeoftheCityCouncilandSchoolBoard 39
- Mayor'sEconomicDevelopmentAdvisoryPanel/EconomicRecoveryTaskForce 17
- CityofAlameda-ACTransitInteragencyLiaisonCommittee(ILC) 4
Link | body | date | page ▲ | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
RecreationandParkCommission/2019-09-12.pdf,78 | RecreationandParkCommission | 2019-09-12 | 78 | RecreationandParkCommission/2019-09-12.pdf | |
RecreationandParkCommission/2019-09-12.pdf,77 | RecreationandParkCommission | 2019-09-12 | 77 | From: Danny Roosevelt To: Amy Wooldridge Subject: voicing support for the Jackson Park playground project Date: Monday, September 9, 2019 2:02:01 PM CAUTION: This email message is coming from a non-City email address. Do not click links or open attachments unless you trust the sender and know the content is safe. Please contact the Help Desk with any questions. *** Hi Amy, I wanted to make my voice heard and let you know my family and I strongly support the proposal to build a playground at Jackson Park and we've love to see the city hire a landscape architect to product 2-3 conceptual designs to help ensure the project is successful. Please let me know if there's anything I can do to help! - Danny Roosevelt (Broadway and Central Ave) -- Danny Roosevelt dannyroosevelt.com | RecreationandParkCommission/2019-09-12.pdf |
RecreationandParkCommission/2019-09-12.pdf,76 | RecreationandParkCommission | 2019-09-12 | 76 | From: helenpak49@yahoo.com To: Amy Wooldridge Cc: KHINEOUN KONG Subject: Re: Jackson Park agenda item on Recreation and Parks Commission 9/12/19 Date: Monday, September 9, 2019 3:42:41 PM CAUTION: This email message is coming from a non-City email address. Do not click links or open attachments unless you trust the sender and know the content is safe. Please contact the Help Desk with any questions. *** Hi Amy, I am unable to attend the meeting but I'd like to see the Commissioners support hiring a landscape architect to create 2-3 conceptual designs to create a beautiful functional play space at Jackson Park. Thank you! Helen & Khineoun Kong 2304 San Jose Ave Alameda, CA 510-910-0763 Sent from my iPhone On Sep 5, 2019, at 10:29 AM, Amy Wooldridge <AWooldridge@alamedaca.gov> wrote: Hello Jackson Park neighbors, This is to inform you that the Recreation and Parks Commission will be discussing the option of a play area at Jackson Park on Thursday, September 12, 2019 at City Hall, Council Chambers on the third floor. It is also televised. The meeting starts at 7:00pm. The staff report and attachments are available on the city's website here. Just choose the Recreation and Parks Commission from the drop down menu and then click on the 9/12/2019 agenda. The blue hyperlinks on the agenda will take you to the staff report and attachments. Three options are being presented to the Commission for them to provide direction to staff. These options include 1) hiring a landscape architect to create 2-3 conceptual designs for a small gathering space/natural play area; 2) to leave the space as it is and not do a play area; 3) build a small natural play area/gathering space with pre-made components from a playground supplier that are natural looking components such as a climable rock or animal sculpture. All of the feedback from the neighborhood meeting is included as well as photo examples and options for a small landscape play area / gathering space. | RecreationandParkCommission/2019-09-12.pdf |
RecreationandParkCommission/2019-09-12.pdf,75 | RecreationandParkCommission | 2019-09-12 | 75 | From: Yu-Yee Wu To: Amy Wooldridge Subject: Re: Jackson Park agenda item on Recreation and Parks Commission 9/12/19 Date: Thursday, September 5, 2019 11:19:20 PM CAUTION: This email message is coming from a non-City email address. Do not click links or open attachments unless you trust the sender and know the content is safe. Please contact the Help Desk with any questions. *** Hi Amy, Thank you so much for the email and update. I was at the first meeting at Jackson Park but could not stay the whole time. I ask that the Commission support options 1 or 3 to have an appropriate sized natural playground integrated into Jackson Park, ideally including a small swing structure. I believe that having a small playground for the growing number of families nearby is in line with and supportive of the population changes and growth in Alameda. A small playground will not totally change the character of the park, which spans two blocks, one block of which can stay as it is for those who don't want change to still enjoy if they don't want to be around kids. I don't see a small local playground becoming a destination point like the other bigger and fancier playgrounds, but will serve to be a delight and resource for families like mine who live nearby who would like to walk to the park with their kids and give them a playground where they can be more active. Because of its close proximity to all the restaurants and shops on Park St, it will also be a nicer place to walk to after spending time on Park St and would help kids get out more of their energy before going home. I ask that the Commission vote for a small playground in Jackson Park to support the growing number of families who live nearby now and in the future. Thank you! Yu-Yee Wu On Sep 5, 2019, at 10:29 AM, Amy Wooldridge <AWooldridge@alamedaca.gov> wrote: Hello Jackson Park neighbors, This is to inform you that the Recreation and Parks Commission will be discussing the option of a play area at Jackson Park on Thursday, September 12, 2019 at City Hall, Council Chambers… | RecreationandParkCommission/2019-09-12.pdf |
RecreationandParkCommission/2019-09-12.pdf,74 | RecreationandParkCommission | 2019-09-12 | 74 | From: J.J. Navarro To: Amy Wooldridge Cc: Sarah Henry Subject: Re: Jackson Park agenda item on Recreation and Parks Commission 9/12/19 Date: Thursday, September 5, 2019 2:16:12 PM CAUTION: This email message is coming from a non-City email address. Do not click links or open attachments unless you trust the sender and know the content is safe. Please contact the Help Desk with any questions. *** Hi Amy - Thanks for your email. I will be out of town on the 12th and unable to attend the meeting. As I've expressed in council chambers on two occasions, and during the neighborhood meeting you hosted, I am very much in favor of building a tasteful, natural-looking play structure in Jackson Park. In my view, it will go a long way to bring our community together, deter the undesirable loitering and drug activity that the park is known for, and provide a much needed play structure for nearby families. Thank you for passing along my comments to the commissioners. -J.J. Navarro J.J. Navarro jinavarro@gmail.com m. 415-515-2259 On Thu, Sep 5, 2019 at 10:29 AM Amy Wooldridge <AWooldridge@alamedaca.gov> wrote: Hello Jackson Park neighbors, This is to inform you that the Recreation and Parks Commission will be discussing the option of a play area at Jackson Park on Thursday, September 12, 2019 at City Hall, Council Chambers on the third floor. It is also televised. The meeting starts at 7:00pm. The staff report and attachments are available on the city's website here. Just choose the Recreation and Parks Commission from the drop down menu and then click on the 9/12/2019 agenda. The blue hyperlinks on the agenda will take you to the staff report and attachments. Three options are being presented to the Commission for them to provide direction to staff. These options include 1) hiring a landscape architect to create 2-3 conceptual designs for a | RecreationandParkCommission/2019-09-12.pdf |
RecreationandParkCommission/2019-09-12.pdf,73 | RecreationandParkCommission | 2019-09-12 | 73 | From: Kasimira Riley To: Amy Wooldridge Subject: Jackson Park Date: Monday, September 9, 2019 10:15:14 AM CAUTION: This email message is coming from a non-City email address. Do not click links or open attachments unless you trust the sender and know the content is safe. Please contact the Help Desk with any questions. *** Hi Amy, I'm writing you to let you know of my support for building a small play space for children in Jackson park. I am in full support of hiring a landscape architect to create conceptual designs so we end up with a beautiful functional play space at Jackson Park. As live just a few blocks away from Jackson park and have a 8 month old who would would love to have a park and playground close by where he can be out in nature and interacting with other kids, I think the addition of a park would be a tremendous value add to the culture of the community. I think it is incredibly important to invest in the future of our community, and that is where I look to the city to take care of the best interests of our children. I hope to have your support! Kasi | RecreationandParkCommission/2019-09-12.pdf |
RecreationandParkCommission/2019-09-12.pdf,72 | RecreationandParkCommission | 2019-09-12 | 72 | From: Ashley Lorden To: Amy Wooldridge Subject: Jackson Park playspace Date: Monday, September 9, 2019 9:57:38 AM CAUTION: This email message is coming from a non-City email address. Do not click links or open attachments unless you trust the sender and know the content is safe. Please contact the Help Desk with any questions. Hello, I believe you are working on the next step for the Jackson Park playspace project, getting a few design options so Recreation and Parks and the community can form a plan. I strongly support this project; as someone who lives nearby, I don't use this park nearly as much as other parks (which are farther away from me) because I worry it's not a safe place for my children. I really like the idea of constructing a play area for children that is designed to feel like a natural part of this historic park, using earth tones and organic materials wherever possible. This would help the park get a lot more use by neighborhood families, which can make it safer for everyone. Thank you for your work on this project! Ashley Lorden | RecreationandParkCommission/2019-09-12.pdf |
RecreationandParkCommission/2019-09-12.pdf,71 | RecreationandParkCommission | 2019-09-12 | 71 | From: Claire Mathieson To: Amy Wooldridge Subject: Please Forward to Recreation and Park Commissioners for 9/12 Agenda Item 7c Date: Wednesday, September 11, 2019 4:09:38 PM CAUTION: This email message is coming from a non-City email address. Do not click links or open attachments unless you trust the sender and know the content is safe. Please contact the Help Desk with any questions. *** Dear Commissioners, My name is Claire Mathieson, and I have been a resident of Park Avenue since 2000, when I was a student at Otis Elementary School. I love Jackson Park because it is such a free, open space; each day the park has many different kinds of visitors, and they are each able to use its blank green canvas to make it their own. When I was a child here, we did not have a playground, but we did not miss one either; we loved making up our own games. I have no significant childhood memories of playing on playgrounds; however, some of my favorite memories feature games that my friends and I invented - light stick tag, which my neighbors and I made up and played often in Jackson Park; concocting Harry Potter-esque potions from mud, grass, and leaves and using sticks as magic wands; drawing elaborate chalk obstacle courses on asphalt and spending days working through the challenges together. Jackson Park is a unique place, a park that doesn't prescribe a way for children to play but rather provides them with a perfect, natural, open space where they can bring their own imaginations together to create endless fun and enrichment in the present and wonderful memories for the future. I think creativity is one of the most wondrous traits we have, and preserving natural, distraction-free places like Jackson Park is essential to nourish creative thinking in an age when so much of what we do is fed to us through screens. Last year I participated in a creativity retreat at Spirit Rock Meditation Center in Marin, and one of the teachers raised a point that really stuck with me. We seem to have so many options now, with endless apps a… | RecreationandParkCommission/2019-09-12.pdf |
RecreationandParkCommission/2019-09-12.pdf,70 | RecreationandParkCommission | 2019-09-12 | 70 | From: Montgomery, Angelina To: Amy Wooldridge Subject: Re: Jackson Park Date: Thursday, September 12, 2019 9:47:58 AM Attachments: image001.png image003.png *** CAUTION: This email message is coming from a non-City email address. Do not click links or open attachments unless you trust the sender and know the content is safe. Please contact the Help Desk with any questions. *** Hi Amy, I am unable to attend the meeting tonight and wanted to send my response to you directly. I have a little 2 year old and am an Alameda resident. We've owned our home in Alameda for a few years and have been renters here for years. I would like to support the city to build the play area at Jackson Park. As a new parent we're always looking for new places to take our child to play, and new ways to engage with our community. Having this new small park would be an excellent way to build community for families in Alameda, especially at Jackson Park! Thanks for your time and consideration. Angelina Montgomery, MPH Help Me Grow Prevention Manager First 5 Alameda County 1115 Atlantic Ave, Alameda, CA 94501 510-227-6943 angel.montgomery@first5alameda.org ww.First5Alameda.org FIRST5 ALAMEDA COUNTY Newsletter Alameda lorg CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This electronic mail transmission may contain privileged and/or confidential information for use only by the intended recipients. Any use, distribution, copying or disclosure by any person, other than the intended recipients is strictly prohibited and may be subject to civil action and/or penalties. If you receive this transmission in error, please notify the sender by reply e-mail or by telephone and delete the transmission. Thank you. | RecreationandParkCommission/2019-09-12.pdf |
RecreationandParkCommission/2019-09-12.pdf,69 | RecreationandParkCommission | 2019-09-12 | 69 | From: Sean P. Scanlon To: Amy Wooldridge Subject: Jackson Park Playground Date: Monday, September 9, 2019 7:32:33 AM CAUTION: This email message is coming from a non-City email address. Do not click links or open attachments unless you trust the sender and know the content is safe. Please contact the Help Desk with any questions. *** Hi Amy -- I am unable to attend the Recreation and Park Commission's meeting on Thursday regarding the proposed Jackson Park playground, but would like to put forward my support for the Commission to hire a landscape architect to create 2-3 conceptual designs for a small gathering space/natural play area. Thank you for all of your thoughtful attention to this potential project. Regards, Sean Scanlon 943 Park St. | RecreationandParkCommission/2019-09-12.pdf |
RecreationandParkCommission/2019-09-12.pdf,68 | RecreationandParkCommission | 2019-09-12 | 68 | From: Jennifer Zimmermann To: Amy Wooldridge Subject: Jackson park playground Date: Monday, September 9, 2019 8:48:26 PM *** CAUTION: This email message is coming from a non-City email address. Do not click links or open attachments unless you trust the sender and know the content is safe. Please contact the Help Desk with any questions. *** Hi Amy, I am a local alameda resident with a three year old. I wanted to reach out because I understand from Ron Limoges the last meeting there was opposition to the proposed park. I have been unable to attend any meetings due to work and lack of baby sitters but I fully support the need for some type of playground at Jackson park. I understand the next step should be hiring a landscape architect to create 2-3 conceptual designs so we end up with a beautiful functional play space. Please ensure this is moved forward We appreciate the work Jennifer, Jethro and Jax Zimmermann | RecreationandParkCommission/2019-09-12.pdf |
RecreationandParkCommission/2019-09-12.pdf,67 | RecreationandParkCommission | 2019-09-12 | 67 | From: Nalani N To: Amy Wooldridge Subject: Jackson Park Playground Date: Sunday, September 8, 2019 10:36:34 PM CAUTION: This email message is coming from a non-City email address. Do not click links or open attachments unless you trust the sender and know the content is safe. Please contact the Help Desk with any questions. *** Dear Amy. I'm writing because 'm hoping to see the Commissioners support hiring a landscape architect to create 2-3 conceptual designs SO we end up with a beautiful functional play space at Jackson Park. Every time l' m at Jackson Park I think it's such a pity there isn't a playground. the park has SO much unrealized potential as a public space. Thank you! Nalani Warde | RecreationandParkCommission/2019-09-12.pdf |
RecreationandParkCommission/2019-09-12.pdf,66 | RecreationandParkCommission | 2019-09-12 | 66 | From: Kate Fayngersh To: Amy Wooldridge Subject: Jackson Park Playground Date: Monday, September 9, 2019 12:44:14 AM *** CAUTION: This email message is coming from a non-City email address. Do not click links or open attachments unless you trust the sender and know the content is safe. Please contact the Help Desk with any questions. *** Hi Amy, My family and I recently purchased a home in Alameda, one block away from the beautiful Jackson Park. I am writing to you in support of the proposed playground, since I have two small children and attending support meetings in person is difficult due to the timing happening during or after bedtime. I would like to see the Commissioners' support hiring a landscape architect to create a couple of designs so we can end up with a beautiful and functional play space at Jackson Park that the entire community can agree upon. At the last meeting, the concept designs that were shared were beautiful, natural, and a tasteful size that took into account the size of the park without creating an eye sore or attracting people who would drive/park cars in the area. Such a play area would be wonderful and even those opposed recognized that something like that would be tasteful and agreeable. Please let me know if you have any questions or if I can reach out to anyone else to offer support for this effort. I appreciate your help with this! Kate Fayngersh 415-902-6446 | RecreationandParkCommission/2019-09-12.pdf |
RecreationandParkCommission/2019-09-12.pdf,65 | RecreationandParkCommission | 2019-09-12 | 65 | From: Louise Van Geffen To: Amy Wooldridge Subject: Fwd: Jackson Park meeting this evening Date: Thursday, September 12, 2019 9:33:00 AM CAUTION: This email message is coming from a non-City email address. Do not click links or open attachments unless you trust the sender and know the content is safe. Please contact the Help Desk with any questions. *** Dear Amy, I will be unable to attend the hearing tomorrow night, however I would like to voice my support for a Jackson Park play-space. My family and I have lived on Park Avenue in Alameda for 7 years. We always thought that Jackson Park was a picturesque looking place with a fine gazebo, but rarely had ever seen anyone put the space to any good use. To be honest, we mostly have just seen commuters waiting for buses there, teenage kids fighting after high school gets out and inebriated people passed out on the lawn. Now that we have small children and frequent other parks across the Island, it seems even more of a shame that there's no dedicated area for young kids to play in. There are even signs up that say that bike riding in the park is not allowed. I think it's reasonable to think that the entire community could benefit from encouraging more walkable options for families with young children. Many of the homes in the area lack any real back yards to play in or are suited to outdoor play. We'd like to see the Commissioners support hiring a landscape architect to create 2-3 conceptual designs for Jackson Park. We believe that we could end up with a beautiful functional play space there. I fear that many of us in our community are working parents of young children and are unable to turn up at these hearings. It's easy for us to be under represented especially given the times allotted for meetings on school nights. Jackson Park is not the center piece of private, gated community. The park deserves to be more than a publicly funded and maintained front yard for houses along Park Ave. It's supposed to be a space for all of us to share. We hope you support our neigh… | RecreationandParkCommission/2019-09-12.pdf |
RecreationandParkCommission/2019-09-12.pdf,64 | RecreationandParkCommission | 2019-09-12 | 64 | From: Dianne Woon To: Amy Wooldridge Subject: Jackson Park play structure Date: Tuesday, September 10, 2019 7:46:24 PM CAUTION: This email message is coming from a non-City email address. Do not click links or open attachments unless you trust the sender and know the content is safe. Please contact the Help Desk with any questions. Hi, Amy, Since both me and my husband have to attend a school function for our daughter, we won't be able to attend September 12 meeting. But we would like to express that we do not support building any play structure in Jackson Park. When we moved here, our children were small and they were able to enjoy using their own creativity to play at the park. Whenever we felt that it is needed, we will take them to other close by park with play structure. I have been a stay home mom and a working mom full time as we raise our kids. Also, since the park is so close to Encinal, it is a high risk to little ones and if you put a fence around the play structure, it will completely ruin the natural decor as we have been provided by the mother nature. Last but not least, we find that any structure is a natural attractive to people to hang out especially dusk and after. Most people who support the play structure lives 1-2 blocks away from it, therefore they never have to deal with calling APD as there are people gathering when they should not already. Play structure will make it even easier, just like the bench at the end of the park, because they will have a place to rest and hang out and play. Therefore, we respectually oppose to have any play structure on Jackson Park. Instead, we respectfully request to have the sidewalks around the park to be paved so there is no tripping hazarad. Thanks, Jason & Dianne Woon 1254 Park Ave | RecreationandParkCommission/2019-09-12.pdf |
RecreationandParkCommission/2019-09-12.pdf,63 | RecreationandParkCommission | 2019-09-12 | 63 | From: Karen Larsen To: Amy Wooldridge Subject: Jackson Park Date: Thursday, September 12, 2019 10:14:32 AM *** CAUTION: This email message is coming from a non-City email address. Do not click links or open attachments unless you trust the sender and know the content is safe. Please contact the Help Desk with any questions. *** Hello Amy, I hope to be able to attend the meeting tonight and add my opposition to adding a playground Jackson Park. Before moving forward with adding a playground I think it is important to keep the commitment made many years ago to spend money on repair and upkeep. It is particularly important to have a long range plan to replace trees with finite lives. I am afraid there will eventually be a wholesale removal of trees changing the character and object of the Park. I know the funds slated for the play area do not come from the maintenance budget. All the more reason for those who have been waiting for appropriate upkeep and repair to be upset with the playground decision. I sent an email in early July to your department asking when the giant stump left after the latest tree was taken down would be removed and replaced. Since there was a sign placed by ARPD on the stump advising that this was going to happen I wanted to know when. I did not receive a reply. I was there the day an ARPD employee dropped by the Park, met a fellow, and pointed to the tree that was subsequently removed. No notice was given to anyone. On the same day the tree was removed. While the tree may have needed to be removed, it was in the same condition on that day as it had been for years. I hope you will forgive my cynicism, but I think that the tree was removed to make way for a play area about which no appropriate public input effort was undertaken. I do understand that parents want to have areas for their children to play. Jackson Park is already being used for that purpose. There just aren't play structures. In an earlier email to you I suggested that a ring of benches might be appropriate. Parents could watch t… | RecreationandParkCommission/2019-09-12.pdf |
RecreationandParkCommission/2019-09-12.pdf,62 | RecreationandParkCommission | 2019-09-12 | 62 | From: Harrison Riley To: Amy Wooldridge Subject: Jackson Park Date: Monday, September 9, 2019 10:09:04 AM CAUTION: This email message is coming from a non-City email address. Do not click links or open attachments unless you trust the sender and know the content is safe. Please contact the Help Desk with any questions. Hi Amy, I'd like to see the Commissioners support hiring a landscape architect to create 2-3 conceptual designs so we end up with a beautiful functional play space at Jackson Park. Thanks, Harrison | RecreationandParkCommission/2019-09-12.pdf |
RecreationandParkCommission/2019-09-12.pdf,61 | RecreationandParkCommission | 2019-09-12 | 61 | From: Cassandra Cook To: Amy Wooldridge Subject: Jackson Park proposal Date: Wednesday, September 11, 2019 7:16:18 PM CAUTION: This email message is coming from a non-City email address. Do not click links or open attachments unless you trust the sender and know the content is safe. Please contact the Help Desk with any questions. *** Hi Amy, My name is Cassandra Lee, a mother of two and resident of Alameda. I am writing in regards to the proposed play area for Jackson Park. I understand that there has been opposition to the park and wanted to voice my opinion and wholehearted approval ahead of the City Hall discussion. Unfortunately, due to the logistics of having two young children, it is difficult for me attend the meetings on the park proposal. When I heard that there was a possibility of a new play structure for my children, and in such close proximity to our home and children's day care facility, my family and I were beyond elated. The parks that are close by are often crowded and I know that I speak for several families when I say that a new play area would be a godsend. I am in a Facebook community for 2016 (457 members) and 2018 (541 members) mothers and we are always looking for places to bring our children. I understand that there are two options for building a new structure- preassembled or hiring an architect. Of course, I believe hiring an architect would increase the value of the park - in attendance and aesthetics, much like the grandeur of the new Sweeney Open Space. Nonetheless, I honestly would be grateful for any play structure! My specific request would be to include a structure accessible for younger children. Since I have moved to Alameda, nearly 10 years ago, the city has exploded with new life. I see more and more young families moving here and growing. I know that this park would be a gift that would keep giving to the community for generations to come. Thank you for reviewing and considering the proposal for the park, and for reading my email. Best, Cassandra The Lee Family | RecreationandParkCommission/2019-09-12.pdf |
RecreationandParkCommission/2019-09-12.pdf,60 | RecreationandParkCommission | 2019-09-12 | 60 | From: Rachel Wilson To: Amy Wooldridge Subject: In support of a playground at Jackson Park Date: Monday, September 9, 2019 1:34:49 PM CAUTION: This email message is coming from a non-City email address. Do not click links or open attachments unless you trust the sender and know the content is safe. Please contact the Help Desk with any questions. Dear Ms. Wooldridge, I would like to see the Commissioners support hiring a landscape architect to create 2-3 conceptual designs so we end up with a beautiful functional play space at Jackson Park. My kids and I regularly walk and bike to the Park Street/Park Avenue area from our house on the East End. I know my kids would really enjoy a play area that makes Jackson Park feel more friendly to children. Thank you, Rachel Wilson 1205 Post St, Alameda, CA 94501 | RecreationandParkCommission/2019-09-12.pdf |
RecreationandParkCommission/2019-09-12.pdf,59 | RecreationandParkCommission | 2019-09-12 | 59 | From: bmathieson@aol.com To: Amy Wooldridge Cc: klofkorn@comcast.net; dnowi@comcast.net Subject: For Recreation and Park Commissioners -- September 12 Agenda Item 7c Date: Monday, September 9, 2019 7:29:27 AM Attachments: Compilation of opposition comments 8-22-2019.pc CAUTION: This email message is coming from a non-City email address. Do not click links or open attachments unless you trust the sender and know the content is safe. Please contact the Help Desk with any questions. *** Honorable Chair and Members of the Recreation and Park Commission: I am a neighbor of Jackson Park and am looking forward to participating in your September 12, 2019, meeting. I appreciate the conclusion in the staff report that states, "Overall, it was clear that a playground is not necessary to fulfill the requested needs but rather a small natural play area and/or gathering space for families would suffice." I would like to provide some additional context to the request for a playground in Jackson Park. Your May 9, 2019, recommendation to the City Council that a playground be constructed in Jackson Park was based on misleading information. The two Alameda residents who spoke at your May 9 meeting live in a neighborhood a few blocks from Jackson Park. One of them had conducted an online survey to gauge interest in a playground at the park and told you that the survey respondents were all in favor of a playground. That was not true; either the compilation of the survey results was flawed, or the speaker inaccurately summarized the results. The input provided at the July 30, 2019, Community Meeting, which at least two of you kindly attended, included vast opposition to a playground by people who identified themselves as living in the immediate neighborhood of the park. In contrast, very few of the playground proponents identified where they live. Unfortunately, the sign-in sheet for the meeting included only names and e-mail addresses, with no record of where the meeting attendees live. Speakers who stated that the closest playground… | RecreationandParkCommission/2019-09-12.pdf |
RecreationandParkCommission/2019-09-12.pdf,58 | RecreationandParkCommission | 2019-09-12 | 58 | From: Jaclyn Karnowski To: Amy Wooldridge Subject: Jackson park for kids!! Date: Thursday, September 12, 2019 9:50:06 AM CAUTION: This email message is coming from a non-City email address. Do not click links or open attachments unless you trust the sender and know the content is safe. Please contact the Help Desk with any questions. *** Hello, Please note my support for a simple kids play structure at Jackson Park. I'm all for a simple climb / swing structure. Please hire an architect and let's get this thing going! I know it will reduce the drug activity in the park, it'll be a great reason to actually open and use the bathroom that exists. And, it' Il be a catalyst for improving the walkway cement that is now quite dangerous for anyone walking the path. Thanks! Jaclyn Karnowski 2422 Webb Ave. Alameda Jaclyn Karnowski Consultant | Educator 810.444.0063 I jaclyn.karnowski@gmail.com beautycounter.com/jaclynkarnowski Our mission is to get safer products in the hands of everyone. | RecreationandParkCommission/2019-09-12.pdf |
RecreationandParkCommission/2019-09-12.pdf,57 | RecreationandParkCommission | 2019-09-12 | 57 | From: Katy Dreyfuss To: Amy Wooldridge Subject: In Support of a Play Space at Jackson Park Date: Tuesday, September 10, 2019 1:01:36 PM Attachments: ATT00001.htm sig ATT00002.htm CAUTION: This email message is coming from a non-City email address. Do not click links or open attachments unless you trust the sender and know the content is safe. Please contact the Help Desk with any questions. *** Hi Amy, My name is Katy Nasitka and I am an Alameda resident who lives .4 miles from Jackson Park. My kids are 7 and 10 years old. We often bike to Park Street and to friends' houses near Jackson Park. We enjoy biking under the trees through the park's open space. We would enjoy the park even more with a play space specifically designed for young children. I hope you will consider supporting the hire of a landscape architect who would create conceptual designs for a play space at Jackson Park. Best, Katy Nasitka | RecreationandParkCommission/2019-09-12.pdf |
RecreationandParkCommission/2019-09-12.pdf,56 | RecreationandParkCommission | 2019-09-12 | 56 | From: Scott Grieder To: Amy Wooldridge Cc: Charlise Tiee Subject: In support of a Jackson Park functional play-space Date: Wednesday, September 11, 2019 9:10:05 PM *** CAUTION: This email message is coming from a non-City email address. Do not click links or open attachments unless you trust the sender and know the content is safe. Please contact the Help Desk with any questions. *** Hello Amy, As I will be unable to attend the hearing tomorrow night, I am writing you in support of a Jackson Park play-space. My wife and I have lived in Alameda for over 10 years on Crist St. We always thought that Jackson Park was a picturesque looking place with a fine gazebo, but rarely had ever seen anyone put the space to any good use. To be honest, we mostly have just seen commuters waiting for buses there, teenage kids fighting after high school gets out and inebriated people passed out on the lawn. Now that we have small children and frequent other parks across the Island, it seems even more of a shame that there's no dedicated area for young kids to play in. There are even signs up that say that bike riding in the park is not allowed. I think it's reasonable to think that the entire community could benefit from encouraging more walkable options for families with young children. Many of the homes in the area lack any real back yards to play in or are suited to outdoor play. We'd like to see the Commissioners support hiring a landscape architect to create 2-3 conceptual designs for Jackson Park. We believe that we could end up with a beautiful functional play space there. I fear that many of us in our community are working parents of young children and are unable to turn up at these hearings. It's easy for us to be under represented especially given the times allotted for meetings on school nights. Jackson Park is not the center piece of private, gated community. The park deserves to be more than a publicly funded and maintained front yard for houses along Park Ave. It's supposed to be a space for all of us to share. We hope… | RecreationandParkCommission/2019-09-12.pdf |
RecreationandParkCommission/2019-09-12.pdf,55 | RecreationandParkCommission | 2019-09-12 | 55 | From: Bobbie V Centurion To: Amy Wooldridge Subject: Jackson Pak Date: Thursday, September 12, 2019 1:00:41 PM CAUTION: This email message is coming from a non-City email address. Do not click links or open attachments unless you trust the sender and know the content is safe. Please contact the Help Desk with any questions. *** Dear Amy, I am unable to be at the meeting, but would like to share some thoughts about play structures to be considered for Jackson Park. I am not in favor of installing any kind of play structure in Jackson Park. I have lived at the corner of Park Ave. and San Jose for almost 30 years. I raised three daughters here and we enjoyed the park a lot. I appreciate the open free-form play that I see so often in the park. Our park, the way it currently is, encourages children to use their imaginations in wonderful ways. Any group of parents, or teachers can use the park in an abundance of creative ways. I also have concerns about our beautiful trees. A friend that lives near Longfellow Park told me that they lost a one hundred year old magnolia recently., and that part of the reason was the roots of the tree were negatively impacted by the compacted soil of a play structure on top of them. Also, I am concerned that a play structure would invite more cars into the area. Parking is a constant issue for this neighborhood. I would like to see Park and Rec funding go towards replacing the dangerous paths and improved lawn maintenance which keeps the grass from growing onto the paths. Thank you for considering my ideas, and thank you for serving in public office. Sincerely, Bobbie V. Centurion 1201 Park Avenue Alameda, CA 94501 (510) 865-9945 | RecreationandParkCommission/2019-09-12.pdf |
RecreationandParkCommission/2019-09-12.pdf,54 | RecreationandParkCommission | 2019-09-12 | 54 | From: Jessica To: Amy Wooldridge Subject: Jackson park Date: Thursday, September 12, 2019 5:01:19 PM *** CAUTION: This email message is coming from a non-City email address. Do not click links or open attachments unless you trust the sender and know the content is safe. Please contact the Help Desk with any questions. Hi Amy, I'm unable to attend tonight's city council meeting because it conflicts with my toddler's bedtime but I am emailing to express my support for building a small natural playground at Jackson park. I was at the meeting held at the park about a month ago and wish I was able to attend this meeting. I would like to see the Commissioners support hiring a landscape architect to create 2-3 conceptual designs to help create a beautiful functional play space at Jackson Park. Thank you for considering this feedback from me and my 22 month old! Best, Jessica Sent from my iPhone | RecreationandParkCommission/2019-09-12.pdf |
RecreationandParkCommission/2019-09-12.pdf,53 | RecreationandParkCommission | 2019-09-12 | 53 | From: Erin Zajonc To: Amy Wooldridge Subject: Support for Jackson Park Play Space Date: Thursday, September 12, 2019 2:54:32 PM CAUTION: This email message is coming from a non-City email address. Do not click links or open attachments unless you trust the sender and know the content is safe. Please contact the Help Desk with any questions. *** Dear Amy, I wanted to share with you my support for a play space at Jackson Park. My family loves downtown and think that a nearby play space would make it even better. Not only will it provide a space for children to run around and socialize but it will also build community and improve Jackson Park. One time, my husband went to Jackson park for my son to run around - but found it less inviting with people loitering for lack of a better word. Likewise, If there were a play space close to downtown, my family and I would eat and shop there more often because we would have a space for our son to burn off some energy before and/or after. We understand that there are fiscal considerations and therefore support the Commissioners to get conceptual designs for the potential play space. Thank you for your time, Erin Fong-Zajonc | RecreationandParkCommission/2019-09-12.pdf |
RecreationandParkCommission/2019-09-12.pdf,52 | RecreationandParkCommission | 2019-09-12 | 52 | RecreationandParkCommission/2019-09-12.pdf | |
CityCouncil/2021-07-06.pdf,51 | CityCouncil | 2021-07-06 | 51 | (21-464) Consider Adoption of Resolution Supporting the Goal of Reaching 100% Zero Emission Vehicle Sales in California by 2030. (Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft) Not heard. (21-465) Considering Having an Introduction and Update from the New Police Chief regarding Strategies to Address Crimes. (Councilmember Herrera Spencer) Not heard. (21-466) Considering Directing Staff to Provide an Update on License Plate Readers. (Councilmember Herrera Spencer) Not heard. (21-467) Consider Directing Staff to Publicly Share Information on Parking Recreational Vehicles. (Councilmember Herrera Spencer) Not heard. (21-468) Consider Directing Staff to Address Representation for Below Market Rate Homeowners on Homeowner Association (HOA) Boards and with Property Management. (Councilmember Herrera Spencer) Not heard. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS Not heard. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft adjourned the meeting at 12:01 a.m. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger City Clerk The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Sunshine Ordinance. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 28 July 6, 2021 | CityCouncil/2021-07-06.pdf |
RecreationandParkCommission/2019-09-12.pdf,51 | RecreationandParkCommission | 2019-09-12 | 51 | Sunday, July 21, 2019 at 4:33:02 PM Pacific Daylight Time Subject: Jackson Park playground proposal Date: Sunday, July 21, 2019 at 4:32:43 PM Pacific Daylight Time From: Gary Cates (sent by gary cates <glcbfd1967@gmail.com>) To: mezzyashcraft@alameda.gov,awooldridge@alameda.gov CC: jacksonparkwatch@googlegroups.com BCC: Sarah Foltz, mary ann cates, gary cates Dear Mayor Ashcraft and Ms. Wooldridge, We purchased our home at 1250 Park Avenue in April of 1974. We raised two children here and now have two teenage grandchildren all of whom spent many hours enjoying the wonders of our beautiful Jackson park. They were allowed to use their imagination to enjoy what little green space we have in a very urban setting. The park was never intended to include a playground. This became evident when the private properties owned by the residents of Park Avenue were deeded to the City for the purpose of building what would become Alameda's first Park. For example, a fire station was once proposed for much of the space and rejected once restrictions outlined in the property transfer agreement were revealed. Because of the park's proximity to a commercial district and Alameda High School the park and those of us who share the area are often exposed to negative conditions such various types of litter, including discarded food packaging, drug paraphernalia and liquor bottles and the noise of late night partying. The addition of a playground could serve as a magnet for many unauthorized activities that would only exacerbate these problems. The park was conceived as a "landscape promenade" that did not incorporate concepts of play and recreation such as playgrounds and sports fields. These elements can be found in later developed parks such as Lincoln and Washington and others. The historic nature of the creation of the park and the wishes of the original grantors must be respected. We fear that we may be living in a time where the concept of respect for history is being eroded. We understand and respect those who feel that a playgrou… | RecreationandParkCommission/2019-09-12.pdf |
CityCouncil/2021-07-06.pdf,50 | CityCouncil | 2021-07-06 | 50 | Councilmember Herrera Spencer stated that she has an issue with the September 22nd meeting date; the date is posed for a League of California Cities conference in Sacramento and she plans to attend; noted September 14th is not a holiday; expressed support for the meeting dates being September 1st and 14th Vice Mayor Vella stated that she has a work commitment on September 14th; schedules are created far in advance due to meeting dates; inquired whether there has been an instance where Christmas has landed on a scheduled Council meeting. The City Clerk responded in the negative; stated the date is a holiday where City Hall is closed and meetings would not be scheduled. Councilmember Herrera Spencer inquired whether the current September meeting dates are the 1st and the 15th The City Clerk responded in the affirmative; stated the dates had been adopted in January; noted the proposed dates revert back to the original meeting schedule; stated a Transportation Commission meeting is scheduled for September 22nd Councilmember Herrera Spencer stated that her preference is to keep the dates already voted on by Council which would be September 1st and 15th Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she has trouble selecting one religion to move Council meetings for; a survey should be provided through the Social Services Human Relations Board (SSHRB); there are many different dates which are important to different religious groups; Council should not favor one religion over another; expressed support for sticking to the regular schedule of the 1st and 3rd Tuesday of each month; SSHRB is likely the most appropriate Board for the matter. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft moved approval of continuing the matter to July 20, 2021 at 6:59 p.m. Vice Mayor Vella seconded the motion, which carried by the following roll call vote: Councilmembers Daysog: Aye; Herrera Spencer: Ayes; Knox White: Aye; Vella: Aye; and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye. Ayes: 5. CITY MANAGER COMMUNICATIONS Not heard. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA Not heard. COUNCIL REFERRALS Regular Me… | CityCouncil/2021-07-06.pdf |
RecreationandParkCommission/2019-09-12.pdf,50 | RecreationandParkCommission | 2019-09-12 | 50 | Lisa Klofkorn East End Zone I have lived in a house facing Jackson Park for twenty years. I do not normally have objections to adding playgrounds to existing parks, however. in regards to Jackson Park I have a few concerns. First, when this park underwent renovations in 2001, the proposed renovation included two phases. Phase one, including the restoration of the bandstand, was completed. It's my understanding that phase two, including much needed improvements to pathways, lighting, and such, was never done due to budgetary constraints. These improvements are still very much needed in this park. How can the expense of adding a playground be justified when much needed park improvements have not been implemented? Secondly, if a playground is added would a fence surrounding this playground be necessary due to safety concerns, because of the close proximity of Park Avenue on both the east and west sides of the park? If a fence is needed I have worries this may negatively impact the beauty and openness of the park. This park is very narrow by design and the space may not lend itself well to the addition of a fenced off area within its boundaries. 21 Mar Reply 6 Monique Lopez. East End Zone V No thank you 22 Mar Thank Reply 1 | RecreationandParkCommission/2019-09-12.pdf |
CityCouncil/2021-07-06.pdf,49 | CityCouncil | 2021-07-06 | 49 | Councilmember Herrera Spencer stated public comment has raised the issue of whether or not the contract is similar to other City staff; her understanding is that the contract is similar; requested clarification for the contract details. The Human Resources Director stated the provisions in the City Attorney's contract allow for employees to cash out vacation, up to two weeks, after being with the City for 15 years; not all employees have the provision; the provision is negotiated; vacation accruals are different based on years of service; the accruals allowed are higher than other City employees however, the amount is nothing higher than seen at other organizations. Councilmember Herrera Spencer inquired whether any other City employees have the same level of vacation cash-out. The Human Resources Director responded other employees have the 80 hours of cash- out option after 15 years of service. Councilmember Herrera Spencer moved approval of the employment agreement. Councilmember Knox White seconded the motion, which carried by the following roll call vote: Councilmembers Daysog: Aye; Herrera Spencer: Ayes; Knox White: Aye; Vella: Aye; and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye. Ayes: 5. (21-463) Adoption of Resolution Amending Resolution Nos. 15728 and 15739 Amending the 2021 Regular City Council Meeting Dates. [Continued to 7/20 at 6:59 p.m.] The City Clerk gave a brief presentation. Councilmember Knox White stated moving the dates back would be problematic; expressed support for the September meeting dates being the 8th and the 22nd Mayor Ezzy Aschraft requested clarification on selecting certain religious holidays to re- schedule. The City Attorney stated Council has a wide range of discretion on when to meet; should Council choose to meet, the reasons would not be due to favoring one religion over another. Councilmember Knox White stated no meetings are scheduled for December 25th which is a Christian holiday; Council can make a determination that meetings can be moved based on conflicts for a large portion of the commu… | CityCouncil/2021-07-06.pdf |
RecreationandParkCommission/2019-09-12.pdf,49 | RecreationandParkCommission | 2019-09-12 | 49 | Nextdoor Jackson Park Playground Survey March 2019 Examples of comments posted to this survey that were in oppositon to having a playground built in Jackson Park. " Monica LeMaster East End Zone I'm very fond of the gorgeous trees and open green space, so I am against losing any of the trees(-ever if they're not intentionally cut, could their roots get unintentionally damaged through construction?). I personally don't think of the park as underutilized, as I've found things to do with my kids there for the last 12 years. Though in those 12 years, I've also wished for a playground from time to time, especially when I have toddler in the house: I've learned to just bring a ball and enjoy the space as is though-building - fairy houses with the sticks is another favorite activity. I'm open to hearing more about the idea though. I know there are a lot of families with young children in this neighborhood, some new and some old, and I would love to meet them at a local, public playground. Edited 22 Mar Thank Reply 6 Terri Ogden, East End Zone T I am a devoted supporter of recreation in Alameda, having worked at the parks and serving on the recreation commission. That being said, I am very much devoted to free play instead of always structuring children's play time. My aunt used to live on Park Avenue and I can remember having some awesome fun running around the park with my cousins playing for hours without the need for playground equipment. There is a lot to be said for the imagination. 22 Mar Thank Reply 4 Mimi Laubach Whale's Eye I like Jackson Park as it is. I think ARPD could do more with the park- maybe Sunday afternoon concerts in the bandstand, upgrade the pathways and add flower beds in areas. Most of our city parks have play structures already and we have few "green" parks where we can enjoy simple nature in Alameda. 28 Mar Thank Reply : 3 | RecreationandParkCommission/2019-09-12.pdf |
CityCouncil/2021-07-06.pdf,48 | CityCouncil | 2021-07-06 | 48 | support for the restaurant and long-term tenants are good for the City; she feels as though she does not have a choice in the matter; expressed support for an operator that is focused on golfing; stated Greenway Golf is not set up to be a restauranteur; she hopes for a golf course operator that is willing to honor working together with Jim's on the Course; expressed support for the motion; expressed concern for Greenway Golf as an operator; stated that she will be looking at Greenway Golf closely moving forward; she has heard complaints about the golf course; it is important that both parties be held to honor the original agreement as much as possible; she expects the operator to be good within the community. On the call for the questions, the motion carried by the following roll call vote: Councilmembers Daysog: Aye; Herrera Spencer: Aye; Knox White: Aye; Vella: Aye; and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye. Ayes: 5. CONSENT CALENDAR (CONTINUED) (21-462) Recommendation to Approve Amended Employment Agreement for the City Attorney. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 25 July 6, 2021 | CityCouncil/2021-07-06.pdf |
RecreationandParkCommission/2019-09-12.pdf,48 | RecreationandParkCommission | 2019-09-12 | 48 | who live in my old neighborhood on and near Crist Street. Those that spoke primarily in opposition to having the playground were residents living in the immediate vicinity of the park, residents living within the 300' radius the city designates as the neighborhood needing to give approval. So, not all who spoke were from the immediate neighborhood (within the 300' radius), and many were from outside the immediate neighborhood, thus giving an inaccurate appraisal of the situation. I have printed out an updated map of Jackson Park and its surrounding residential neighborhood showing those residences opposed to having a playground built in the park. This map illustrates the overwhelming opposition this neighborhood has to the addition of a playground in Jackson Park. I addition I am including a copy of the Conceptual Master Plan of Jackson Park, drawn up twenty years ago, in hopes that the city would see fit to implement some of the improvements included in this plan, as well as seeing to much needed deferred maintenance this park sorely needs. | RecreationandParkCommission/2019-09-12.pdf |
CityCouncil/2021-07-06.pdf,47 | CityCouncil | 2021-07-06 | 47 | will continue attempting to sell the tent; Mr. Geanekos might not be able to recoup the costs. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired what will happen should the costs be able to be recovered. The Chief Assistant City Attorney responded Council may request staff to draft a provision to stagger the rent recovery provision outlined in option B should Jims on the Course be able to sell back the event tent. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft expressed support for a provision to stagger rent recovery. Expressed support for the third amendment; stated that he is excited to continue partnering with the City to improve the golf course; city staff, Jim's on the Course and Greenway Golf have worked hard to find a path forward that works for all parties; he and Mr. Geanekos are committed to working together in a manner which is mutually beneficial and in turn, benefits the City; having more food and beverage options at the course will bring more patrons thus increasing business for both Greenway Golf and Jim's on the Course; having expanded offerings will provide an opportunity to bring in other Alameda food vendors during tournaments; the amendment will allow Greenway Golf to bring larger tournaments to Corica Park; outlined a ranking of 12th best course provided by Golf Magazine; discussed the annual golf tournament; stated having more choices at Corica Park will enable the annual tournament to come home to the City's golf course; discussed letters of support; stated that he hopes the amendment will allow Greenway Golf to host bigger tournaments in the coming years; urged Council support the amendment: Umesh Patel, Greenway Golf. Discussed operations of locations; stated many first job opportunities are provided at Jim's; the golf course has undergone many transformations since 2006 and the only stable factor has been Jim's on the Course; prior to 2006, a food and beverage cart provided limited service to golfers only; he has since invested large sums of money to improve kitchen facilities and dining areas; the full service restaurant can serve h… | CityCouncil/2021-07-06.pdf |
RecreationandParkCommission/2021-03-11.pdf,47 | RecreationandParkCommission | 2021-03-11 | 47 | tennis courts. Harbor Bay Club also has 4 Pickleball courts. Can ARPD work with HBC and make an arrangement with them for the public to use their Pickleball courts in exchange for St. Joe's using public tennis courts? At Lincoln Park on March 12th at 11:30 a.m., there were 21 Pickleball players. As I was sitting there waiting for a court, I noticed that the basketball court and thought that maybe that could be an option for the rec and park to look at to build more Pickleball courts. The ground structure is already in place and may be easy to convert over to courts as 8 new basketball courts were built at Washington Park. On my way home, I drove by Krusi Park and all 3 tennis courts were empty. What about Estuary Park, where the new turf field was built. Can ARPD work with the East Bay Regional Parks and see if there is land that they can add Pickleball courts? I do not support a reservation system to use courts for the tennis and/or Pickleball for local residents. The courts are public land and should be used by the public for free as we pay property tax to the City of Alameda. This is a disadvantage to residence in Alameda who cannot "pay to play" the games. We need to encourage people to exercise and enjoy the outdoors. Who will be monitoring the courts to make sure people are using the reservation system correctly? I do not believe a GoFundMe or fundraisers to build Pickleball courts is ideal. Why should the citizens of Alameda, whom already pay property tax, contribute money to build Pickleball courts? We live in a community, but not everyone in the community supports Pickleball and it appears that the only people whom would contribute are the Pickleball players, which comes back to "pay to play" situation. You all have a tough decision to make sure everyone in the community is happy and I praise you for the long hours you put in for the community. It is not fair to put Pickleball courts in places without lights, bathrooms and drinking faucets, so the tennis community is happy. I hope you review some, or all… | RecreationandParkCommission/2021-03-11.pdf |
RecreationandParkCommission/2019-09-12.pdf,47 | RecreationandParkCommission | 2019-09-12 | 47 | I'm Lisa Klofkorn. I have lived across from Jackson Park for twenty years, and previous to that lived for ten years in the neighborhood where many of the pro- playground folks now reside. I raised my children in these two neighborhoods and I'm intimately familiar with both. A traditional playground, especially any structure that needs to be fenced in, doesn't fit into this narrow park, which was originally intended for passive recreation. Other factors that make this site a poor one for a playground include the busy streets that surround the park on all sides, the poor condition of the existing trees that may pose a hazard, and the lack of sufficient parking (as this is an extremely high density neighborhood with many multi-unit dwellings). I reviewed the video of your May 9 meeting. The social media surveys mentioned did not ask respondents for their addresses, so it would not be possible to know if the respondents were from the immediate area. The results stating that all respondents were for having a playground built in Jackson Park were inaccurate, as I and others responded to the Nextdoor survey with our opposition and concerns, but these comments were not referenced in the May 9 meeting. I'm attaching a few of these responses in the packet I'm leaving with you tonight. In Ms. Wooldridge's report on the July 30 meeting in Jackson Park, which I attended, she comments that of those who voiced opinions about half were for the playground and half were opposed. The sign-in sheet did not ask for the addresses of those in attendance. After that meeting I wrote to Ms. Wooldridge to clarify what was meant by "neighborhood" in reference to the city council's stipulation that the playground was "contingent upon neighborhood approval". She wrote back that the city generally uses the standard of 300' from any given project. At the July 30 meeting it was apparent that several of the people voicing their approval of the proposed playground were from areas outside the immediate neighborhood, including those | RecreationandParkCommission/2019-09-12.pdf |
CityCouncil/2021-07-06.pdf,46 | CityCouncil | 2021-07-06 | 46 | its regulatory and proprietary capacities. This Third Amendment shall not be construed to limit the City's future discretion to approve, conditionally approve, or deny such uses;" stated the language indicates Council will review items as they arise. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the language is to be included in the settlement agreement. Councilmember Daysog responded the language will be inserted as section 14. The City Attorney stated Councilmember Daysog is recommending an additional provision to the third amendment to Greenway Golf lease. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the recommended language has been discussed with Greenway Golf, to which the City Attorney responded in the affirmative. Councilmember Herrera Spencer requested clarification on the claim against the City from Greenway Golf; stated that she would like to know the monetary risk to those named in the claim. The City Attorney stated the claim in a nutshell states that Greenway Golf has alleged Jim's on the Course has breached its obligations to build an event center, and that the City has been complicit in the breach with Greenway Golf and has incurred damages in the range of tens of millions of dollars. Councilmember Herrera Spencer stated the amount of the claim is tens of millions of dollars; inquired whether Jim's on the Course has filed a claim against the City of Alameda, to which the City Attorney responded in the negative. Councilmember Herrera Spencer stated the response has confirmed that Greenway Golf has filed a claim for tens of millions of dollars against the City and Jims on the Course; noted Jims on the Course has not filed a claim against the City. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired the proposed location of the referenced restaurant at the golf course. The Recreation and Parks Director responded the location has yet to be determined; stated there are a number of City requirements to be worked through on Greenway Golf's part, including Gold Commission, Planning Board and City Council. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether th… | CityCouncil/2021-07-06.pdf |
RecreationandParkCommission/2021-03-11.pdf,46 | RecreationandParkCommission | 2021-03-11 | 46 | From: Helen Simpson [mailto:HSimpson@MPBF.com Sent: Friday, March 12, 2021 2:20 PM To: ARPD <ARPD@alamedaca.gov> Subject: [EXTERNAL] ARPD's Meeting on March 11, 2021 Dear Commissioners of Alameda Recreation and Parks Department. Thank you all for your time in working with the Pickleball community in finding a location for new Pickleball courts to be built. I watched the Zoom meeting on March 11th and found it interesting the different comments about tennis verses Pickleball. Pickleball is not for "old, retired tennis players" as referred to by some of the speakers. One speaker mentioned that Pickleball players could use "masking tape" to make our lines to play on tennis courts, which would not work because the nets are not the same size. I play Pickleball with a group of players from the ages of 25 - 75. I have never played tennis because I always felt it was a very competitive sport (and too quiet), where Pickleball is not. I am not a "pandemic" Pickleball player either, as some speakers identified Pickleball players to be. I feel if there were more Pickleball courts in Alameda, more people would play. There are high schools around the country that now have Pickleball teams. During the presentation, it appears there are 6 tennis courts at Washington Park and 2 wall ball courts. From some of the callers at the meeting, they made it sound like there were 4 tennis courts at Washington Park and by converting one to Pickleball, that would leave 3 tennis courts, which in fact, it would be 5 tennis courts and 2 wall ball courts. The perfect spot for Pickleball courts is Washington Park since it is in mid-town, easy access, away from homes, close to soccer field, baseball field, basketball courts, dog park and tennis courts. It should be an all-around park for all to enjoy. Also, there are lights at Washington Park so Pickleball players can enjoy playing in the evening. I heard at last night's meeting that tennis tournaments are held at Washington Park and 3 courts are used for tournaments. Lydecker and Krusi both have … | RecreationandParkCommission/2021-03-11.pdf |
RecreationandParkCommission/2019-09-12.pdf,46 | RecreationandParkCommission | 2019-09-12 | 46 | RecreationandParkCommission/2019-09-12.pdf | |
CityCouncil/2021-07-06.pdf,45 | CityCouncil | 2021-07-06 | 45 | immediately be cut-off from a range of State funding sources; the funding applies to transportation, open space, affordable housing and homeless project money; the City relies on all the related funding which could be cut-off. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired the due date, to which the Planning, Building and Transportation Director responded January 2023. The Planning, Building and Transportation Director stated that he would like to come back to Council in the fall with projects related to the Housing Element; the projects may be voted up or down; staff will be clear and inform Council of the projects in relation to the Housing Element; the General Plan will be coming to Council in the fall; noted the General Plan is designed to support a Housing Element however, the General Plan does not predetermine the RHNA allocation; stated the General Plan represents the coming 20 years; noted three Housing Elements will occur in the General Plan time frame; the General Plan will allow decisions for multi-family overlay and densities; by the end of the fall, staff will find out the RHNA allocation; he will continue to work with the Planning Board and the community on the multi-family overlays and will return to Council for a study session style update report on the final RHNA allocation plans; the report will come to Council between January and February providing time to continue working; Council may provide feedback and fine tuning on the plan but will not need to make a final determination. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft expressed support for workshops taking place in different parts of the City with access for all and for conducting walking tours; noted the matter will return in the future. (21-460) Recommendation to Authorize the Chief of Police to Update the Existing Alameda Police Department Policy Manual to be Current with Existing Best Practices and Statutory Requirements. Not heard. (21-461) Introduction of Ordinance Approving a Third Amendment to the Greenway Golf Lease Agreement for Operation of the Corica Park Golf Complex. I… | CityCouncil/2021-07-06.pdf |
RecreationandParkCommission/2021-03-11.pdf,45 | RecreationandParkCommission | 2021-03-11 | 45 | From: Helen Simpson [mailto:HSimpson@MPBF.com Sent: Tuesday, February 23, 2021 5:00 PM To: ARPD@alamedaca.gov Subject: ARPD's Meeting on March 11, 2021 Dear Commissioners of Alameda Recreation and Parks Department. I have recently picked up the fastest growing sport in the United States, Pickleball. I play Pickleball at Lincoln Park on Mondays and Saturdays and I am truly enjoying the game and the people whom also play. Everyone is so friendly and it really is a social sport. Pickleball is a healthy, inexpensive outdoor sport that anyone age can play and also any ability. The rules are easy (and not too many rules) and easy to pick up. Thank you for considering converting a tennis court at Washington Park to 4 Pickleball courts. Washington Park would be a great location since it is in central Alameda. If possible, I would love to see more tennis courts, at different parks, converted to Pickleball courts. What about the old tennis court at Hornet Field? There are 23 tennis courts (including Alameda and Encinal High Schools) and four Pickleball courts. The four courts at Lincoln Park are enjoyed by many and heavily used. On Saturday afternoons, there are anywhere between 25 and 35 players wanting to play between 3:00 and 5:00. With only four courts, there is a lot of waiting around for a court to open up. Also, since there are no lights at Lincoln Park, the courts close when the sun goes down, giving limited time to play. Thank you for the opportunity to share my love of Pickleball and I truly support building more Pickleball courts in the City of Alameda. Sincerely, Helen Simpson Alameda Resident | RecreationandParkCommission/2021-03-11.pdf |
RecreationandParkCommission/2019-09-12.pdf,45 | RecreationandParkCommission | 2019-09-12 | 45 | PARK AVENUE WEST Magnolias (E) Park Sign NOTE Cown Lown VII PARK AVENUE ERST Plenic Area Elevated Two Ther Fountein With upper of Lower Coping Sycamores () Magnolias () Pergola's With Flowering Vine Low Boxwood Hedge Single Species Bed With Seasonal Color Palms (E) Pavers Large Urns With Annual Color Circuler Bed Victorian Style Bench Single Species Beds With Seasonal Color Ornamental 42"Wroughe Iron Fence Victorian Style Trosh Receptacle Decomposed Granite Paving Interlocign Pavers Stone Seat Well Restroom in style of Gasebo Slopad Circular Rjoben Beds Drinking Fountain Pavers Victorion Style Light Peles Sycamores (E) Linden Treas (2) PARK WEST Red Oaks () AVENUE Redwoods (E) JACKSON PARK Sensonal Flowering Strubbs Around Concrets Seat (") With Now Drining Fountain For Dags CONCEPTUAL MASTER PLAN City of Alameda Alameda, California February 1997 jha Londange Lave --- o 10 20 40 00 FEQT Polms (E) Low Boxwood Hedge Magnolias (E) Pargola's With Flowering Vine sightly Mounded Rib6on Bed With Sensona a/ Color Interlocion Pavers PART AVENUE EAST Ornamental 42e Wrought Iron Fence Standard Roses 'With Flowering Groundcover Dischied Accessible Victorian Stryle Gassbo | RecreationandParkCommission/2019-09-12.pdf |
CityCouncil/2021-07-06.pdf,44 | CityCouncil | 2021-07-06 | 44 | is provided; staff anticipates a series of meetings with Council over the following nine months; the process allows staff to keep moving and informing Council; emphasized the need for smoothness at the end of the process. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated the Measure Z ballot measure elections results have been a resounding no; the campaign was not well-run and educating voters was not adequately performed; expressed support for an informative public process; Council decided late in the game to place the measure on the ballot; answers to public questions were not given enough of a chance; the City fell short in communicating and now has a second chance at bringing the public along; Council cannot pretend as though there is no housing crisis; Council must solve housing problems realistically; expressed support for Council providing clear direction on what to include in the returning report; questioned the matters which Council would like addressed. Councilmember Daysog stated that he will need to know the final RHNA allocation before he signs off on the Housing Element and multi-family zoning strategies; he will need to determine whether or not the allocation is fair to the island; the public and Council will need a thorough analysis regarding densities of new General Plan land use categories and the relationship to multi-family overlays; he will find it difficult to support any kind of Housing Element or zoning overlay change should there be no reduction in the RHNA allocation; the City is unique and is one of two California islands; the City cannot support any allocation near the 5,300 units; he will put out more of his thoughts between now and the returning report. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether Councilmember Daysog prefers the matter not return to Council until after the November or December determination of the RHNA allocation, to which Councilmember Daysog responded in the affirmative. Vice Mayor Vella stated it makes sense to wait until the final RHNA allocation is provided; there are a number of questions t… | CityCouncil/2021-07-06.pdf |
RecreationandParkCommission/2021-03-11.pdf,44 | RecreationandParkCommission | 2021-03-11 | 44 | Full Name Zip code Email Signature Tequh Subiantor 94607 94501 Joseph Nakhur | RecreationandParkCommission/2021-03-11.pdf |
RecreationandParkCommission/2019-09-12.pdf,44 | RecreationandParkCommission | 2019-09-12 | 44 | RecreationandParkCommission/2019-09-12.pdf | |
CityCouncil/2021-07-06.pdf,43 | CityCouncil | 2021-07-06 | 43 | Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye. Ayes: 4. Noes: 1. Vice Mayor Vella stated that she would like to hear from the City Attorney on the fiduciary obligations for Council; she agrees that an attempt at unanimity relative to the multi-family overlay is needed; expressed support for City staff providing possible approaches to the matter. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft expressed support for staff providing implications of having a Housing Element which is not in compliance with State law. The City Attorney stated there is no pressing deadline due to the approval of appealing the allocation; the Housing Element does not need to be certified until the end of next year; Council has time and the matter will return with updates; one option for Council is to continue the matter and allow the Planning, Building and Transportation Director to bring back new information based on the appeal process; the new information can inform the Council discussion; recommended allowing the Planning, Building and Transportation Director to perform work with the community; Council may also take a number of other actions including making commitments about allowing multi-family overlays, prioritizing City-owned land or Council may decide not to take action; staff recommends any Council direction for litigation be brought forth in Closed Session; Council has a wide range of options with a lot of time. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired when Council can anticipate an update on the appeal process. The Planning, Building and Transportation Director responded that an update on the appeal should be available by the end of the calendar year; an e-mail follow up to Council with a more definitive date will be sent in the coming days. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft outlined the timeline for the anticipated appeals schedule; noted the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) will adopt the final RHNA plan in December. The Planning, Building and Transportation Director stated staff will approach the work as a series of steps which will play out over the next nine months; staff understands … | CityCouncil/2021-07-06.pdf |
RecreationandParkCommission/2021-03-11.pdf,43 | RecreationandParkCommission | 2021-03-11 | 43 | BO Principal tha costib 12/24 aweN and news | RecreationandParkCommission/2021-03-11.pdf |
RecreationandParkCommission/2019-09-12.pdf,43 | RecreationandParkCommission | 2019-09-12 | 43 | Park Avenue Heritage Area September 2019 to 07 #73 179 - - #95 1201 1203 1207 1211 1213-6 1217 1227 1229-31 1286 37 1247 PARK AVENUE = TREES 2414-1 21 1333 1344 1345 47 1349 1551 1393-57 1509 1375 PARK AVENUE 1304 ISOS 1308 1314 1318 1320 1322 1334 1336-38 1340 1344 1346 1350 PARK AVENUE #66 #70 #74 ##2 IISO #95 1200 1206 1220 1222 224 1224 1252 1236 1240 1246 1250-52 1254 1258 5 S 5 2 and Residences opposed to having playground in Jackson Park (based on a partial survey) PARK | RecreationandParkCommission/2019-09-12.pdf |
CityCouncil/2021-07-06.pdf,42 | CityCouncil | 2021-07-06 | 42 | non-compliant; it is ok for the City to end up in Court; a long-term answer to the question will result; the multi-family overlay is not a magic concept to duck State allocations; staff came up with the multi-family overlay in order to sell and ignore the Charter based on State laws and calculations; the concept had been pitched to Council and was not fought by Councilmembers; Measure A is illegal and the multi-family overlay is a way for the City to pretend the matter is being addressed; now the City must address the matter in having a multi-family overlay which is placed at well over 30 units per acre; the housing units will need to be everywhere; he does not feel comfortable being one of the Council votes to ignore the will of the voters; expressed support for Council votes being flexible and an understanding that the multi-family overlay will be more than 30 units per acre in some places; for encouraging staff to work on the matter; expressed concern for what will occur in six months' time; expressed concern for proposed units on Park Street being small and over 30 units per project and non-compliant; stated that he is ok with being non-compliant should it mean the ability to be ethically aligned with the previous question posed at the election; he will not be part of a majority which rams through multi-family overlays; the full Council needs to be the adult in the room. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated the discussion can be tabled for the time being due to there being no majority vote on anything. Vice Mayor Vella stated Councilmembers are City fiduciaries; one of the biggest problems with the State of California is the previous allowing of zoning via the ballot box; the result is the current housing conundrum being faced; the majority of people that turned out to vote cast the winning ballots; the resulting decisions have shown the City of Alameda does not want to comply with regulations and will limit the ability to have local control and project-by-project decision making; Council and many jurisdictions have al… | CityCouncil/2021-07-06.pdf |
RecreationandParkCommission/2021-03-11.pdf,42 | RecreationandParkCommission | 2021-03-11 | 42 | S Full Name Zip code Email Signature MIGE COAD > 94941 mcardy@hotmail.com/ as Stron McMedica 94501 An 94(9450) danclone@yahoo.com form Tommy L 94607 Hans@gmail.com Ronnie Lee 94612 II Autmuniting 94552 PALL | RecreationandParkCommission/2021-03-11.pdf |
RecreationandParkCommission/2019-09-12.pdf,42 | RecreationandParkCommission | 2019-09-12 | 42 | CARNEGIE INNOVATION HALL VISUALIZING CARNEGIE INNOVATION HALL JOIN US Alameda's historic Carnegie Library is being restored into Carnegie Innovation Hall: a state-of-the-art center for performance, education, technology, and community and we need you! Participate in a community workshop and explore the possibilities for this project. Be ready to jump in, meet our team and learn how you can participate in our growing community. Your presence and engagement in these ongoing workshops is essential to ensure the Carnegie Innovation Hall grows into an Alameda space that: Creates programming which radically includes our entire community Includes diverse community needs in creative and equitable ways Builds upon the assets of our community SUN ALAMEDA MAIN LIBRARY 15 SEPT 2019 STAFFORD ROOM 2PM TO 4PM 1550 OAK STREET, ALAMEDA, CA 94501 | RecreationandParkCommission/2019-09-12.pdf |
CityCouncil/2021-07-06.pdf,41 | CityCouncil | 2021-07-06 | 41 | in providing housing units which are affordable by design; expressed concern for the price of housing at Alameda Point; she does not think the pricing supports the majority of Alamedans; many people cannot write a check for one million dollars; most of the housing at Alameda Point is worth over one million dollars; Council needs to come up with a way to build housing so people can buy property and not have to pay rent for life; the problem is serious; questioned how small a unit has to be in order to bring the price point lower; outlined the pricing for smaller homes; there is a problem with smaller units having a high price tag; the City must work with a developer that can build housing to buy for a price which is significantly under one million dollars; the City is performing gentrification; outlined turn of the century housing prices; stated that she is a long-term renter in Alameda and she cannot pay one million dollars for a home; she is interested in looking at different densities; the densities must be reflected in the price point to purchase; expressed support for being flexible; stated that she would like to strike the reference to Encinal Terminals from the document; she has yet to put her name on the project and she might not do so; she is still negotiating the project and including Encinal Terminals is not appropriate; a plan has been approved without the swap; outlined project viability and costs per unit; she does not know how much revenue developers actually make on projects; a plan has been approved for Encinal Terminals, should the developer want a swap, negotiations will need to occur; any reference to Encinal Terminals in the resolution document alludes to an already Council-approved project swap. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated there is a difference between properties which require four- affirmative Council votes and properties which require three-affirmative Council votes to approve; should the City be told by the State to build housing units at either 2,650 or 5,300, the units must be placed some… | CityCouncil/2021-07-06.pdf |
RecreationandParkCommission/2021-03-11.pdf,41 | RecreationandParkCommission | 2021-03-11 | 41 | Full Name Zip code Email Signature Tony Xlony 94501 my Moctor Kankara 94610 stay Joan Hu 94501 joun23hy@gmail.com Rich Hucag 94602 richkhugge that Kenny Lee 94501 Kennylee@gmailes Mammura Kohmoko 94610 KRAMOKOGMAHAOULD gmail Com John Rcsp 94701 John Koll G gmail. can an Tam Lam 94618 TanLam & smalling angy Brianmiller G Brian Miller 94602 bahworican des ken wei 94ba Kennig yana,com In Andy Lin auler Lin.Andy G yanwiton my | RecreationandParkCommission/2021-03-11.pdf |
RecreationandParkCommission/2019-09-12.pdf,41 | RecreationandParkCommission | 2019-09-12 | 41 | CARNEGIE HOME ABOUT RESTORATION COMMUNITY USES TEAM PARTICIPATE CONTACT It INNOVATION HALL e 00 or S 9 CARNEGIE INNOVATION HALI Check our website For future meetings and join our mailing list carnegieinnovationhall.org | RecreationandParkCommission/2019-09-12.pdf |
CityCouncil/2021-07-06.pdf,40 | CityCouncil | 2021-07-06 | 40 | The Planning, Building and Transportation Director responded the City needs to remain flexible; outlined a two story building having 80 units per acre with small workforce units; the units are small and affordable; noted 80 units per acre at a larger site, such as South Shore, is not necessary; 30 units at South Shore will be plenty; outlined support for projects from West Alameda Business Association; stated the unit fluctuation is a good discussion to have while planning; the appropriate number of units for Webster Street might not be appropriate for the South Shore area or Alameda Point; Council should let the community decide how many units to get out of the allocation at each project site location; noted massing diagrams will be provided in order to identify the density needed. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she shares the belief of units needing to be affordable by design which are smaller and command a lower price; a range of units are needed; expressed support for smaller units. Councilmember Daysog stated Council should lead by the type of community which fits in the built environment; Alameda has a homogenizing built environment; outlined Shoreline Avenue's design; stated a uniform density exists throughout Alameda; 30 units per acre is not an arbitrary number, the number is required and eligible by State law; it is wrong to allocate 5,300 units and a regime should not be set in place which accommodates 5,300 units; the regime should accommodate 2,650 units and he suspects the current 30 units per acre will work; should Council lean on the side of being flexible, the City will be accommodating 5,300 units; expressed concern for being flexible. The Planning, Building and Transportation Director stated it is premature to decide the densities; the City does not yet know the RHNA allocation due to the appeal and should not be deciding the density until the allocation is known; a year-long planning process is needed in order to make some of the recommended decisions; the one thing driving the issue is staff… | CityCouncil/2021-07-06.pdf |
CityCouncil/2021-09-07.pdf,40 | CityCouncil | 2021-09-07 | 40 | Councilmember Daysog seconded the motion. Under discussion, Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether an upcoming agenda will contain any related matters. The City Manager responded the Police Chief is putting together a presentation for the September 21st Council meeting. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated the time is now 12:00 a.m. and the meeting must be adjourned. (21-563) Considering Directing Staff to Provide an Update on License Plate Readers. (Councilmember Herrera Spencer). Not heard. (21-564) Consider Directing Staff to Publicly Share Information on Parking Recreational Vehicles. (Councilmember Herrera Spencer). Not heard. (21-565) Consider Directing Staff to Address Representation for Below Market Rate Homeowners on Homeowner Association (HOA) Boards and with Property Management. (Councilmember Herrera Spencer). Not heard. (21-566) Consider Directing Staff to Support Removal of the US Navy Constraints Limiting Housing Development at Alameda Point. (Councilmember Herrera Spencer and Councilmember Daysog). Not heard. (21-567) Consider Directing Staff to Address Identifying New Areas at Alameda Point to Develop a Number of Housing Units Above the Originally-Agreed Upon Numbers of the 2023-2031 Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA). (Councilmember Daysog). Not heard. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS None. ADJOURNMENT (21-568) There being no further business, Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft adjourned the meeting at 12:03 a.m. in memory of Beth Aney and former Councilmember Barbara Thomas. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger City Clerk The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Sunshine Ordinance. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council September 7, 2021 32 | CityCouncil/2021-09-07.pdf |
CityCouncil/2016-01-05.pdf,40 | CityCouncil | 2016-01-05 | 40 | APPROVED MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING TUESDAY--JANUARY 5, 2016--5:33 P.M. Mayor Spencer convened the meeting at 5:37 p.m. Roll Call - Present: Councilmembers Daysog, Ezzy Ashcraft, Matarrese, Oddie and Mayor Spencer - 5. [Note: Councilmember Daysog arrived at 5:58 p.m.] Absent: None. The meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider: (16-001) Conference with Conference with Labor Negotiators (54957.6); City Negotiator: Elizabeth D. Warmerdam; Employee Organizations: International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local 1245 (IBEW), Electric Utility Professional Association of Alameda (EUPA), Alameda City Employees Association (ACEA), Alameda Police Officers Association Non-Sworn Unit (PANS), and Alameda Management and Confidential Employees Association; (MCEA) Under Negotiation: Salaries and terms of employment. (16-002) Conference with Legal Counsel - Anticipated Litigation; Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 54956.9 of the Government Code; Number of cases: One (As Defendant - City Exposure to Legal Action). Not heard. Following the Closed Session, the meeting was reconvened and Mayor Spencer announced that direction was given to staff. Adjournment There being no further business, Mayor Spencer adjourned the meeting at 6:26 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger City Clerk The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Sunshine Ordinance. Special Meeting Alameda City Council January 5, 2016 | CityCouncil/2016-01-05.pdf |
RecreationandParkCommission/2021-03-11.pdf,40 | RecreationandParkCommission | 2021-03-11 | 40 | Full Name is code Email N 1 EUNICE FURUTA 94606 Modeleine Malon 94606 Modmanone Gayle Thomas 94501 Alue myshoff 94501 dicemyahrif@gmail. cm John MEYLIN SANCHER 94601 melele9@gmail.com Dand Meyers 94501 KEVINL HERRING 94502 REVIN.HERRING etc. W Stephen Lonie 94502 slonie@ad.com S67 Stan Tang 94502 stnlytange Yahoo com sore Jessica Taal 94941 taalbem@gmail.com Ame NANCY SON GORDON 94501 Mannah Green 94501 hannah.m.green@ smale TT | RecreationandParkCommission/2021-03-11.pdf |
RecreationandParkCommission/2019-09-12.pdf,40 | RecreationandParkCommission | 2019-09-12 | 40 | Ways you can help make this happen: Join the Volunteer to help with Fundraising Committee Community organizing Finance Committee Event planning Public Outreach Committee Administration Diversity Committee Writing Historic Restoration Committee IT and Infrastructure Educational Programming Committee Entrepreneurial Programming Committee Event Programming Committee Technology Committee Community Advisory Board Board of Directors | RecreationandParkCommission/2019-09-12.pdf |
CityCouncil/2021-07-06.pdf,39 | CityCouncil | 2021-07-06 | 39 | expressed concern for members thinking the multi-family overlay is something specific with a set number; stated presentations have indicated the multi-family overlay can have a number of different unit sizes; he does not want staff to spin their wheels returning to Council with an unwanted recommendation; expressed support for policy direction being provided at the current and next Council meeting. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated those not supportive of the multi-family overlay zoning are for single-family residential and suburban sprawl which does not seem to be environmentally advantageous for a City concerned with sea-level rise and rising groundwater. Councilmember Daysog expressed support for multi-family overlay as currently used; stated the amount of density can never be more than 30 units per acre without factoring in Density Bonus, or 36 units per acre with Density Bonus; noted multi-family overlay does not currently allow anything bigger than the stated units; 30 units per acre is sufficient in meeting State law. The Planning, Building and Transportation Director stated in order to get to 5,300 units and meet the criteria outlined by Councilmember Daysog, staff will then need to spread the multi-family overlay over much larger areas of the City; there is a benefit in being flexible with the matter; noted the multi-family overlay will need to increase above 30 units per acre should the City have 5,300 unit allocation; setting a cap of 30 units per acre now sets an unintended consequence of applying the overlay to larger areas through the City; recommended Council remain flexible on the matter and let the planning process play out; stated having 30 units per acre is viable however, the citizens may want to concentrate the units in specific locations. *** (21-458) Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated Councilmember Daysog is out of speaking time; questioned whether Councilmembers should be set back at nine minutes of speaking time; noted those that have held time will not receive an increase, the time set will be at nine … | CityCouncil/2021-07-06.pdf |
CityCouncil/2021-09-07.pdf,39 | CityCouncil | 2021-09-07 | 39 | Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft noted the matter can be brought forth at a later time; stated the consideration is a good point. Vice Mayor Vella expressed support for providing broad direction to staff to figure out whether there are alternatives for providing broader legal notices and the accompanying details. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft expressed concern over a potential OGC complaint. CITY MANAGER COMMUNICATIONS (21-560) The City Manager announced that all three Alameda Libraries have resumed full service hours and masks are required at all times; discussed a City vaccine milestone; stated 80% of residents 12 years and older have been fully vaccinated and 92% of residents have received at least the first vaccine shot; stated drop-in vaccine clinics are available. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA None. COUNCIL REFERRALS (21-561) Resolution No. 15814, "Supporting the Goal of Reaching 100% Zero Emission Vehicle Sales in California by 2030." Adopted. (Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft) Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft gave a brief presentation. Councilmember Herrera Spencer stated that she did not think the earlier motion to continue the meeting past 11:00 p.m. included hearing Council Referrals. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated the motion from Councilmember Knox White included continuing the meeting as agendized until 12:00 a.m. Councilmember Knox White moved approval of the Council Referral, including adoption of related resolution. Councilmember Daysog seconded the motion, which carried by the following roll call vote: Councilmembers Daysog: Aye; Herrera Spencer: No; Knox White: Aye; Vella: Aye; and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye. Ayes: 4. Noes: 1. (21-562) Considering Having an Introduction and Update from the New Police Chief regarding Strategies to Address Crimes. (Councilmember Herrera Spencer). Councilmember Herrera Spencer moved approval of the Council Referral. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council September 7, 2021 31 | CityCouncil/2021-09-07.pdf |
CityCouncil/2016-01-05.pdf,39 | CityCouncil | 2016-01-05 | 39 | COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS None. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Mayor Spencer adjourned the meeting at 3:59 a.m. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger City Clerk The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Sunshine Ordinance. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 39 January 5, 2016 | CityCouncil/2016-01-05.pdf |
CityCouncil/2010-06-15.pdf,39 | CityCouncil | 2010-06-15 | 39 | Commissioner Tam seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Mayor/Chair Johnson adjourned the meeting at 1:32 a.m. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger City Clerk Secretary, CIC The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act. Regular Meeting Alameda Public Financing Authority June 15, 2010 | CityCouncil/2010-06-15.pdf |
RecreationandParkCommission/2021-03-11.pdf,39 | RecreationandParkCommission | 2021-03-11 | 39 | PASR - Full Name Zip code Email Signature EDGAR LUBER 94501 Cubber Allyson Luber 94501 allysonluker@gmail.com Angell adamluber95a adam luber 94561 GMail.COM light ALASSA DOMINGO 94501 gmail.com AND IMAIL.COM Amin BROWN 94501 BROWNAMIR82 Amia Delleon HAlEy 94501 Wils Gabriela Aranda 94501 78garanda@gmail.com 8 A | RecreationandParkCommission/2021-03-11.pdf |
RecreationandParkCommission/2019-09-12.pdf,39 | RecreationandParkCommission | 2019-09-12 | 39 | Potential Community Partners Academy of Alameda College of Alameda Alameda Architectural Preservation Society Dance10 Performing Arts Center Alameda-Based Community Theater Company Downtown Alameda Business Association Alameda Boys & Girls Club Encinal High School Alameda Civic Ballet Foodshift Alameda Community Band Frank Bette Center for the Arts Alameda Education Foundation Ginny Parsons Alameda Education Fund Girl's Inc of the Island City Greater Alameda Business Association Alameda Museum Pacific Pinball Museum Alameda Naval Air Museum Rhythmix Cultural Works Alameda Point Collaborative Saint Joseph Notre Dame High School Alameda School of Music Starland Music Alameda String Academy Studio 23 Altarena Playhouse The California Historical Radio Society Art Yowza The USS Hornet Sea, Air & Space Museum Artistic Home Studio Tomorrow Youth Repertory Boys and Girls Club of Alameda West Alameda Business Association Chamber of Commerce Yu Ying Learning (Mandarin bilingual school) We need your help to grow out this list | RecreationandParkCommission/2019-09-12.pdf |
CityCouncil/2010-07-27.pdf,38 | CityCouncil | 2010-07-27 | 38 | MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING TUESDAY--JULY 27, 2010- -6:00 P.M. Mayor Johnson announced that the City Council attempted to meet in Closed Session tonight; due to the pending investigation into the official conduct of Councilmember Tam, which has been filed with the District Attorney, Councilmember Tam was asked to recuse herself from the Closed Session; Councilmember Tam refused to do so; as a result, the City Council did not meet in Closed Session, but continued the matter to a future date; the City was unable to transact its official business while the investigation is pending before the District Attorney's Office and looks to the District Attorney and Grand Jury to expedite a resolution of the investigation. (10-375) Conference with Legal Counsel - Existing Litigation (54956.9); Name of case: Collins V. City of Alameda (Boatworks). Not heard. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger City Clerk The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act. Special Meeting Alameda City Council July 27, 2010 | CityCouncil/2010-07-27.pdf |
CityCouncil/2021-07-06.pdf,38 | CityCouncil | 2021-07-06 | 38 | The Planning, Building and Transportation Director stated the March draft of the General Plan put recommendations forward for land use classifications; one is the shopping center land use classification referenced by Councilmember Daysog; the draft identified the types of densities and zoning necessary to get to 5,300 units; the Planning Board and a number of speakers on the draft spoke out in opposition of the plan; the speakers supported a general approach to the plan, and a decision of the necessary zoning and densities of the various land use classification areas; the decisions can be made when the Housing Element is created; staff released proposed revisions to the draft General Plan and brought the land use classifications more into sync with current conditions; staff has eliminated the language which had been recommended to the Planning Board while using the Floor Area Ration (FAR) from the existing zoning of shopping centers; staff will be providing a recommendation to Council for approval; changes can be made to the General Plan recommendation prior to being adopted in the fall; the Planning Board will be recommending the Housing Element to Council the following fall, with the necessary zoning to meet the RHNA allocation; staff has created a sequence of steps which allows Council to make decisions in a logical way. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether Councilmember Daysog is recommending that the second item does not commit to adopting a Housing Element which is in compliance with State law; stated there will be dire consequences for the City as a result. Councilmember Daysog responded the issue is so complex and convoluted; there are other outstanding issues such as categories and densities to come up with in the General Plan land use section and the rules which developers can rely on to build at densities sought; the level of discussion is not currently before Council; Council should be discussing the Housing Element compliance and adopting multi-family zoning separately as a standalone discussion. May… | CityCouncil/2021-07-06.pdf |
CityCouncil/2017-07-18.pdf,38 | CityCouncil | 2017-07-18 | 38 | Lara Weisiger City Clerk and Secretary SACIC The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Sunshine Ordinance. Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council and Successor Agency 2 to the Community Improvement Commission July 18, 2017 | CityCouncil/2017-07-18.pdf |
CityCouncil/2021-09-07.pdf,38 | CityCouncil | 2021-09-07 | 38 | Councilmember Knox White stated the matter is not related to two small, hometown newspapers; the Alameda Journal is owned by a Denver hedge-fund with 100 papers and 200 other publications nationwide; the Alameda Sun is a local newspaper; expressed support for Alameda Sun; stated if Council wishes to continue running ads in the Alameda Journal, the number in the original staff report listed $46,000 and Council can commit to funding $46,000 for the Alameda Sun; he did not originally vote to move the legal notices to the Alameda Journal; however, he can support a form of keeping legal ads published in the Alameda Journal as well as providing funding for the Alameda Sun; expressed support for the proposed motion. Vice Mayor Vella expressed concern about circulation, which remains the point of legal notices; stated that she would like to see a way to expand circulation for Alameda Sun; expressed support for looking at other options relative to grants and advertising; stated her position has not changed; both newspapers are not hometown papers; the desire to provide aid to Alameda Sun is separate from the desire to provide adequate legal notices; she does not support moving legal notices to the Alameda Sun in addition to providing financial aid; expressed support for adding the options proposed by staff. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the matter should be bifurcated; stated that she does not support awarding the contract to the Alameda Sun and providing financial aid; questioned whether the City would eventually be the major funder of the Alameda Sun; expressed concern about the concept of the City majorly funding the newspaper. Councilmember Daysog stated the cleanest approach is to terminate the contract with Alameda Journal and award the contract to the Alameda Sun without providing additional funding to Alameda Sun; the contract provides funding; expressed support for the use of one legal notice provider; expressed support for selecting the Alameda Sun to provide legal notices. Councilmember Daysog amended hi… | CityCouncil/2021-09-07.pdf |
CityCouncil/2016-01-05.pdf,38 | CityCouncil | 2016-01-05 | 38 | In response to Councilmember Oddie's inquiry, the Community Development Director stated staff is going to review Mountain View's ordinance and come back with a recommendation regarding whether or not to offer one year leases for existing tenants when there is a rent increase. (16-012) Conduct a Public Hearing and Consider Introduction of Ordinance Amending Alameda Municipal Code Section 30-5.15 regarding Medical Marijuana Dispensaries to Define and Prohibit the Commercial Cultivation of Medical Marijuana in the City of Alameda to Protect the City's Jurisdiction Regarding Cultivation, While Preserving the Opportunity to Have a Robust Discussion About Medical Marijuana Cultivation at a Later Date. [The Proposed Amendment is Categorically Exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15305, Minor Alternations to Land Use Limitations.] Introduced. The Planning Director gave a brief presentation. Councilmember Oddie stated the ordinance prohibits cultivation; the community has not had a discussion; Assembly Bill 21 is on track to pass and be signed by the Governor; that he would prefer the ordinance not take effect if the March 1st deadline vanishes; the City could emulate Placer County, which has declared a local preemption, rather than creating a ban. The City Planner stated agriculture and horticulture are permitted by right in Alameda's residential districts, as well as industrial and commercial; the City would be in a bind if someone made a request tomorrow; Placer County is requiring use permits and has not made a decision about which districts will allow the use; noted the ordinance can be opened back up; stated that he believes the City will start receiving requests. Vice Mayor moved introduction of the ordinance; stated the matter could be opened back up when the State law is clear; now not the time for a robust discussion. Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft seconded the motion, which carried by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmembers Daysog, Ezzy Ashcraft, Matarres… | CityCouncil/2016-01-05.pdf |
CityCouncil/2010-06-15.pdf,38 | CityCouncil | 2010-06-15 | 38 | Mayor/Chair Johnson inquired whether the EIR would provide an option for fewer housing units. Mr. Brown responded an alternative to be studied in the EIR has not been identified; stated work still needs to be done; typically, one option would be to have a lower level of development proposed; the EIR consultant and staff, along with comments from SunCal, would develop an alternative to be studied for a reasonable, smaller project. AGENDA ITEMS (10-46 CIC) Public Hearing to Consider Resolution No. 10-167, "Approving and Adopting the Five-Year Implementation Plan for the Business and Waterfront and the West End Community Improvement Projects (2010-2014)." Adopted. The Economic Development Director gave a Power Point presentation. Commissioner Gilmore thanked the Economic Development Director for the presentation; stated sometimes the City gets busy pushing ahead on the next project and does not take the opportunity to look back on accomplishments; the City has changed for the better. The Economic Development Director stated policy decisions have been put in place with a lot of community input; this is the time for the City to talk about the impact that projects have had on the community; in the last couple of years, funding projects without redevelopment agency support has been difficult; the construction trade is the hardest hit unemployment group in Alameda County. Commissioner Tam stated that she would like to echo appreciation to staff; all Councilmembers throughout the State are telling their legislature that redevelopment funds are an economic engine and create jobs; inquired whether the City has a strategy for locating retail sites. The Economic Development Director responded the City has a number of different retail opportunities which are not necessarily within the redevelopment project area boundaries; stated Alameda Landing has an opportunity for up to 300,000 square feet of retail; the City has identified how much the City could handle through a saturation invoice and retail leakage analysis; the Catellu… | CityCouncil/2010-06-15.pdf |
RecreationandParkCommission/2021-03-11.pdf,38 | RecreationandParkCommission | 2021-03-11 | 38 | Full Name Zip code Email Signature Susan Fagel 8500 94501 Susan-fagel@yahoo.com Eldie Casti 94501 ec15155@yahoo.com all Kevin Fagel 94501 kevinf3262@gmail.com Matt Stevenson 94501 Mithours can MARSHA LAISON Marthy | RecreationandParkCommission/2021-03-11.pdf |
RecreationandParkCommission/2019-09-12.pdf,38 | RecreationandParkCommission | 2019-09-12 | 38 | RecreationandParkCommission/2019-09-12.pdf | |
CityCouncil/2010-07-27.pdf,37 | CityCouncil | 2010-07-27 | 37 | COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS (10-397 CC) Consideration of Mayor's nomination for appointment to the Public Utilities Board. Mayor Johnson nominated Madeline Deaton for appointment to the Public Utilities Board. (10-398 CC) Councilmember Gilmore inquired why Council did not find out about the documentation given to the District Attorney on May 26, 2010 until six weeks later. The City Attorney responded the District Attorney's office requested that the matter be kept confidential pending their investigation; stated it was only at the insistence of the attorneys for the City and Interim City Manager, given the fact that it was necessary to hold a Closed Session regarding SunCal, that precipitated the need to make the matter public. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Mayor/Chair Johnson adjourned the meeting at 1:47 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger, City Clerk Secretary, CIC The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act. Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Alameda Reuse 37 and Redevelopment Authority, and Community Improvement Commission July 27, 2010 | CityCouncil/2010-07-27.pdf |
CityCouncil/2021-07-06.pdf,37 | CityCouncil | 2021-07-06 | 37 | not wish to strip the language, a partially stripped resolution has been proposed by Christopher Buckley; noted Councilmember Herrera Spencer's resolution adds emphasis on the need to renegotiate the Navy housing cap in an attempt to eliminate the cap; stated the staff report outlines the current Navy housing cap allowance of 1,200 units; renegotiating the cap will be an attempt to get the maximum amount of units possible at Alameda Point; a variety of constraints exist at Alameda Point which will have to be worked through; removing the housing cap is a good idea from staff's perspective; there are fair housing aspects of State Housing law; placing all units at Alameda Point is not a strategy; Alameda Point does have a lot of vacant land which is underutilized; Alameda Point allows for 25% affordable housing and has a strong case for maximizing the space; staff is looking for direction and confirmation of how Council would like to lead the Housing Element process. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she agrees with removing the Navy housing cap; it does not make sense to pay a premium for adding more housing at Alameda Point however, the approach may not be the wisest; signaling the Navy by including language in the resolution may not be wise; noted there are Congress members and lobbyists that can help to ensure the negotiations are as successful and effective as possible; questioned whether the same goal can be accomplished by providing clear direction to staff to begin exploring a pursuit of lifting the Navy housing cap; stated there is likely a lot of political support for the matter. The Planning, Building and Transportation Director stated staff can accomplish the task either way; Council may provide direction to staff; a successful and quick negation is desired. Councilmember Herrera Spencer stated that she has included language in the proposed resolution related to the Navy cap; the $100,000 per unit cost creates difficulty in building affordable housing; the goal is to build affordable, workforce housing; in… | CityCouncil/2021-07-06.pdf |
CityCouncil/2017-07-18.pdf,37 | CityCouncil | 2017-07-18 | 37 | MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL JOINT MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION (SACIC) TUESDAY-JULY 18, 2017--7:01 P.M. Mayor/Chair Spencer convened the meeting at 2:48 a.m. ROLL CALL - Present: Councilmembers/Commissioners Ezzy Ashcraft, Matarrese, Oddie, Vella and Mayor/Chair Spencer - 5. Absent: None. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None. REGULAR AGENDA ITEM (17-490 CC/17-010SACIC) Public Hearing to Consider: 1) Approving and Authorizing the City Manager to Execute a Consent to Partial Assignment and Assumption Agreement for the Alameda Disposition and Development Agreement for the Alameda Landing Mixed Use Project; and 2) Authorizing the City Manager to Negotiate and Execute an Operating Memorandum for the Disposition and Development Agreement Consistent with the Term Sheet. A Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report for the Alameda Landing Mixed Use Development Project was Certified in Accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (State Clearinghouse #2006012091) in 2006. An Environmental Assessment for the Proposed Actions has been Prepared. Approved. The matter was heard under the Public Hearing regarding Alameda Landing on the regular City Council meeting. Councilmember/Commissioner Oddie moved approval of the staff recommendation. Councilmember/Commissioner Vella seconded the motion, which carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Councilmembers/Commissioners Ezzy Ashcraft, Matarrese, Oddie and Vella - 4. Noes: Mayor/Chair Spencer - 1. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Mayor/Chair Spencer adjourned the meeting at 2:49 a.m. Respectfully submitted, Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council and Successor Agency to the Community Improvement Commission July 18, 2017 | CityCouncil/2017-07-18.pdf |
CityCouncil/2016-02-16.pdf,37 | CityCouncil | 2016-02-16 | 37 | Mayor Spencer inquired how much time is anticipated to finish the CIP and the appropriation of funds. The Community Development Director responded the discussion would also include the program fee; she estimates one hour to one and a half hours. Mayor Spencer suggested continuing the meeting until 5:30 p.m. on March 1st, then hold the regularly scheduled meeting at 7:00 p.m. The Community Development Director stated extension of the urgency ordinance extending the moratorium would be discussed at the regular meeting. At 2:38 a.m., Mayor Spencer continued the meeting to March 1, 2016 at 5:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger City Clerk The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Sunshine Ordinance. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 35 February 16, 2016 | CityCouncil/2016-02-16.pdf |
CityCouncil/2021-09-07.pdf,37 | CityCouncil | 2021-09-07 | 37 | Protection Plan (PPP) funds. Urged Council reconsider the prior vote and award the contract for the publication of legal notices to the Alameda Sun; stated the Alameda Sun is locally-owned and operated and is a vital part of the community; outlined the Alameda spelling bee, which is sponsored by the Alameda Sun; stated the Alameda Sun is engaged and active within the City in ways which go beyond other publications; the Alameda Sun provides an outlet for City government and is the most important outlet for informing Alamedans about news; urged Council find other ways to financially support the Alameda Sun: Chuck Kapelke, Alameda. Councilmember Daysog expressed support for Council immediately considering reversing the previous decision. Councilmember Daysog moved approval of terminating the contract with the Alameda Journal and awarding the contract to the Alameda Sun and inviting the Alameda Sun to obtain other sources of funding described in the three bullet points of the staff report, with a cap of no more than an additional $19,200. Councilmember Herrera Spencer seconded the motion. Under discussion, Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she does not think the City should terminate the contract with the Alameda Journal; Alameda Journal has a more extensive circulation, which is important in providing legal notices; she does not want to pit one small newspaper against another; expressed concern about any punitive stance towards any newspaper; stated that she thinks the City can provide some forms of financial assistance to the Alameda Sun, including ARPA funds; outlined funding received by Alameda Sun; stated the ability to apply for the City's COVID-19 relief or Alameda Strong funds was by lottery; the City has since expended the funds and will need to find other sources; expressed support for following the first bullet listed in the alternatives to keep the contract with the Alameda Journal and provide direction on funding to assist the Alameda Sun in any of the listed forms, including the General Fund, ARPA funds, … | CityCouncil/2021-09-07.pdf |
CityCouncil/2016-01-05.pdf,37 | CityCouncil | 2016-01-05 | 37 | Councilmember Daysog stated that he would have liked to see something regarding mom and pop landlords and just cause eviction; however, we live in a world of compromise; focusing on Ordinance 1, Council began to flush out elements of how to move forward; he is concerned that the economics are not being dealt with seriously enough; more can be figured out over the coming weeks; at least Council is focusing on Ordinance 1. Mayor Spencer stated at least one email was received regarding changes being made to no longer allow pets. The Assistant City Attorney stated the issue has been addressed because pets are included in the definition of rent; increasing a pet fee would apply to reaching the threshold. Mayor Spencer stated that she would like the issue of changes being made to no longer allow pets to return to Council. The Assistant City Attorney stated perhaps the matter could be considered a reduction in service. Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired when the ordinance would return, to which the City Attorney responded staff could draft the new ordinance and bring back the first reading on February 2nd. The Assistant City Attorney suggested the ordinance return at the same time as the capital improvement plan to provide the whole picture. The City Attorney inquired when the plan would be ready, to which the Community Development Director responded the second meeting in February. Councilmember Oddie inquired whether the moratorium would have to be extended again. The Assistant City Attorney responded the moratorium has been extended until March. The City Attorney stated the Council could extend the moratorium again at said time to allow for a first and second reading and 30 days for the ordinance to become effective. Mayor Spencer stated that she is fine with doing so; stated staff should take the time needed; inquired whether Council agrees. After Council expressed consensus, Mayor Spencer stated a majority agrees. The Community Development Director stated staff will draft the ordinance based on the consensus direc… | CityCouncil/2016-01-05.pdf |
CityCouncil/2010-06-15.pdf,37 | CityCouncil | 2010-06-15 | 37 | is not sure whether changes have occurred in the last month or so; the School District is evaluating facility needs; SunCal has provided two school sites within the plan. Mayor/Chair Johnson stated school site placement has been an issue. Mr. Brown stated the he is unaware of any location issues, but SunCal would be happy to engage in said conversation; the issue is a normal give and take process and would be part of the EIR. Mayor/Chair Johnson inquired whether SunCal is working on a transportation plan. Mr. Brown responded transportation planning is a big part of the budget; stated SunCal is finding its own expert to advance the ball on transportation and transit issues; alternatives are being reviewed; SunCal realizes that issues need to be fully mitigated in order for a plan to be viable and approved by the City; SunCal recognizes that transportation issues cannot become worse and is willing to work with its own consultant in addition to the joint consultant retained through the EIR. Regular Meeting Alameda Public Financing Authority June 15, 2010 | CityCouncil/2010-06-15.pdf |
RecreationandParkCommission/2021-03-11.pdf,37 | RecreationandParkCommission | 2021-03-11 | 37 | - Full Name Zip code Signature LilyLeung 94502 Jackie Cungug COT seang fly 94502 geta Barbara Besions 94502 Chanya Bartel bysic14@ad Belisped 94601 chuangsakulde Byahae lir Karis Kim 94582 canskim207@gmail.com 22 Trinity Zhang 94502 trinityzhancy@live.com B Wesley Omi 94502 Wesley so 1106e Louisa Chew buisashewe egm Welfa 94502 Marie Fung 94502 mfungusl eyahooon Marie Favor Vicki Majhor 94501 rpmremeant.com Uniki mahn Randy Friedman 94502 randy-fnedman Rob Currier 94.500 citagehotmail.com Randy Freedman Refurtar Tommy Wong 94502 oh =tom Elizabeth Becht 94501 Nancy Gordon 94501 revn)o Santh 994542 bloss@gmail.com oriko 94502 sto20200@yahoo.com off blossack lawa Sumrall 94501 msmitchrolattnet summall Laura Mitchell Sumt 94501 Mitchcoblue@attric Mondall summal 94501 L | RecreationandParkCommission/2021-03-11.pdf |
RecreationandParkCommission/2019-09-12.pdf,37 | RecreationandParkCommission | 2019-09-12 | 37 | RecreationandParkCommission/2019-09-12.pdf | |
CityCouncil/2010-07-27.pdf,36 | CityCouncil | 2010-07-27 | 36 | Councilmember Gilmore stated that she wants consensus to bring the matter back for a full-blown discussion. Mayor Johnson stated that she would prefer to bring the matter back rather than discussing the matter at 1:45 a.m. Councilmember Gilmore stated that she is in concurrence. Councilmember Tam moved that the matter be brought back. Councilmember Gilmore seconded the motion. Under discussion, Vice Mayor deHaan stated past practices have been to bring legal opinions to Closed Session. Councilmember Gilmore stated this time, she found out about the existence of the opinion beforehand. Vice Mayor deHaan stated a hard copy has never been provided to Council [to keep] in the past. Mayor Johnson stated the City Attorney has followed past practices; Councilmember Gilmore wants to discuss the issue. Councilmember Matarrese inquired whether the intent would be to discuss the matter or provide a policy for handling confidential documents. Mayor Johnson stated the discussion and/or policy would need to be addressed when the matter is heard. Councilmember Gilmore stated that she wants the matter agendized for further discussion, and wants some sort of direction to come out of the discussion. Mayor Johnson stated the process followed by the City Attorney has been consistent with past practices. Councilmember Gilmore stated Council has not affirmed policy and direction. Mayor Johnson stated a policy is nowhere to be found if there is one. On the call for the question, the motion carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Councilmembers Gilmore, Matarrese, Tam and Mayor Johnson - 4. Noes: Vice Mayor deHaan - 1. Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Alameda Reuse 36 and Redevelopment Authority, and Community Improvement Commission July 27, 2010 | CityCouncil/2010-07-27.pdf |
CityCouncil/2018-07-10.pdf,36 | CityCouncil | 2018-07-10 | 36 | Councilmember Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by the following roll call vote: Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye; Councilmember Matarrese: Aye; Councilmember Oddie: Aye; Vice Mayor Vella: Aye; and Mayor Spencer: Abstain. Ayes: 4. Abstention: 1. The City Clerk stated the subcommittee will draft the rebuttal; inquired whether the Council wants the subcommittee to decide who will sign the rebuttal argument, Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft responded in the affirmative. Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft moved approval of having the subcommittee, which has agreed to draft the rebuttal, decide who would sign the rebuttal argument. Councilmember Matarrese seconded the motion. Under discussion, Mayor Spencer inquired whether the Council decided who would draft the rebuttal, to which the City Clerk responded in the affirmative; noted the argument in favor would be transmitted to the subcommittee after the deadline tomorrow. On the call for the question, the motion carried by the following roll call vote: Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye; Councilmember Matarrese: Aye; Councilmember Oddie: Aye; Vice Mayor Vella: Aye; and Mayor Spencer: Abstain. Ayes: 4. Abstention: 1. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Mayor Spencer adjourned the meeting at 9:25 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger City Clerk The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Sunshine Ordinance. Special Meeting Alameda City Council 4 July 10, 2018 | CityCouncil/2018-07-10.pdf |
CityCouncil/2018-06-05.pdf,36 | CityCouncil | 2018-06-05 | 36 | 238 Adjournment There being no further business, Mayor Spencer adjourned the meeting at 6:47 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger City Clerk The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Sunshine Ordinance. Special Meeting Alameda City Council June 5, 2018 | CityCouncil/2018-06-05.pdf |
CityCouncil/2021-07-06.pdf,36 | CityCouncil | 2021-07-06 | 36 | Councilmember Herrera Spencer stated that she would like to pivot to the Planning, Building and Transportation Director and see if sense can be made of the Council direction provided. The Planning, Building and Transportation Director stated clarity to the City-wide prohibition related to Measure Z is to be provided in acknowledging that the City does allow multi-family housing through the overlay and Density Bonus; staff will need to not use the clarity as an argument as to why the appeal for 2,650 units will be allowed; noted State law states Density Bonus cannot be counted on for RHNA numbers; stated a developer may take advantage of the Density Bonus however, the Density Bonus cannot be counted on; staff can write the appeal to include the clear distinction. Councilmember Herrera Spencer inquired whether staff feels as though sufficient direction has been provided from Council, to which the Planning, Building and Transportation Director responded in the affirmative. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether there is agreement in including the 2,650 unit allocation in the appeal. Councilmember Herrera Spencer expressed support for the number. Councilmember Knox White stated that he prefers no number be included however, he will support the 2,650 units being included. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether staff has input on the proposed units. The Planning, Building and Transportation Director stated staff will include the units as requested and will explain the determination as recommended by Councilmember Daysog. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the changes are acceptable to Councilmember Daysog as the seconder of the motion, to which Councilmember Daysog responded in the affirmative. On the call for the questions, the motion carried by the following roll call vote: Councilmembers Daysog: Aye; Herrera Spencer: Aye; Knox White: Aye; Vella: No; and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft: No. Ayes: 3. Noes: 2. The Planning, Building and Transportation Director stated there are three different resolutions on the table and all three h… | CityCouncil/2021-07-06.pdf |
CityCouncil/2017-07-18.pdf,36 | CityCouncil | 2017-07-18 | 36 | Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger City Clerk The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Sunshine Ordinance. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council July 18, 2017 | CityCouncil/2017-07-18.pdf |
CityCouncil/2016-02-16.pdf,36 | CityCouncil | 2016-02-16 | 36 | Vice Mayor Matarrese - 1. The Community Development Director stated the matter will be back March 1, 2016 for a second reading of the ordinance and to extend the moratorium for 22 more days until the ordinance can go into effect; staff can expand the item to include the resolution on the CIP, which does not need to be effective until the ordinance is effective. Mayor Spencer inquired whether the CIP resolution only requires one reading. The Community Development Director responded in the affirmative; stated the appropriation of funds also has to be discussed. Councilmember Oddie moved approval of continuing the meeting on the CIP. The motion FAILED for lack of a second. The Interim City Manager stated that if the meeting is continued, it would not be subject to public comment. Mayor Spencer stated the second reading cannot be continued; inquired if the meeting could be continued to 6:00 p.m. on March 1st to address the CIP and the appropriation. The Community Development Director responded that the resolution and the appropriation are not required to be done at a regularly scheduled meeting so Council could start early. Vice Mayor Matarrese stated there was no public comment on the CIP or the fee. Mayor Spencer inquired whether public comment could be allowed at the continuation meeting. The Assistant City Attorney clarified if the Council wants to continue the item to a date certain or the next meeting, public comment would not be required because the matter has already come before the public at a public hearing. Mayor Spencer stated there will need to be public comment on the ordinance second reading; she would like to continue this part of the item to an hour before the March 1st regular meeting; then, have the second reading and public comment on the second reading at the regular meeting. Mayor Spencer inquired whether a time has to be picked; she inquired on how much time would be needed for the items to be able to start the regular meeting at 7:00 p.m. was needed for the items to be able to start the regula… | CityCouncil/2016-02-16.pdf |
CityCouncil/2021-09-07.pdf,36 | CityCouncil | 2021-09-07 | 36 | Alameda Sun. The City Clerk and the Economic Development and Community Services Manager gave a brief presentation. In response to Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft's inquiry, the Economic and Community Services Manager stated qualified businesses could have received $7,500 from one grant or another and staff evaluates the application in order to determine qualification. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether applicants were able to receive funds from either grant source or both, to which the Economic and Community Services Manager responded only one. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the Alameda Sun has been able to receive funds from the State or federal government, to which the Economic and Community Services Manager responded in the affirmative; stated the Alameda Sun received Paycheck Regular Meeting Alameda City Council September 7, 2021 28 | CityCouncil/2021-09-07.pdf |
CityCouncil/2016-01-05.pdf,36 | CityCouncil | 2016-01-05 | 36 | Councilmember Daysog stated a landlord might need to have a family member move in for medical reasons. The Assistant City Attorney stated there is an exception; extension of time does not apply to a family member moving in. Councilmember Oddie stated Council needs to decide whether or not to do a sliding scale. Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft noted the table attached to the staff report shows relocation benefits in other jurisdictions are substantially more and can contain additional charges. Councilmember Daysog stated that he would prefer to go with the staff recommendation. Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft concurred. Councilmember Oddie stated that he could go either way. Mayor Spencer stated two Councilmember support the staff recommendation and two do not. Councilmember Oddie stated that he would support the staff recommendation. Mayor Spencer stated the relocation benefit would be tied to length of tenancy. Councilmember Oddie noted the reduced services petition is outstanding, but could come back. The Community Development Director stated there is a request to analyze the components of the fee; staff would continue to recommend that there be a fee to administer whatever program is adopted; a more in depth analysis can now be completed since staff understands what the program would be. Councilmember Oddie inquired whether tenants could petition for reduced services. Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she is not inclined to support Ordinance 3 because she thought the provision would be more complicated to administer, especially in the first year; stated the matter could be considered after a year. Councilmember Oddie stated the matter should be reviewed after the capital improvement plan is addressed; landlords have indicated that they will not spend money to invest in their properties if rent increases are limited; properties will end up with broken heaters, etc.; that he would like the matter to return before one year. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 36 January 5, 2016 | CityCouncil/2016-01-05.pdf |
CityCouncil/2010-06-15.pdf,36 | CityCouncil | 2010-06-15 | 36 | Mr. Brown responded that SunCal indicated that the ENA would be ending soon and that SunCal wanted to remain involved in the project. Mayor/Chair Johnson inquired if the conversation included whether the Navy supports the ENA extension, to which Mr. Brown responded briefly. Vice Mayor/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan stated Section 20-1 states that SunCal is not to meet or engage in negotiations with the Navy concerning the project or project site without giving advanced, reasonable notice to the City in order to give the City an opportunity to negotiate with SunCal and the Navy at such meeting; inquired what is Mr. Brown's interpretation of said Section. Mr. Brown responded that he concurs that the statement is the first sentence of the Section; however, the second sentence states "notwithstanding anything to the contrary in the foregoing, developer is authorized to communicate directly with the Navy regarding the project and project site as long as the developer promptly keeps the City informed of such communications"; stated SunCal made no attempt to negotiate with the Navy without the City being present. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Tam inquired how the meeting came about; further inquired whether Mr. Brown just happened to be in Washington, D.C. Mr. Brown responded in the negative; stated SunCal does a fair amount of business with the Department of Defense; originally, SunCal was talking to the Department of Defense regarding solar opportunities; SunCal has been pursuing entering into a Power Purchase Agreement to sell power to the armed services; the opportunity came to head at the meeting. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Tam stated that it does not sound like a meeting was planned to follow up on Council's opportunity to meet with the Navy; inquired whether SunCal informed City staff immediately after the meeting. Mr. Brown responded in the affirmative; stated SunCal still wants to meet with senior Navy staff, Councilmembers, and City staff to negotiate terms of the Agreement; one frustr… | CityCouncil/2010-06-15.pdf |
RecreationandParkCommission/2021-03-11.pdf,36 | RecreationandParkCommission | 2021-03-11 | 36 | Preserve Courts 1-6 at Fairfield Tennis Complex We, the undersigned, call on the City of Alameda and ARPD to drop the consideration to converting court 44 or any of the tennis courts at WAPA, Krusi or Leydecker park courts into pickle ball courts since the Longfetlow courts are already home to pickle ball. We request the city and ARPD look into other solutions for the pickle ball demand and we also request looking into meeting the higher demand for tennis courts that has also occurred this year. The wait times to play tennis at WAPA. Krusi, Leydecker are excessive during the weekdays after 4pm and on all weekends The existing tennis courts are not enough to meet this demand for tennis courts currently in Alameda Tennis courts currently not being used AHS. EHS. College of Alameda. Navel base courts Full name Postcode Email address Signature Alex Pryshch. epa 94501 alex33603@yahoo.com # Andrew Hom 94502 farms.new-yorka@yahoo PLA Jon Greer 94501 jgreen113@gmail.com If MagieMorom 94501 an Et lifeta the EV. 94561 Moses Dmolade 94409 KS e Jun Macbonald 94582 SEANMACDONOCOMGASTNET fm Path Dumsly 94502 Rathanasby@gmail.com Rm Pallins 94597 RideRhin @@hotmail.com in David Alle- 94501 dallanmare@gmail.com I. Zayden muse P4501 zaydon@Allernoon.com Zayden iad lee 94501 Tad-601@Yahoo.com th Ryanynny 94502 lol @gmail. 100m Ray fres Speper 94608 (or fu Published and promoted by the Alameda Happy Tennis Group at Fairfield Tennis Complex When complete, piease return to: The Alameda Happy Tennis Group at Fairfield Tennis Complex or email directly to both ARPD@alamedaca.gov and awooldridge@atamedaca.gev For more info please join our F acebock Group www Ne may conted you for the ihs - bul will - USI your ine ane suspose or share 2 entity | RecreationandParkCommission/2021-03-11.pdf |
RecreationandParkCommission/2019-09-12.pdf,36 | RecreationandParkCommission | 2019-09-12 | 36 | RecreationandParkCommission/2019-09-12.pdf | |
CityCouncil/2021-03-16.pdf,35 | CityCouncil | 2021-03-16 | 35 | MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL JOINT MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION (SACIC) TUESDAY--MARCH 16, 2021-6:59 - P.M. Mayor/Chair Ezzy Ashcraft convened the meeting at 7:02 p.m. Councilmember/Commissioner Herrera Spencer led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL - Present: Councilmembers/Commissioners Daysog, Herrera Spencer, Knox White, Vella and Mayor/Chair Ezzy Ashcraft - 5. [Note: The meeting was held via Zoom.] Absent: None. CONSENT CALENDAR Councilmember/Commissioner Knox White moved approval of the Consent Calendar. Vice Mayor/Commissioner Vella seconded the motion, which carried by the following roll call vote: Councilmembers/Commissioners Daysog: Aye; Herrera Spencer: Aye; Knox White: Aye; Vella: Aye; and Mayor/Chair Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye. Ayes: 5. [Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk preceding the paragraph number.] (*21-151 CC/21-06 SACIC) Minutes of the Special Joint City Council and Successor Agency to the Community Improvement Commission (SACIC) Meeting Held on February 2, 2021. Approved. (*21- CC/21-07 SACIC) Recommendation to Accept the Investment Report for the Quarter Ending September 30, 2020. Accepted. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Mayor/Chair Ezzy Ashcraft adjourned the meeting at 7:04 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger, City Clerk Secretary, SACIC The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Sunshine Ordinance. Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council and Successor Agency 1 to the Community Improvement Commission March 16, 2021 | CityCouncil/2021-03-16.pdf |
CityCouncil/2010-07-27.pdf,35 | CityCouncil | 2010-07-27 | 35 | Vice Mayor deHaan noted transportation is missing. The motion carried by consensus. (10-396 CC) Discuss/Take Action on the City Attorney Policy of Not Providing Legal Opinions to Councilmembers in Advance of Meetings. Councilmember Gilmore gave a brief presentation. Mayor Johnson inquired what Section 8-2 of the Charter states. The City Attorney responded the last phrase of the last sentence of Section 8-2 states "The City Attorney shall be the legal advisor of and attorney and counsel for the City and for all officers and boards thereof in all matters relating to their official duties, and whenever requested in writing by any of them, he shall give his or her legal advice in writing"; a legal opinion was given in writing; that she advised each individual Councilmember that the legal opinion would be handed out in Closed Session which has been done many times before; that she needs to have some discretion as to how best to do her job to protect Council and the City; she made it clear that the opinion was going to be provided in Closed Session, but that any Councilmember could come to her office to read the opinion in advance; the opinion was to be collected at the end of the Closed Session as has often been done which is not a violation of the City Attorney's duties under the Charter. Councilmember Gilmore stated the opinion was particularly lengthy as well as the staff report; she went to the City Attorney's office to read the opinion within an hour before the meeting started; the lengthy opinion was hard to digest; the City Attorney's procedure assumes that she would only read the opinion once; the City Attorney made some vague comments regarding concerns with leaks coming out of Closed Session; that she has not been accused of a leak; she does not understand why she could not have a copy of the opinion to read at her leisure; that she advised the City Attorney that she had no problems with giving the opinion back; she has no interest in keeping confidential materials; the City Attorney is making it hard for he… | CityCouncil/2010-07-27.pdf |
CityCouncil/2021-11-16.pdf,35 | CityCouncil | 2021-11-16 | 35 | Lara Weisiger City Clerk The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Sunshine Ordinance. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council November 16, 2021 24 | CityCouncil/2021-11-16.pdf |
CityCouncil/2018-07-10.pdf,35 | CityCouncil | 2018-07-10 | 35 | Council. Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated signatures must be gathered by 6:00 p.m. tomorrow; inquired whether the subcommittee thought of any community signers or assumed it would be the Councilmembers. Councilmember Matarrese responded since the issue is about good government, he was hoping to have the entire Council sign the argument; stated it does not matter which side of the question you are on; Ordinance 3148 has things that are impossibly wrong to put in the Charter and require an election to fix; as State law changes, the City has to adapt. Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft suggested Laura Thomas be the fifth signer. Councilmember Matarrese suggested the argument be left in the Clerk's office for anyone to sign. The Clerk stated there is a limit of five signers. *** Mayor Spencer called a recess at 9:11 p.m. and reconvened the meeting at 9:22 p.m. The City Clerk outlined the options to determine who will sign: defer the decision to the subcommittee; have only four Councilmembers sign; have four Councilmembers sign and one other person sign, which would require Council to decide how to select the other person. Councilmember Oddie stated that he is happy to let the subcommittee decide who they want as the fifth person or if they even want a fifth person. Councilmember Matarrese stated said suggestion is fine with him. Vice Mayor Vella stated the subcommittee's preference was to have the Council sign; she is open to hearing other Councilmember's preferences. Mayor Spencer stated Councilmember Oddie suggested having the subcommittee discuss whether or not to have a fifth person sign. Councilmember Oddie stated four Councilmembers will sign and the subcommittee can decide whether or not a fifth person would sign and who that would be. Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft, Matarrese and Vella expressed support. Councilmember Oddie moved approval [of having the four Councilmembers sign and the subcommittee decide about a fifth signature]. Special Meeting Alameda City Council 3 July 10, 2018 | CityCouncil/2018-07-10.pdf |
CityCouncil/2018-06-05.pdf,35 | CityCouncil | 2018-06-05 | 35 | 237 MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING TUESDAY- -JUNE 5, 2018- -5:00 P.M. Mayor Spencer convened the meeting at 5:04 p.m. Roll Call - Present: Councilmembers Ezzy Ashcraft, Matarrese, Oddie, Vella and Mayor Spencer - 5. [Note: Vice Mayor Vella was present via teleconference from the Hilton at 10000 Beach Club Drive, Myrtle Beach, South Carolina 29572.] Absent: None. The meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider: (18-310) Conference with Legal Counsel - Anticipated Litigation; Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to subdivisions (d)(2) and (e)(1) of Government Code Section 54956.9; Number of cases: One (As Defendant - City Exposure to Legal Action) (18-311) Conference with Real Property Negotiators (Government Code section 54956.8); Property: Northwest Territories, Alameda Point; City Negotiators: Elizabeth D. Warmerdam, Acting City Manager; and Jennifer Ott, Director of Base Reuse & Transportation Planning; Potential Tenant: East Bay Regional Park District; Issue Under Negotiation: Real Property Negotiations Price and Terms of Payment. Not heard. (18-312) Public Employee Appointment/Hiring Pursuant to Government Code § 54957; Title/description of positions to be filled: Acting City Manager and City Manager (18-313 ) Conference with Legal Counsel - Anticipated Litigation; Initiation of litigation pursuant to subdivision (c) of Section 54956.9 of the Government Code; Number of cases: One (As Plaintiff - City Initiating Legal Action) Following the Closed Session, the meeting was reconvened and the City Clerk announced that regarding Public Employee Appointment/Hiring and Initiating Legal Action, the City Council gave direction to staff by the following roll call vote: Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye; Councilmember Matarrese: Aye; Councilmember Oddie: Aye; Vice Mayor Vella: Aye; and Mayor Spencer: Aye. Ayes: 5; and regarding Exposure to Legal Action, the City Council gave direction to staff by the following roll call vote: Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft: No; Councilmember Matarrese: No; Counci… | CityCouncil/2018-06-05.pdf |
Advanced export
JSON shape: default, array, newline-delimited, object
CREATE TABLE "pages" ( [body] TEXT, [date] TEXT, [page] INTEGER, [text] TEXT, [path] TEXT, PRIMARY KEY ([path], [page]) );