pages
8,920 rows where body = "CityCouncil"
This data as json, CSV (advanced)
date (date) >30 ✖
- 2021-07-06 51
- 2016-01-05 40
- 2021-09-07 40
- 2010-06-15 39
- 2010-07-27 38
- 2017-07-18 38
- 2016-02-16 37
- 2018-06-05 36
- 2018-07-10 36
- 2005-05-17 35
- 2020-07-21 35
- 2021-03-16 35
- 2021-11-16 35
- 2006-12-05 34
- 2017-07-05 34
- 2017-11-07 34
- 2019-12-18 34
- 2021-07-20 34
- 2005-07-19 33
- 2020-05-19 33
- 2007-01-02 32
- 2007-12-04 32
- 2009-10-20 32
- 2010-04-20 32
- 2016-02-02 32
- 2017-06-06 32
- 2020-03-03 32
- 2022-05-03 32
- 2006-10-17 31
- 2009-02-07 31
- …
Link | body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
CityCouncil/2005-03-22.pdf,1 | CityCouncil | 2005-03-22 | 1 | MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING TUESDAY- - -MARCH 22, 2005- -5:00 P.M. Mayor Johnson convened the Special Meeting at 5:05 p.m. Roll Call - Present : Councilmembers Daysog, deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese, and Mayor Johnson - 5. Absent : None. The Special Meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider: (05-131) Public Employee Performance Evaluation - Title: City Manager. Following the Closed Session, the Special Meeting was reconvened and Mayor Johnson announced that the Council gave direction to the City Manager. Adjournment There being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the Special Meeting at 6:40 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger City Clerk The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act. Special Meeting Alameda City Council March 22, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-03-22.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-03-22.pdf,2 | CityCouncil | 2005-03-22 | 2 | MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING TUESDAY- -MARCH 22, 2005- -6:00 P.M. Mayor Johnson convened the Special Meeting at 6:45 p.m. Roll Call - Present : Councilmembers Daysog, deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese, and Mayor Johnson - 5. Absent : None. The Special Meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider : (05-132) Public Employment - Title: City Manager. Following the Closed Session, the Special Meeting was reconvened and Mayor Johnson announced that the Council gave direction to Recruiter. Adjournment There being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the Special Meeting at 8:50 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger City Clerk The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act. Special Meeting Alameda City Council March 22, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-03-22.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-04-05.pdf,1 | CityCouncil | 2005-04-05 | 1 | MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL TUESDAY - - APRIL 5, 2005 - - 7:30 P. M. Mayor Johnson convened the Regular Meeting at 9:07 p.m. ROLL CALL - Present : Councilmembers Daysog, deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese and Mayor Johnson - 5. Absent : None. AGENDA CHANGES None. PROCLAMATIONS, SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY AND ANNOUNCEMENTS (05 -136 - ) Proclamation declaring April 3-9, 2005 as the Week of the Young Child. Mayor Johnson read and presented the proclamation to Peter Stensrud, Woodstock Child Development Center. Mr. Stensrud stated that after school programs are essential; thanked the Council for the proclamation. (05-137) Update on the new main library project. The Project Manager gave a brief project update. Mayor Johnson stated there have been comments regarding noise issues. that a suggestion was made to hand out flyers to property owners in the area. The Project Manager stated that he will talk with the property owners and tenants beginning next week; noted the noisiest part of the project is now; stated that he plans to post a weekly update at the Times Star building directory. Councilmember Matarrese suggested advising the public on how to utilize the web camera for updates. The Project Manager stated the web camera is accessible from the City and Library websites. CONSENT CALENDAR Councilmember Matarrese moved approval of the Consent Calendar. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 1 April 5, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-04-05.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-04-05.pdf,2 | CityCouncil | 2005-04-05 | 2 | Vice Mayor Gilmore seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. [ Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk preceding the paragraph number. . ] (*05-138 - ) Minutes of the Special City Council Meeting, the Special Joint City Council and Community Improvement Commission Meeting, and the Regular City Council Meeting held on March 15, 2005; and Special City Council Meetings held on March 22, 2005. Approved. (*05-139) Ratified bills in the amount of $4,165,275.22. (*05-140) Recommendation to accept the City of Alameda Investment Policy. Accepted. ( *05-141) Recommendation to approve two-month Contract extension for William C. Norton for City Manager services. Accepted; and ( *05-141A) Resolution No. 13824, "Requesting that the Public Employee Retirement System Board Waive the 960-Hour Rule for William C. Norton. " Adopted. (*05-142) Resolution No. 13825, "Approving Revised Memorandum of Understanding and Salary Resolution Between the Alameda Police Officers Association Non-Sworn Unit and the City of Alameda for the Period Commencing December 28, 2003 and Ending December 24, 2006. " Adopted. (*05-143) Introduction of Ordinance Approving and Authorizing Execution of Lease Between the City of Alameda (Lessor) and the County of Alameda (Lessee) for Real Property Located at 1429 Oak Street. Introduced. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS (05-144) Public Hearing to consider an Appeal of the Planning Board's approval of Rezoning, R04-0002, to rezone 1/2 acre from R-5 to C-C; Variance, V04-0018, for a second driveway when one driveway is permitted by the Alameda Municipal Code; Use Permit, UP04-0013, for expansion of the vet clinic, and Design Review, DR04-0101, to allow a 5,300 square foot new commercial building (veterinary hospital) to replace approximately 2,000 square feet of commercial buildings, with a parking lot expansion to 23 spaces. The property is located at 1410 Everett Street, 2501 Central Avenue and 2507 Central Avenue, in the C-C Community Commercial and R-5 General Residential Zoning Dist… | CityCouncil/2005-04-05.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-04-05.pdf,3 | CityCouncil | 2005-04-05 | 3 | (05-144A) Resolution No. 13826, "Upholding the Planning Board's Recommendation to Approve Rezoning R04-002, Variance V04-018, Use Permit UP04-013 - and Major Design Review, DR04-101, for Construction of a Veterinary Clinic, with an amendment to include that the Applicant has a dog walking policy and that kenneling is limited to clients. Adopted. The Supervising Planner provided a brief presentation on the project. Mayor Johnson opened the Public Hearing. Proponents (In favor of appeal) : John Barni, Jr., Appellant (provided diagram) ; Monica Pena, Alameda; Heather Beales, Alameda; and Joe Meylor, Alameda. Opponents (Not in favor of appeal) : Lawrence Henderson, Alameda; Susan Corlett, Alameda: Helen Mohr Thomas, Alameda; Diane Schaffer, Oakland; Cathy Wydner, Applicant; Steve Busse, Park Centre Animal Hospital Geni Manchester; Mary Applegate, Applicant; Nancy Matthews, Alameda (submitted letter) ; and Robb Ratto, Park Street Business Association (PSBA) There being no further speakers, Mayor Johnson closed the Public Hearing. Vice Mayor Gilmore inquired whether the Public Works Department reviewed the current site plan and verified that the plan met vehicle standards for safety and setbacks. The Supervising Planner responded that there are hundreds of instances where buildings are up to the edge of the sidewalk in the commercial districts; stated that she would assume there were no restrictions since the Public Works Department reviewed the plan and did not raise the issue. The Acting City Manager stated that the Engineering Department would have commented if the site distance were a problem. Councilmember deHaan inquired whether the commercial area was willing to have dogs walk in the area, to which Mr. Ratto, PSBA, responded absolutely. Councilmember deHaan stated dog walking in neighborhoods has always been a problem; that he feels more comfortable with the concessions [made by Applicant regarding dog walking] that have been made tonight ; that he is very satisfied with the architectural design Regular Meeting … | CityCouncil/2005-04-05.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-04-05.pdf,4 | CityCouncil | 2005-04-05 | 4 | changes ; that he can live with the client only boarding concession; that he did not hear dogs barking at the site; noted that the site is a very professional and confined operation; a lot of dogs have to stay in kennels for a period of time and are picked up later in the day; that in mind, he feels comfortable with moving forward with the project. Mayor Johnson stated that the Applicant has been very accommodating. Councilmember Matarrese moved adoption of the resolution upholding the Planning Board's recommendation. Vice Mayor Gilmore seconded the motion. Under discussion, Councilmember deHaan inquired how the recommended concessions [regarding kenneling and dog walking would be reflected in the motion. The Supervising Planner stated the conditions of approval do not include the Applicant's agreement that only patients be kenneled on site, not general kenneling; as to walking in the neighborhood, a condition could be crafted that encourages use of streets other than Regent Street and the south side of Central Avenue, which might be difficult to enforce. Mayor Johnson inquired whether the approval could reflect that the Applicant has an adopted dog walking policy, to which the Supervising Planner responded the dog walking policy could be incorporated. Mayor Johnson inquired whether including the policy was acceptable to the Applicant, to which the Applicant responded in the affirmative. Councilmember Matarrese amended his motion to incorporate reference to the Applicant's dog walking policy as well as the kenneling of client animals only. Vice Mayor Gilmore seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. (05-145) Public Hearing to consider an Appeal of the Planning Board's approval of Design Review, DR04-0113, and Planned Development, PD04-0004, for the construction of a new 6,000 square foot community center and four detached sixteen-car garages, exterior modifications to existing apartment buildings, and other site modifications at the 615 unit Harbor Island Apartments Regular Meeting Alameda C… | CityCouncil/2005-04-05.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-04-05.pdf,5 | CityCouncil | 2005-04-05 | 5 | Complex. The site is located at 433 Buena Vista Avenue within the R-4 PD, Neighborhood Residential Planned Development Zoning District. Applicant: Chris Auxier for Alameda Multi Family Ventures LLC. Appellant: Lorraine Lilley; and (05-145A) - Resolution No. 13827, "Upholding the Planning Board of the City of Alameda's Decision to Approve Design Review DR04-0113 and Planned Development PD04-0004 to Construct a 6,000 Square Foot Community Center and Four Detached Garages, Exterior Modifications to Existing Buildings, and Other Site Modifications at the 615 Unit Harbor Island Apartment Complex Located at 433 Buena Vista Avenue, Located in an R-4 PD, Neighborhood Residential Planned Development Zoning District. Adopted. The Supervising Planner provided a brief presentation on the project. Councilmember Matarrese inquired whether asbestos abatement is part of the permitting process. The Supervising Planner responded in the affirmative. Mayor Johnson opened the Public Hearing. Proponents (In favor of appeal) : Lorraine Lilley, Harbor Island Tenant Association; Modessa Henderson, Harbor Island Tenant Association; Lynette Lee, Oakland; Delores Wills Guyton, Harbor Island Tenant Association; Eve Bach, Arc Ecology ( submitted handout ) ; Reginald James, Alameda; and Michael Yoshi ( submitted handout) . Opponent (Not in favor of appeal) : Mark R. Hartney, Alameda Multi Family Ventures. Following Ms. Henderson's comments, Mayor Johnson inquired what type of engineering review must be done to ensure the building is structurally safe. The Supervising Planner responded that all of the plans would be reviewed. The Project Architect stated that work must conform with the 2001 California Building Code (CBC) ; noted that he is unaware of any part of the existing building that is not structurally sound; stated that the Building Department would have notified the property owners if the building was not structurally sound. Mayor Johnson inquired whether that is how the process works. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 5 April 5, 200… | CityCouncil/2005-04-05.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-04-05.pdf,6 | CityCouncil | 2005-04-05 | 6 | The Supervising Planner responded that plans reviewed by the Building Department would be checked against the Alameda Building Code; stated any new construction has to be done according to the 2001 CBC ; that any rehabilitation to the existing buildings needs to be done to Code, but not necessarily the 2001 CBC . Mayor Johnson inquired whether there would be any work done that would trigger a requirement for all buildings to be brought up to code, to which the Supervising Planner responded that she was not qualified to answer the question; stated the Building Official would need to respond. Councilmember Matarrese inquired whether any safety issues would be addressed by the Building Official before the buildings were reoccupied and whether a Certificate of Occupancy would need to be issued. The Supervising Planner responded that the Building Code requires that only safe buildings be occupied. The Project Architect stated that he was not aware that the Building Department identified any structural problems. Vice Mayor Gilmore inquired how the balconies would be checked. The Project Architect responded that a Structural Engineer would make sure that the existing balconies are structurally sound. Mr. Hartney stated that the Community Center and any additional work on the old building needs to be built to 2001 CBC ; noted that the Planning Department would check the safety of every building before a Certificate of Occupancy is issued. The Acting City Manager stated that the exterior work is primarily cosmetic; noted that nothing was being done that would structurally change the balconies; stated that he would ensure that the Building Official check the balconies and that the American with Disabilities Act (ADA) trigger would be reviewed. The Project Architect stated that the 2001 CBC has a provision that excludes any upgrades from complying with the ADA for residential buildings built and occupied before 1991; noted that any new work done to the Community Center needs to conform with the current standards. Councilmem… | CityCouncil/2005-04-05.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-04-05.pdf,7 | CityCouncil | 2005-04-05 | 7 | The Acting City Manager responded that the Fire Marshall determined that there were some Fire Code problems and notified the property owner; stated a report from the Fire Marshall indicated the problems were repaired with the exception of the fire alarm system and elevator. The Project Architect stated that agreements have been developed with the Building, Planning and Fire Departments regarding the level of upgrades that need to be satisfied. There being no further speakers, Mayor Johnson closed the Public Hearing. Mayor Johnson inquired whether the Planning Department was under a deadline for the project. The Supervising Planner responded that there is a statutory deadline under the Permit Streamlining Act; stated that once a project has been deemed complete, action needs to be taken within [60 days]. Councilmember Daysog inquired whether the approval for the Community Center was via the Permit Streamlining process and whether there are other aspects of the overall project that would be subject to the Permit Streamlining process. The Supervising Planner responded that all discretionary permits are subject to the Permit Streamlining process which includes the Design Review and the Planned Development amendment for the Community Center and the new garage buildings. Councilmember Daysog inquired whether there are issues other than what is being addressed tonight that are subject to the Permit Streamlining process. The Supervising Planner responded that the structural issues are not part of the Permit Streamlining processi stated the structural and plumbing issues are not under the Planning Board's purview. Mayor Johnson stated the Building Code Appeals Board reviews building code deviations. The Supervising Planner stated that the Building Code Appeals Board addresses instances where a building permit is not issued because of a technical requirement when the applicant believes that an alternate method for construction would be appropriate. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 7 April 5, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-04-05.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-04-05.pdf,8 | CityCouncil | 2005-04-05 | 8 | Councilmember Daysog stated that it appears that acceptance of the Community Center design green lights thee project and that structural issues would be dealt with administratively Mayor Johnson inquired whether structural findings could be brought back. The Acting City Manager responded in the affirmative; stated an off agenda report would be provided. Councilmember Daysog inquired what is the tenant status, to which the Acting City Manager responded there are four tenants remaining on leases or have approval from the property owners to stay for two or three months. Mr. Hartney stated that there is a 60-day timeframe for the Permit Streamlining Act; that the deadline was in February the Planning Board requested another study session and an extension, which was granted; stated that three tenants would be remaining as of tomorrow at noon; noted that the remaining tenants are under long- term leases. Vice Mayor Gilmore inquired whether the cosmetic work would trigger a requirement to upgrade the electrical or plumbing, to which the Supervising Planner responded that she would provide Council information on the matter. Vice Mayor Gilmore inquired whether the Community Center was considered an amenity to the project and whether the City has any way of regulating the size or square footage of a building that can be deemed a Community Center. The Supervising Planner responded that there is no regulation; stated that the Fifteen Group wanted to provide an opportunity for some amenities but the building would not be a sufficient size to hold tenant meetings. Vice Mayor Gilmore inquired whether the prior use of two units as office space was an expansion of use and whether there is an issue with Measure A, to which the Supervising Planner responded that staff would provide Council information on the matter. Mr. Hartney stated that the plans show that the building was permitted for 615 units; noted that it is not a change of use if the owner chooses to take two units off the market to use for its own purpose, and then put t… | CityCouncil/2005-04-05.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-04-05.pdf,9 | CityCouncil | 2005-04-05 | 9 | if the two office space units return to rented units, to which Mr. Hartney responded in the affirmative. Councilmember deHaan inquired what was the intent to upgrade the electrical and plumbing. The Project Architect responded that drawings for improvements need to be submitted for a building permit; stated the drawings would be reviewed to ensure conformance with the conditions of approval and agreements that were negotiated through the Design Review processi noted that interior upgrade permits have already been submitted. Mayor Johnson inquired whether the elevators, to which the Project Architect responded in the affirmative. Councilmember Matarrese requested a review on the process of safety issues prior to occupancy and clarification on lead and asbestos abatement. inquired how the sewer issues are connected with the process of upgrading the exteriors of the buildings and whether sprinklers would be required in the building. The Acting City Manager responded lead and asbestos abatement and sewer problems are not addressed as part of the exterior review but would take place in the ministerial part of the building permits noted a qualified contractor would need to perform the lead and asbestos abatement work; stated that the sewer issue would probably not be triggered but should be addressed. Councilmember Matarrese inquired whether the sewer work would be required to be done, to which the Acting City Manager stated that the sewer work should be reviewed. The Project Architect stated that the sewer work is a condition of approval i noted that some of the work has already been done and presented to the Public Works Department. The Acting City Manager stated that there are parts of the project which would require sprinklers. The Project Architect stated that public hallways and common areas would be protected with a fire sprinkler system and the fire alarm system would be upgraded; stated that reports from the Applicants are required as part of the demolition permitting process; noted testing has been done for l… | CityCouncil/2005-04-05.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-04-05.pdf,10 | CityCouncil | 2005-04-05 | 10 | The Project Architect stated that parking has been a concern since the beginning; noted that eliminating the carports has maximized the amount of parking on the site; stated that he cannot guarantee that there will not be an overflow. Councilmember Daysog noted that the Judge made a decision and the redevelopment project must go forward. Mayor Johnson concurred with Councilmember Daysog stated that information has been requested on issues raised. Councilmember Daysog moved adoption of resolution denying the Appeal. Councilmember deHaan seconded the motion, which carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Councilmembers Daysog, deHaan, and Mayor Johnson -5. Noes Vice Mayor Gilmore and Councilmember Matarrese - 2. (05-146) - Ordinance No. 2937, "Amending the Alameda Municipal Code by Amending Section 30-2 (Definitions) ; Amending Subsection 30-3.2 (Combining Districts) i Adding a New Subsection 30-4.22 ( T-Theater Combining District) ; and Reclassifying and Rezoning Certain Properties Within the City of Alameda to Include the Theater Combining District. Finally passed. Councilmember deHaan moved final passage of Ordinance. Councilmember Daysog seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. (05 - 147 ) Ordinance No. 2938, "Amending the Alameda Municipal Code by Amending Section 30-2 (Definitions) of Article I (Zoning Districts and Regulations) of Chapter XXX (Development Regulations) by Adding a New Section 30-6 (Sign Regulations) to Chapter XXX (Development Regulations) " Finally passed. Councilmember Matarrese moved final passage of Ordinance. Councilmember Daysog seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (05-148) Michael McGhee, Alameda, stated that he wants to develop a resource guide of veterans' services available in Alameda; the Housing Authority should refer veterans seeking housing to Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 10 April 5, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-04-05.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-04-05.pdf,11 | CityCouncil | 2005-04-05 | 11 | Operation Dignity; that he welcomes help from the City Council or private businesses. (05-149) Deborah James, Alameda, stated that Redding Property Management Group is trying to evict tenants without going through due process. (05-150) Reginald James, Alameda, stated that there are reoccurring fires from a malfunctioning dryer at the Esperanza Community Center; noted problems should be addressed. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS (05-151) Selection of Councilmember and alternate to serve as the Association of Bay Area Governments representative. Councilmember Matarrese moved that Vice Mayor Gilmore serve as the Association of Bay Area Governments representative and Councilmember deHaan serve as the alternate. Councilmember Daysog seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. (05-152) Mayor Johnson read the names of the members of the newly formed Task Force: Vice Mayor Gilmore, an Alameda Unified School District Board Member, Acting City Manager Bill Norton or designee, Lorraine Lilley, Tom Matthews, Kendra Holloway, Steve Edrington, Hadi Monsef and Carol Martino. Councilmember Matarrese inquired what was the timeframe for providing findings, to which the Acting City Manager responded 60 days. Councilmember Matarrese inquired about the goal of the Task Force, to which the Acting City Manager responded preventing future mass evictions and creating more affordable housing. Councilmember Matarrese inquired whether the focus would be centric to the surrounding Harbor Island Apartments or to a broader area. The Acting City Manager responded there is more opportunity in the West End but possibilities should not be limited. Mayor Johnson noted that information is not coordinated enough ; staff in different departments reviewed building code violations and fire code violations in the Harbor Island Apartments staff should review the issue of coordinating that information. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 11 April 5, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-04-05.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-04-05.pdf,12 | CityCouncil | 2005-04-05 | 12 | (05-153) Councilmember Daysog requested that staff respond to a resident' inquiry regarding the rules of operating a roving coffee shop. Mayor Johnson stated the resident wants to operate a coffee truck in the City parking lot by the Dog Park; the resident indicated that East Bay Regional Park representative Doug Siden supports the idea. (05-154) ouncilmember deHaan stated that the Cineplex and parking structure designs are dove tailing together; requested the designs be presented at the same time and an overall design provided. ADJOURNMEN'T There being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the Regular Meeting at 11:37 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger City Clerk The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 12 April 5, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-04-05.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-04-05.pdf,13 | CityCouncil | 2005-04-05 | 13 | MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING TUESDAY - -APRIL 5, 2005- -5:30 P. .M. Mayor Johnson convened the Special Meeting at 5:45 p.m. Roll Call - Present : Councilmembers Daysog, deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese, and Mayor Johnson - 5. Absent : None. The Special Meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider: (05-133) Public Employee Performance Evaluation: Title: City Attorney. (05-134) Conference with Labor Negotiators; Agency Negotiators: Human Resources Director and Craig Jory Employee Organizations : Police Association Non-Sworn (PANS) International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW) and Management and Confidential Employees Association (MCEA) . Following the Closed Session, the Special Meeting was reconvened and Mayor Johnson announced that regarding Public Employee Performance Evaluation, the Council provided direction; and regarding Conference with Labor Negotiators, the Council obtained a briefing from Labor Negotiators. Adjournment There being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the Special Meeting at 7:25 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger City Clerk The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act. Special Meeting Alameda City Council April 5, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-04-05.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-04-05.pdf,14 | CityCouncil | 2005-04-05 | 14 | MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL JOINT CITY COUNCIL AND COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY - - - APRIL 5, 2005 - - - 5:31 P.M. Mayor/Chair Johnson convened the Special Joint Meeting at 7:25 p.m. ROLL CALL - Present : Councilmembers/Commissioners Daysog, deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese, and Mayor/Chair Johnson - 5. Absent : None. The Special Joint Meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider: (05-135CC/05-013CIC Conference with Legal Counsel - Existing Litigation: Name of cases : Alameda Belt Line V. City of Alameda, Alameda Belt Line V. City of Alameda, and City of Alameda V. Alameda Belt Line. Following the Closed Session, the Special Joint Meeting was reconvened and Mayor/Chair Johnson announced that the Council/Commission obtained briefing from Legal Counsel. Adjournment There being no further business, Mayor/Chair Johnson adjourned the Special Joint Meeting at 7:28 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger, City Clerk Secretary, Community Improvement Commission The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act. Special Joint Meeting Alameda Cit Council and Community Improvement Commission April 5, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-04-05.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-04-05.pdf,15 | CityCouncil | 2005-04-05 | 15 | APRIL 5, 2005 COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION MINUTES PLACEHOLDER The April 5, 2005 CIC Minutes have not been approved by the Commission. | CityCouncil/2005-04-05.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-04-07.pdf,1 | CityCouncil | 2005-04-07 | 1 | MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING THURSDAY- - -APRIL 7, 2005- - -4:00 P.M. Mayor Johnson convened the Special Meeting at 4:10 p.m. Roll Call - Present : Councilmembers Daysog, deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese, and Mayor Johnson - 5. Absent : None. The Special Meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider : (05-155) - Public Employment - Title: City Manager. Following the Closed Session, the Special Meeting was reconvened and Mayor Johnson announced that no decision was made. Adjournment There being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the Special Meeting at 8:10 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger City Clerk The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act. Special Meeting Alameda City Council April 7, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-04-07.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-04-08.pdf,1 | CityCouncil | 2005-04-08 | 1 | MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING FRIDAY - - APRIL 8, 2005 - 3:30 P.M. Mayor Johnson convened the Special Meeting at 4:10 p.m. Roll Call - Present : Councilmembers Daysog, deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese, and Mayor Johnson - 5. Absent : None. The Special Meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider : (05-156) Public Employment - Title: City Manager. Following the Closed Session, the Special Meeting was reconvened and Mayor Johnson announced that no decision was made. Adjournment There being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the Special Meeting at 9:10 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger City Clerk The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act. Special Meeting Alameda City Council April 8, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-04-08.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-04-19.pdf,1 | CityCouncil | 2005-04-19 | 1 | MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING TUESDAY - - APRIL 19, 2005 - - 7:30 PM Mayor Johnson convened the Regular Meeting at 8:07 p.m. ROLL CALL - Present : Councilmembers Daysog, deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese, and Mayor Johnson - 5. Absent : None. AGENDA CHANGES (05-160) Mayor Johnson announced that the Resolution Commending Alameda Police Department Sergeant Jon Westmoreland would be presented after Special Orders of the Day. PROCLAMATIONS, SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY AND ANNOUNCEMENTS (05-161) Proclamation declaring April 23, 2005 as Earth Day Alameda 2005. Mayor Johnson read and presented the Proclamation to Paul Groff, Allegra Printing. Mr. Groff thanked the Council for the Proclamation. REGULAR AGENDA ITEM (05-162) Resolution No. 13828, "Commending Alameda Police Department Sergeant Jon Westmoreland for His Contributions to the City of Alameda. " Adopted. Mayor Johnson read and presented the Resolution to Sergeant Jon Westmoreland. Sergeant Westmoreland thanked the Council and stated that he was honored to have served the City. Councilmember Matarrese moved adoption of the Resolution. Councilmember deHaan seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. CONSENT CALENDAR Mayor Johnson announced that the recommendation to authorize the Acting City Manager or designee to enter into an agreement for the acquisition of real property [paragraph no. 05-166], the Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 1 April 19, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-04-19.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-04-19.pdf,2 | CityCouncil | 2005-04-19 | 2 | recommendation to authorize the Acting City Manager to use $201,000 in Measure B ferry reserves [paragraph no. 05-169], and the Resolution Approving the Application for Land and Water Conservation Fund [paragraph no. 05-174] were removed from the Consent Calendar for discussion. Councilmember Matarrese moved approval of the remainder of the Consent Calendar. Councilmember deHaan seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. [Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk preceding the paragraph number. ] ( 05-163) - Minutes of the Special and Regular City Council Meetings held on April 5, 2005 and the Special City Council Meeting held on April 7, 2005 and April 8, 2005. Approved. (*05-164) Ratified bills in the amount of $1,826,558.48 ( *05-165) Recommendation to approve Agreement with Community Playgrounds, Inc. in the amount of $98,930 for Leydecker Park Playground Renovation Project. Accepted. (05-166) Recommendation to authorize the Acting City Manager or designee to enter into an agreement for the acquisition of real property from the East Bay Municipal Utility District for $110,800 plus closing costs. Councilmember deHaan requested clarification on the impacts of drawing $110,800 from the Recreation and Park Commission's existing budget. Councilmember Matarrese stated that he understood that the $110,800 was coming from the Open Space Fund. Mayor Johnson stated that the Open Space Fund was a result of the property sold at the Harbor Bay Business Park; Council directed that the sale proceeds be placed in a separate Open Space account. Councilmember deHaan inquired whether the money was also being used for the Estuary Park Project. The Acting City Manager responded in the affirmative. stated purchasing the full amount of land [for Estuary Park] shown in the General Plan could cost up to $5 million; there will be discussions with the developer and the Bay Conservation and Development Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 2 April 19, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-04-19.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-04-19.pdf,3 | CityCouncil | 2005-04-19 | 3 | Commission (BCDC) regarding requirements for a pathway Councilmember deHaan inquired whether having an approximate $300,000 delta will limit the capabilities of carrying on with the project. The Acting City Manager responded there would be limitations in getting a larger share of the land; discussions with the developer and grant approval would determine how much land the City could obtain; staff must recommend proceeding because the project is shown in the General Plan. Councilmember deHann moved approval of the recommendation to authorize the Acting City Manager or designee to enter into an agreement for the acquisition of real property from the East Bay Municipal Utility District for $110,800 plus closing costs [paragraph no. 05-166] and Adoption of Resolution Approving the Application for Land and Water Conservation Fund Estuary Park Project [paragraph no. 05-174]. Under discussion, Mayor Johnson inquired whether the grant was the same one the City previously applied for and did not receive and whether the chances for approval were better. The Acting Recreation and Park Director responded the current grant was from the Land and Water Conservation Act; the previous grant was under the Roberti-z'Berg-Harris Urban Open Space and Recreation Program; the State prefers to fund developments rather than acquisitions. Mayor Johnson requested staff to advise Council on whatever efforts are needed to succeed. Councilmember Matarrese seconded the motion. Under discussion, Councilmember Matarrese stated that it is important to acquire the last strip of property before the Bay Farm Bridge because the property completes the Bay Trail and precludes building another house at one of the choke points of the City; the development of Estuary Park should move forward with whatever money is left; when the opportunity comes up with the developer, money can be found. The Acting City Manager stated there are ways to work with the developer to maximize the amount of land the City can obtain; the matter would be discussed with the devel… | CityCouncil/2005-04-19.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-04-19.pdf,4 | CityCouncil | 2005-04-19 | 4 | Accepted. (05-169) Recommendation to authorize the Acting City Manager to use $201,000 in Measure B ferry reserves for ferry boat repairs. Vice Mayor Gilmore stated there seems to be more ferry boat repair issues with the Harbor Bay Ferry than the Alameda/Oakland Ferry Service; if so, requested a review of ferry boat operators' maintenance schedules. Councilmember deHaan stated that the Harbor Bay Ferry costs need to be reviewed; an Off Agenda Report notes that the Peralta was sent back up to Washington for super structure modifications the Peralta is a young ship; there were flaws in the materials used; requested the review address the Peralta. Vice Mayor Gilmore moved approval of the staff recommendation. Councilmember Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. ( *05-170) - Resolution No. 13829, "Preliminarily Approving Annual Report Declaring Intention to Order Levy and Collection of Assessments and Providing for Notice of June 21, 2005 Hearing Thereof - Island City Landscaping and Lighting District 84-2. " Adopted. ( (*05-171) Resolution No. 13830, "Preliminarily Approving Annual Report Declaring Intention to Order Levy and Collection of Assessments and Providing for Notice of June 21, 2005 Hearing Thereof - Maintenance Assessment District 01-01 (Marina Cove) . " Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 4 April 19, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-04-19.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-04-19.pdf,5 | CityCouncil | 2005-04-19 | 5 | Adopted. (*05-172) Resolution No. 13831, "Approving Tentative Map, TM04- 0004, for a Sixteen Lot Subdivision at Harbor Bay Business Park." Adopted. (*05-173) Resolution No. 13832, "Approving the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) Report "Taming Natural Disasters" as the City of Alameda's Local Hazard Mitigation Plan. Adopted. (05-174) Resolution No. 13833, "Approving the Application for Land and Water Conservation Fund Estuary Park Project. Adopted. Refer to comments and motion under the recommendation to authorize the Acting City Manager or designee to enter into an agreement for the acquisition of real property [paragraph no. 05-166]. (*05-175) Introduction of Ordinance Reclassifying and Rezoning Certain Property within the City of Alameda by Amending Zoning Ordinance No. 1277, N.S., from R-5 (General Residential) Zoning District to C-C (Community Commercial) Zoning District, for that Property Located at 2507 Central Avenue at Everett Street. Introduced. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS (05-176) Public Hearing to consider a recommendation to adopt FY 2005-06 through FY 2009-10 Consolidated Plan, adopt FY 2005-06 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Action Plan, amend FY 2004-05 CDBG Action Plan, and authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute related documents, agreements and modifications and (05-176A) Recommendation regarding CDBG public service recommendations Mayor Johnson opened the public portion of the Hearing. Speaker: Doug Biggs, Alameda Point Collaborative. There being no further speakers, Mayor Johnson closed the public portion of the Hearing. Vice Mayor Gilmore moved approval of the staff recommendation. Councilmember Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 5 April 19, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-04-19.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-04-19.pdf,6 | CityCouncil | 2005-04-19 | 6 | (05-177) - Ordinance No. 2939, "Approving and Authorizing Execution of Lease between the City of Alameda (Lessor) and the County of Alameda (Lessee) for Real Property Located at 1429 Oak Street. " Finally passed. Mayor Johnson stated that the County Health Center is moving into the former Children's Library site; there is now a home for the Recreation and Park Department and the County Health Center thanked the Acting City Manager for finding a very good solution to a potentially difficult problem. Councilmember Matarrese stated that the County's opportunity provides the City with the benefit of improvements and maintaining a building that is a City asset; the move is a fine solution and keeps the County services central to the bus line and the center of town. Councilmember Matarrese moved final passage of the Ordinance. Councilmember deHaan seconded the motion. Under discussion, the Acting City Manager stated that the Public Works Department put in partitions and did a lot of the work in a short period of time; the County will have a ribbon cutting ceremony either later this week or next week; the cost of the materials was paid for by the County; a City building has been fixed up with a combination of City forces and County funds; everyone came out a winner. Mayor Johnson stated that the building was not occupied for at least eight years and was in fairly blighted conditions. Councilmember deHaan stated that he appreciates the Acting City Manager's win-win solutions. On the call for the question, the motion carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA None. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS (05-178) - Discussion of the Harbor Bay ferry system. Councilmember Daysog stated that he received many e-mails regarding the Harbor Bay ferry; noted that the City was able to get a one Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 6 April 19, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-04-19.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-04-19.pdf,7 | CityCouncil | 2005-04-19 | 7 | year reprieve; suggested a Town Hall meeting be held regarding the ferry system in three to four months; stated that some riders feel out of the loop regarding ferry issues; noted that a Town Hall meeting would provide a better sense of timetables for improving ferry services and costs issues; suggested a more formal way of communicating with riders be developed by the Transportation Commission or an adhoc committee that reports to City Council. Councilmember Matarrese concurred with Councilmember Daysog; suggested that the Town Hall meeting occur soon; stated that the city cannot afford to lose the ferry service; traveling across the Bay Farm Island Bridge would affect commuters and is unacceptable: stated that informing commuters that everything will be done to keep the ferry in service is an urgent matter and maintains credibility for transit solutions at Alameda Point. Councilmember Daysog stated that he is in favor of having the Town Hall meeting sooner, but that it is important to collect information for presentation. Mayor Johnson stated that she does not see any advertising for the ferries; noted that fuel cost issues should be investigated; stated that the City will not lose the ferry service; that there is a long-term possibility that the Water Transit Authority will operate the ferries; the City needs to continue operating successfully until then; there should be a Council briefing on the state of the ferries and then a public workshop. Vice Mayor Gilmore stated that the maintenance issues are important; noted if the ferry is out of service, commuters find other means of commuting and it is difficult to get them back once habits have changed. Councilmember Daysog suggested that the Council Meeting be the Town Hall meting. Councilmember deHaan stated that there was a fare box increase of 25% and 40% is needed; the capacity of the ferry service and parking limitation is a difficult dynamic to solve; that the Alameda/Oakland Ferry Service was successful because parking spaces were increased and ridership … | CityCouncil/2005-04-19.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-04-19.pdf,8 | CityCouncil | 2005-04-19 | 8 | staff and Grant Allocation Committee endorsed; more work needs to be done to refine the information; there are plans to have a Town Hall meeting next week or the following week; then staff will provide a status report to Council; a better job can be done on marketing the ferry. Mayor Johnson stated that when the ferry problem became apparent, the Acting City Manager immediately took action and set up meetings with the Metropolitan Transportation Commission; thanked the Acting City Manager for the efforts taken to negotiate one more year. Vice Mayor Gilmore requested that e-mails be sent to concerned citizens [regarding the Town Hall meeting] in addition to the normal noticing procedures. (05-179) Consideration of Mayor's nominations (3) for appointment to the Golf Commission. Mayor Johnson nominated Ray Gaul, Jane Sullwold, and Bill Schmitz to the Gold Commission. Councilmember deHaan stated that he was extremely impressed with the applicants' depth; he would hope that the individuals look at other commissions and boards. Mayor Johnson concurred with Councilmember deHaan. (05-180) - Consideration of the Mayor's nomination for appointment to the Housing and Building Code Hearing and Appeals Board. Continued. (05-181) Selection of alternate to serve on the Alameda County Lead Abatement Joint Powers Authority Board. Mayor Johnson stated that Councilmember deHaan has indicated an interest to serve as the alternate. Vice Mayor Gilmore moved that Councilmember deHaan serve on the Alameda County Lead Abatement Joint Powers Authority Board. Councilmember Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. (05-182) Councilmember Daysog noted that today is the City of Alameda's 151st birthday. (05-183 - ) Councilmember deHaan requested a report on the Lincoln School drop off area situation; there is concern with the next Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 8 April 19, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-04-19.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-04-19.pdf,9 | CityCouncil | 2005-04-19 | 9 | generation of remediation intruding into the existing field area. Vice Mayor Gilmore stated that the School District staff is presenting a plan to the School Board on April 26. The Acting City Manager stated that the meeting may be sooner than April 26 and that he would verify the date. Mayor Johnson inquired whether the plan intrudes into the field area, to which the Acting City Manager responded that the plan goes partially into the field area and basketball paved area. Vice Mayor Gilmore inquired how the plan would effect putting in a full size regulation soccer field, to which the Acting City Manager responded the matter would be addressed at the meeting and City staff would bring back information. Mayor Johnson stated that she has informed a couple of School Board members and the Superintendent that she is concerned about taking away field space; noted that the basketball courts are not just used by the school. (05-184) Councilmember deHaan inquired whether the window display ordinance came back to Council, to which the Acting City Manager responded that there is 30-day implementation period to allow people time to adjust before enforcement. (05-185) Mayor Johnson requested that increasing the size of the Recreation and Park Commission be placed on the next agenda. (05-186) Mayor Johnson stated the Finance Director is working on a more aggressive policy to buy in Alameda; noted that the check registers indicate how much the City spends outside of Alameda and are very disturbing stated that sales tax revenue is being given to other cities a purchasing position might be needed to coordinate better prices and ensure that purchasing is done in Alameda as much as possible. (05-187) - Mayor Johnson stated the Council should consider a Business Recruiter position in the next budget. Councilmember deHaan stated that every Economic Development Commission study indicated a Business Recruiter as a top priority; noted that buying in Alameda is important. (05-188 - ) Councilmember Matarrese stated important projects are … | CityCouncil/2005-04-19.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-04-19.pdf,10 | CityCouncil | 2005-04-19 | 10 | Downtown Vision Plan, the Bicycle Master Plan, etc; staff reports should have a section that reviews basic conformance to the policy documents that have been adopted for non-conformance there should be an explanation of the pros and cons; noted the plans may need to be updated; projects such as the Theatre, Bridgeside Shopping Center and the Base need to check conformances to existing plans. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the Regular Meeting at 8:57 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger City Clerk The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 10 April 19, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-04-19.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-04-19.pdf,11 | CityCouncil | 2005-04-19 | 11 | MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL JOINT CITY COUNCIL AND COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY- - -APRIL 19, 2005- -7:27 P.M. Mayor/Chair Johnson convened the Special Joint Meeting at 7:56 p.m. ROLL CALL - Present : Councilmembers/Commissioners Daysog, deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese, and Mayor/Chair Johnson - 5. Absent : None MINUTES (05-157CC/05-016CIC) Minutes of the Special Joint City Council and Community Improvement Commission Meeting held on April 5, 2005. Approved. Vice Mayor/Commissioner Gilmore moved approval of the minutes. Councilmember/Commissioner Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. AGENDA ITEMS (05-158CC/05-017CIC) Recommendation to approve the Annual Operating and Capital Budget for the Bayport Project. The Acting City Manager stated the budget scenario is considerably better based upon the profit participation section that allows participation in some of the developer's profit. The Development Services Director gave a brief report on the project. ouncilmember/Commissioner Daysog inquired whether bond issuance is not required because revenue generated would cover public improvements and still provide an $800,000 profit. The Development Services Director responded that one bond was issued early in the project; the project's bottom line does not require using any other bonds to finish the project. Mayor/Chair Johnson inquired whether bond capacity is freed up for other potential uses in the future. The Development Services Director responded in the negative; stated the existing agreement does not just contemplate the current phase the obligations of the projects are linked; any project proceeds Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council and 1 Community Improvement Commission April 19, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-04-19.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-04-19.pdf,12 | CityCouncil | 2005-04-19 | 12 | that flow from Phase I tax increments are obligated to Phase II unless negotiated differently. Mayor/Chair Johnson inquired whether Phase II has been negotiated, to which the Development Services Director responded Phase II has a Disposition and Development Agreement (DDA) . Mayor/Chair Johnson inquired whether the DDA provisions could be renegotiated, to which the Development Services Director responded in the affirmative. Councilmember/Commissioner Matarrese inquired whether the bottom line of the next phase is more favorable. The Development Services Director responded that a developer advance is not required; available funds would be required to be put into the infrastructure in a different pattern. Councilmember/Commissioner Matarrese inquired whether the Research and Development Park and Business Park look more favorable, to which the Development Services Director responded that she could not respond; there are other issues related to the economics. Councilmember/Commissioner Matarrese inquired whether the profits rolling into the next project allow for a more favorable situation, to which the Development Services Director responded possibly. Councilmember/Commissioner deHaan inquired whether the price of homes is the principal factor for the current situation, to which the Development Services Director responded in the affirmative. Councilmember/Commissioner deHaan stated the break-even point was $650,000. The Redevelopment Manager noted the average sale price of the homes was $725,000. louncilmember/Commissioner Daysog stated that news is good overall; profit participation was initially questionable. Councilmember/Commissioner deHaan moved approval of the staff recommendation Counci lmember/Commissioner Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. Doug Biggs, Alameda Point Collaborative (APC), stated that the APC Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council and 2 Community Improvement Commission April 19, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-04-19.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-04-19.pdf,13 | CityCouncil | 2005-04-19 | 13 | was originally granted 39 units to meet housing needs for the homeless: APC entered into an agreement with the City to replace the original units in east housing near the corner of Atlantic Avenue and Fifth Street the City told APC that there are no funds to build the 39 units; the City is contemplating financing a 39- - unit project through other funds instead; the City specifically designated project revenues from the Catellus Project as the primary source for the 39 units, including $2 million from the sale of land; that designation of funds is not shown in the accounting presented tonight; without the agreement with APC to relocate units, the Bayport Project would not have happened; the use of the Catellus funds could go a long way toward making units more affordable and serve the homeless. buncilmember/Commissioner Matarrese requested an Off Agenda Report in response to Mr. Biggs' comments. (05-159CC/05-018CIC) Joint Public Hearing to consider authorizing the City Manager/Executive Director to enter into a Disposition and Development Agreement with Alameda Entertainment Associates, L.P. , approval of the 33433 Report, and adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Alameda Theater, Cineplex and Parking Structure Project (State Clearinghouse #2004-122-042). (05-018A/CIC) Adoption of Resolution Approving and Authorizing Execution of a Disposition and Development Agreement Between the Community Improvement Commission and Alameda Entertainment Associates, L.P., and Approving Certain Mitigation Measures for the Project and Adopting a Mitigation Monitoring Program; and (05-159A/CC) Adoption of Resolution Approving and Authorizing Execution of a Disposition and Development Agreement Between the Community Improvement Commission and Alameda Entertainment Associates, L.P., and Adopting a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program. Continued to May 3, 2005. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Mayor/Chair Johnson adjourned the Special Joint Meeting at 8:06 p.m. Respectfully submit… | CityCouncil/2005-04-19.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-04-19.pdf,14 | CityCouncil | 2005-04-19 | 14 | APRIL 19, 2005 JOINT HOUSING AUTHORITY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS AND ALAMEDA PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY MINUTES PLACEHOLDER The April 19, 2005 Joint HABOC/APFA Meeting Minutes have not been approved. | CityCouncil/2005-04-19.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-04-21.pdf,1 | CityCouncil | 2005-04-21 | 1 | MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING THURSDAY - -APRIL 21, 2005- -4:00 P.M. Mayor Johnson convened the Special Meeting at 4:00 p.m. Roll Call - Present : Councilmembers Daysog, deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese, and Mayor Johnson - 5. Absent : None. The Special Meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider : (05-189) - ) Public Employment - Title: City Manager. Following the Closed Session, the Special Meeting was reconvened and Mayor Johnson announced that direction was given to the recruiter and no decision was made. Adjournment There being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the Special Meeting at 10:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger City Clerk The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act. Special Meeting Alameda City Council April 21, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-04-21.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-05-03.pdf,1 | CityCouncil | 2005-05-03 | 1 | MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING TUESDAY - - MAY 3, 2005 - -7:30 P.M. Mayor Johnson convened the regular meeting at 9:29 p.m. ROLL CALL - Present : Councilmembers Daysog, deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese and Mayor Johnson - 5. Absent : None. AGENDA CHANGES (05-196) Mayor Johnson addressed the Resolutions Appointing Members of the Golf Commission [paragraph no. 05-207, 05-207A, 05- 207B] after Special Orders of the Day PROCLAMATIONS, SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY AND ANNOUNCEMENTS (05-197) Proclamation declaring May as "Older Americans Month. " Mayor Johnson read and presented the proclamation to Don Oransky, President, Mastick Advisory Board. Mr. Oransky thanked the Council for the proclamation. (05-198) Update on the new main library project. The Project Manager gave a brief project update. Vice Mayor Gilmore commended the Project Manager and staff for keeping the project running smoothly by putting out many fires daily. CONSENT CALENDAR Councilmember Matarrese moved approval of the Consent Calendar. Vice Mayor Gilmore seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. [Items so adopted or enacted are indicated by an asterisk preceding the paragraph number. ] ( *05-199 - ) Minutes of the Regular City Council Meeting held on April 19, 2005 ; and the Special City Council Meeting held on April 21, 2005. Approved. (*05-200) Ratified bills in the amount of $ 2,201,788.60 Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 1 May 3, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-05-03.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-05-03.pdf,2 | CityCouncil | 2005-05-03 | 2 | (*05-201) Recommendation to authorize Call for Bids for Legal Advertising for the Fiscal Year ending June 30, 2006. Accepted. (*05-202) Recommendation to accept the Quarterly Investment Report for period ending March 31, 2005. Accepted. (*05-203) Recommendation to accept the Quarterly Financial Report for the period ending March 31, 2005 and approve third quarter budget adjustments. Accepted. (*05-204) Recommendation to set Hearing to establish Proposition 4 Limit for Fiscal Year 2005-06 for May 17, 2005. Accepted. (*05-205) Recommendation to accept the work of SpenCon Construction, Inc. for Repair of Portland Cement, Concrete Sidewalk, Curb, Gutter, Driveway and Minor Street Patching Phase 5, Fiscal Year 2004-05, No. P.W. 08-04-08. Accepted. ( *05-206) Recommendation to approve an Agreement with Alameda County to continue participation in the Alameda HOME Consortium and authorize the Acting City Manager to negotiate and execute necessary documents. Accepted. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS 05-207) - Resolution No. 13836, "Appointing Ray A. Gaul as a Member of the Golf Commission. Adopted. (05-207A) Resolution No. 13837, "Appointing Bill T. Schmitz as a Member of the Golf Commission. " Adopted. (05-207B) Resolution No. 13838, "Appointing Jane Sullwold as a Member of the Golf Commission. Adopted. Vice Mayor Gilmore moved adoption of the resolutions. Councilmember Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. The City Clerk administered the Oath and presented certificates of appointment to the Golf Commission members. (05-208 ) Ordinance No. 2940, "Reclassifying and Rezoning Certain Property within the City of Alameda by Amending Zoning Ordinance No. 1277, N.S., from R-5 (General Residential) Zoning District to C-C (Community Commercial) Zoning District, for that Property Located at 2507 Central Avenue at Everett Street. Finally passed. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 2 May 3, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-05-03.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-05-03.pdf,3 | CityCouncil | 2005-05-03 | 3 | Counci lmember Daysog moved final passage of the ordinance. Councilmember deHaan seconded the motion, which passed by unanimous voice vote - -5. (05-209) Recommendation to accept the West Alameda Neighborhood Improvement Concept Plan. The Community Programs and Housing Division Manager gave a Power Point presentation on the Plan. Mayor Johnson stated the Plan would make important changes to the area; requested staff to review ways to accelerate the Plan; stated that a member of the Housing Task Force Committee recommended that the Committee review the Plan, provide input, and delay the vote. Councilmember deHaan stated that the quality of life at the West End is important because of the high population density; the Boys' and Girls' Club brings positive steps to the area; funding sources are important; he is always concerned with transportation issues; the Transportation Commission needs to be engaged; requested to see more detail on the sources of estimates for varied activities; stated that he has no problem with delaying the acceptance of the Plan; inquired whether the Plan could be delayed. The Community Programs and Housing Division Manager responded there has been an extensive public comment process the draft plan was presented at a community meeting in February; Board and Commission input has been requested; there is no problem in delaying the acceptance; acceptance of the conceptual Plan is requested; different components would be brought back to Council at various times. Councilmember deHaan inquired whether the short-term, simple projects could be accomplished quickly. The Community Programs and Housing Division Manager responded in the affirmative; stated there is funding available for planting additional trees on an infill basis, and installation of trash receptacles at the Webster Street and Poggi Street corridor. Mayor Johnson inquired whether the trash receptacles would be selected by Public works. The Community Programs and Housing Division Manager responded that BMS Design would select the trash r… | CityCouncil/2005-05-03.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-05-03.pdf,4 | CityCouncil | 2005-05-03 | 4 | the Plan was not broader. The Community Programs and Housing Division Manager responded the census tract has the highest concentration of minorities and low Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 4 May 3, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-05-03.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-05-03.pdf,5 | CityCouncil | 2005-05-03 | 5 | income. the priority was to work with residents to bring more services into the neighborhood using Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds; residents voiced concern about not being able to walk freely through the neighborhood because of the Harbor Island Apartment and Chipman Middle School the area to the south is not a low to moderate income neighborhood. Councilmember Daysog stated the Plan could be used as a tool to identify City resources that could be used to improve neighborhoods; the sidewalks are in horrible condition; the paving on Santa Clara Avenue is odd. Mayor Johnson stated the name of the Plan can be changed to be more specific; there are sidewalk, street, tree, and lighting issues everywhere in the Cityi there is nothing more odd than the paving on Gibbons Drive; increased sidewalk maintenance funding and more aggressive repair schedules need to be reviewed; CDBG funds could not be used if the Plan was expanded and could result in a thirty- year Plan instead of a ten-year Plan; that she does not have a problem with delaying acceptance until the Housing Task Force Committee report is received; suggested direction be provided to rename the Plan. Councilmember deHaan stated expanding the scope cannot be done with the existing funding; the West End could be reviewed further at a later date; that he is uncertain what the impact would be in deferring acceptance until after the Housing Task Force Committee review. Mayor Johnson inquired whether there are projects that are ready to move forward; stated the Plan could be accepted with direction to bring the matter back to Council after receiving the Housing Task Force Committee report. The Community Programs and Housing Division Manager responded that tree, trash can, and bus shelter locations could begin to be determined; staff could synchronize with the Housing Task Force Committee and report back to Council. the Plan provides a vision of the future and encourages residents to participate and not allow development which might become an impediment … | CityCouncil/2005-05-03.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-05-03.pdf,6 | CityCouncil | 2005-05-03 | 6 | infrastructure and repairs; Public Works would provide an infrastructure report at the next City Council Meeting; Council would receive a model showing the performance of the budget over a period of ten years in late July or early August reports will outline what needs to be done to correct problems i funding recommendations can be discussed. Councilmember Daysog stated that he would not be on the Council if not for the support of residents south of Pacific Avenue and Lincoln Avenue; many people needed to sell their homes with the Base closure; the neighborhood faces a lot of development Council would be missing an opportunity if there is no coordination with activities occurring north of Pacific Avenue and Lincoln Avenue. Councilmember Matarrese moved approval of accepting the Plan, modifying the title to reflect the Plan's intent to target the most needy census tract in the City and requiring that the Plan return to Council coinciding with the Task Force report to revise concepts in the Plan if needed. Councilmember deHaan stated that there is $500,000 in resources that can go towards activities right away; going forward and accepting the Plan is prudent; the elements within the first and third year are very straightforward. Councilmember deHaan seconded the motion. Under discussion, Mayor Johnson stated that she is very concerned with the infrastructure everywhere in Alameda; the sidewalks and streets are not in the same condition as a few years agoi Council needs to address the issues and set priorities on the infrastructure deficit. Councilmember Daysog stated re-designating the name is important; he is fine with remaining north of Pacific Avenue and Lincoln Avenue if the Plan is not opened up to Harbor Island Task Force. On the call for the question, the motion carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (05-210) Wilbur Richards, Alameda, complimented the Council on the quality of City services. (05-211) Michael John Torrey, Alameda, stated the President is proposing to put oil refi… | CityCouncil/2005-05-03.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-05-03.pdf,7 | CityCouncil | 2005-05-03 | 7 | (05-212 - ) Rob Siltanen, Alameda, submitted a letter requesting that the Alameda Point vision include sensible traffic solutions, middle class housing, and a small town Alameda feel. (05-213) - Jon Spangler, Cross Alameda Trail Steering Committee, stated that Saturday, June 4, is National Trails Day there will be a trail walk between Main Street and Webster Street. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS (05-214) Vice Mayor Gilmore stated that she and Councilmember deHaan attended the Association of Bay Area Government conference regarding casinos last week; there appears to be a one size fits all negotiation strategy there is no recognition of the obvious differences between urban and rural casinos; the Governor' S negotiator promised that the Governor would take a hard look at Indian tribes looking to have land restored; the negotiator was not aware of anything pertaining to the Koi proposal on Swan Way; stated tribal lobbying efforts have not made it all the way up the ladder. ( 05-215 ) Councilmember Matarrese stated that there is a special June election for a Measure A parcel tax; the tax would allow the School District to extend the current parcel tax; requested that Council give direction to place the matter on the next City Council meeting agenda; stated there is a gap in School District funding a County Financial Advisor would be required if the School District slips into financial disarray; the City does not need a County person advising how money is spent. (05-216) ouncilmember deHaan stated that he is concerned that the reservation shopping battle has just begun; some cities want to move forward with casinos because of economic woes. (05-217) Councilmember deHaan requested staff to review costs and funding sources to centralize City administration particularly the Public Works and Development Services Departments. Mayor Johnson stated that she would support the idea. Councilmember Matarrese stated that he assumed that the matter would be addressed with the budget and the ten-year outlook. (05-218 ) Mayor Johnson requ… | CityCouncil/2005-05-03.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-05-03.pdf,8 | CityCouncil | 2005-05-03 | 8 | ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the Regular Meeting at 10:38 p.m. Respectfully Submitted, Lara Weisiger City Clerk The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 8 May 3, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-05-03.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-05-03.pdf,9 | CityCouncil | 2005-05-03 | 9 | MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING TUESDAY - -MAY 3, 2005- -5:30 P. M. Mayor Johnson convened the Special Meeting at 5:45 p.m. Roll Call - Present : Councilmembers Daysog, deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese, and Mayor Johnson - 5. Absent : None. The Special Meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider : (05-190) Public Employee Performance Evaluation; Title: City Attorney (05-191) - Worker's Compensation Claim; Claimant : James MacKey Agency Claimed Against City of Alameda. (05-192) Conference with Labor Negotiators; Agency Negotiators Human Resources Director and Craig Jory; Employee Organizations : International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers ( IBEW) and Management and Confidential Employees Association (MCEA) . Following the Closed Session, the Special Meeting was reconvened and Mayor Johnson announced that regarding Public Employee Performance Evaluation, the Council discussed the City Attorney's performance; regarding Worker's Compensation Claim, the Council gave instructions to Legal Counsel: and regarding Conference with Labor Negotiators, the Council gave instructions to Labor Negotiators. Adjournment There being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the Special Meeting at 7:45 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger City Clerk The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act. Special Meeting Alameda City Council May 3, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-05-03.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-05-03.pdf,10 | CityCouncil | 2005-05-03 | 10 | MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY - - MAY 3, 2005 - - - 7:05 P.M. Chair Johnson convened the Special Meeting at 7:45 p.m. Roll Call - Present : Commissioners Daysog, deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese and Chair Johnson - 5. Absent : None. The Special Meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider: (05-019) Conference with Legal Counsel - Anticipated Litigation; Initiation of litigation pursuant to subdivision (c) of Section 54956.91 Number of cases: One. Following the Closed Session, the Special Meeting was reconvened and Chair Johnson announced that the Commission obtained briefing from staff and Legal Counsel and gave direction. Adjournment There being no further business, Chair Johnson adjourned the Special Meeting at 8:00 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger Secretary, Community Improvement Commission The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act. Special Meeting Community Improvement Commission May 3, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-05-03.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-05-03.pdf,11 | CityCouncil | 2005-05-03 | 11 | MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL JOINT CITY COUNCIL AND COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY - - - MAY 3, 2005 - - - 7:25 P.M. . Mayor/Chair Johnson convened the Special Joint meeting at 8:08 p.m. Councilmember/Commissioner Matarrese led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL - Present : Councilmembers/Commissioners Daysog, deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese, and Mayor/Chair Johnson - 5. Absent : None. MINUTES (05-193CC/05-020CIC) Minutes of the Special Joint City Council and Community Improvement Commission Meeting held on April 19, 2005. Approved. Councilmember/Commissioner Daysog moved approval of the minutes. Councilmember/Commissioner deHaan seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. AGENDA ITEMS (05-194CC/05-021CIC) Joint Public Hearing to consider authorizing the City Manager/Executive Director to enter into a Disposition and Development Agreement with Alameda Entertainment Associates, L.P. , approval of the 33433 Report, and adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Alameda Theater, Cineplex and Parking Structure Project (State Clearinghouse #2004-122-042) ; (05-194A/CC) Resolution No. 13834, "Approving and Authorizing Execution of a Disposition and Development Agreement Between the Community Improvement Commission and Alameda Entertainment Associates, L.P., and Adopting a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program. Adopted; and (05-021A/CIC) Resolution No. 05-134, "Approving and Authorizing Execution of a Disposition and Development Agreement Between the Community Improvement Commission and Alameda Entertainment Associates, L.P., Approving Certain Mitigation Measures for the Project, and Adopting a Mitigation Monitoring Program. " Adopted. The Business Development Division Manager gave a Power Point presentation. Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council and 1 Community Improvement Commission May 3, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-05-03.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-05-03.pdf,12 | CityCouncil | 2005-05-03 | 12 | The Development Services Director provided a brief update on the project. Councilmember/Commissioner deHaan inquired about the traffic remediation requirements. The Development Services Director responded there was one major traffic improvement to upgrade a signal at Santa Clara Avenue and Oak Street; there are struggles with traffic improvements at the intersection; modifications need to be made to all of the equipment at the intersection because the equipment is old; the estimate to do the work is about $100,000; the design plan will provide a nice public environment to half the block of Oak Street by extending the public sidewalk from eight feet to fourteen feet and providing garage and theatre outside lighting to accommodate people, cars and bicycles entering and exiting the garage. Councilmember/Commissioner deHaan inquired whether determining the scope is an on-going process, to which the Development Services Director responded in the affirmative. Mayor/Chair Johnson opened the public portion of the Hearing. Proponents: Christopher Buckley, Alameda Architectural Preservation Society; Susan Decker, Alameda; Lars Hanson, Park Street Business Association (PSBA) i Pauline Kelly; Barbara Marchand, Alameda Civic Light Opera; Cathy Leong, Alameda Chamber of Commerce; Mike Corbett, Harsch Investments and Robb Ratto, PSBA. Opponents: Gary McAfee, Alameda; Jennifer Van Airsdale, Alameda; Joan Steber, Alameda; John McNulty, Alameda John F. Ruake; Zach Kaplan, Alameda; and Lucy Gigli, Bike Alameda (submitted handout) . Expressed concern with bike safety on Central Avenue between Oak and Walnut Streets: Robert Van de Walle, Alameda; Andy Cutright, Alameda; Alameda; Jon Spangler, Alameda; Mark Haskett; and Jillian Saxty, Alameda. There being no further speakers, Mayor/Chair Johnson closed the public portion of the Hearing. louncilmember/Commissioner deHaan stated that the Council should follow through with the commitment to reconfigure the parking [ on Central Avenue between Oak and Walnut Streets) to the original parall… | CityCouncil/2005-05-03.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-05-03.pdf,13 | CityCouncil | 2005-05-03 | 13 | was created because of the new gymnasium, City Hall moving into the east wing of the high school, and the Library moving into the middle wing of the high school; parking was increased from 32 spaces to 58 spaces; Council approved an ordinance modification for diagonal parking; the Recreation and Park Department is the only part of City Hall remaining in the east wing and will be moving out within a month; the Library is projected to move out within 17 or 18 months. much of the parking demand will be eliminated; the parking garage construction provides an opportunity to move back to parallel parking; a parking plan would need to be brought back to Council for approval. Vice layor/Commissioner Gilmore stated that she has great sympathy for bicyclists; a large segment of the youth population will either ride bikes or take the bus to the theatre. Councilmember/Commissioner deHaan stated the dollar value of parking spaces is understood now. Mayor/Chair Johnson stated that the parking structure would solve a lot of the parking problems. louncilmember/Commissioner Daysog stated that the project is good for all of Alameda, especially the youth. louncilmember/Commissioner Matarrese stated the theatre project is important for the whole City; dollars would be kept in town; the historic theatre will rot if the project does not move forward. Vice Mayor Gilmore moved adoption of the Resolution Approving and Authorizing Execution of a Disposition and Development Agreement Between the Community Improvement Commission and Alameda Entertainment Associates, L.P., and Adopting a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program [paragraph no. 05- 194CC]. Councilmember deHaan seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. Commissioner Matarrese moved adoption of the Resolution Approving and Authorizing Execution of a Disposition and Development Agreement Between the Community Improvement Commission and Alameda Entertainment Associates, L.P., Approving Certain Mitigation Measures for the Project, and Ad… | CityCouncil/2005-05-03.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-05-03.pdf,14 | CityCouncil | 2005-05-03 | 14 | voice vote - 5. Mayor/Chair Johnson directed staff to bring the Central Avenue bike lane issue back to Council. (05-022CIC) Resolution No. 05-135, "Approving and Authorizing Payment of Certain Public Improvements to the Park Street and Otis Drive Intersection. Adopted; and (05-195CC) Resolution No. 13835, "Approving and Authorizing Execution of a Public Improvements Construction Agreement Between the City and Harsch Investment Corporation. Adopted. Councilmember/Commissioner Matarrese stated the project is critical to Alameda's economic engine. Councilmember/Commissioner Matarrese moved adoption of the resolutions. Councilmember/Commissioner Daysog seconded the motion. Under discussion, Councilmember/Commissioner deHaan inquired what type of funding would be used. The Development Services Director responded that staff recommends using Community Improvement Commission funds for the project; the primary benefit finding is required because the intersection is just outside the formal boundaries of a redevelopment project area; the improvements are tied to the form and function of the rest of the redevelopment project area; Redevelopment Law has a provision that recognizes that there are projects that may be outside the boundaries which are a primary benefit to the function of the rest of the project area. Councilmember/Commissioner deHaan inquired whether other funding sources were considered. The Development Services Director responded that there was a discussion about using some sales tax dollars from the new South Shore Shopping Center development. Councilmember/Commissioner deHaan inquired how the two-third, one- third cost sharing was derived. The Development Services Director responded that the formula was a result of negotiations with the developer ; there was a dispute over the assignment of the impact of the intersection; the developer Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council and 4 Community Improvement Commission May 3, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-05-03.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-05-03.pdf,15 | CityCouncil | 2005-05-03 | 15 | felt that he should not be responsible for making all the improvements to the intersection; traffic modeling shows that there are other background projects not yet developed, but approved, which would also impact the intersection; the negotiation used the actual number of trips coming off the project and the impact on the intersection. Councilmember/Commission deHaan stated that there might be further requirements for further entitlements; inquired what the affect would be on the traffic remediation. The Development Services Director responded that the entitlements received for the project anticipate 112,000 square feet of new retail square footage at the South Shore Shopping Center and would likely increase; circulation issues related to the gas station would need to be examined independently additional improvements can always be made; a need for further improvements is anticipated by 2020. Councilmember/Commissioner deHaan stated that he was concerned that the same [ redevelopment funds are being used for many issues. inquired whether there is a detailed breakdown of where redevelopment funding stands. The Development Services Director responded that there are sufficient funds; anticipated improvements can be made with existing tax increments and not bonds. The Acting City Manager stated that at the next meeting staff would provide a Community Improvement Commission multi-year budget to show how much money remains. Councilmember/Commissioner Matarrese stated the project is very important the rationale and logic fits into the true meaning of redevelopment that he defends the approach of taking redevelopment funds for the Library project; his motion to adopt the resolutions stands. Councilmember/Commissioner Daysog stated the investment is necessary if the money means that the City would have stores such as Borders or Chicos. Mayor/Chair Johnson stated that the City needs to be frugal with redevelopment money but also needs to use the money wisely; moving forward with projects that help continue the redevelopment… | CityCouncil/2005-05-03.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-05-03.pdf,16 | CityCouncil | 2005-05-03 | 16 | Counci lmember/Commissioner deHaan stated that he is comfortable with delaying other major retail developments to allow South Shore Shopping Center to mature; he supports and looks forward to the renewed Center, but has concerns with funding. Commissioner Matarrese moved adoption of the Resolution Approving and Authorizing Payment of Certain Public Improvements to the Park Street and Otis Drive Intersection [paragraph no. 05-022CIC]. Commissioner deHaan seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. Councilmember Matarrese moved adoption of the Resolution Approving and Authorizing Execution of a Public Improvements Construction Agreement Between the City and Harsch Investment Corporation [paragraph no. 05-195CC]. Councilmember Daysog seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. (05-023CIC) Recommendation to approve an Amended Contract with Architectural Resources Group, Inc. by increasing the Contract amount an additional $44,275 to provide additional pre-planning services for the proposed Alameda Theatre Project. Commissioner Daysog moved approval of the staff recommendation. Commissioner deHaan seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Mayor/Chair Johnson adjourned the Special Meeting at 9:28 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger, City Clerk Secretary, Community Improvement Commission The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act. Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council and 6 Community Improvement Commission May 3, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-05-03.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-05-04.pdf,1 | CityCouncil | 2005-05-04 | 1 | MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING WEDNESDAY -MAY 4, 2005- - - 4:00 P.M. (05-219) - A Special Meeting was called to allow the Council to attend a Public Utilities Board meeting. Lara Weisiger, City Clerk The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act. Special Meeting Alameda City Council May 4, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-05-04.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-05-04.pdf,2 | CityCouncil | 2005-05-04 | 2 | MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING WEDNESDAY- -MAY 4, 2005- -5:00 P.M. Mayor Johnson convened the Special Meeting at 5:00 p.m. Roll Call - Present : Councilmembers Daysog, deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese, and Mayor Johnson - 5. Absent : None. The Special Meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider : (05-220) Public Employment; Title: City Manager. Following the Closed Session, the Special Meeting was reconvened and Mayor Johnson announced that Council gave direction to the recruiter. Adjournment There being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the Special Meeting at 9:45 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger City Clerk The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act. Special Meeting Alameda City Council May 4, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-05-04.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-05-07.pdf,1 | CityCouncil | 2005-05-07 | 1 | MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING TUESDAY - MAY 7, 2005 - - - 9:30 A.M. (05-221) - A Special Meeting was called to allow the Council to attend an Alameda Point Community Workshop. Lara Weisiger, City Clerk The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act. Special Meeting Alameda City Council May 7, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-05-07.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-05-10.pdf,1 | CityCouncil | 2005-05-10 | 1 | MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING TUESDAY - - - MAY 10, 2005 - 6:30 P.M. (05-222) - A Special Meeting was called to allow the Council to attend a Town Hall Meeting on the Harbor Bay Ferry service. Lara Weisiger, City Clerk The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act. Special Meeting Alameda City Council May 10, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-05-10.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-05-12.pdf,1 | CityCouncil | 2005-05-12 | 1 | MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING THURSDAY - -MAY 12, 2005- -5:00 P.M. Mayor Johnson convened the Special Meeting at 5:10 p.m. ROLL CALL - Present : Councilmembers Daysog, deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese and Mayor Johnson - 5. [Note: Councilmember Matarrese arrived at 6:30 p.m. ] Absent : None. Agenda Items (05-223) Recommendation to approve an Agreement with Meyers, Nave, Riback, Silver and Wilson for consultation services on City Attorney contract negotiations. Councilmember deHaan inquired what the cost and projected hours would be for the consultation services. Mayor Johnson responded the cost and projected hours would depend upon what the Council requests. Councilmember deHaan inquired what was the hourly rate, to which the Assistant City Attorney responded $250. Councilmember deHaan inquired whether $250 per hour was the norm, to which the Assistant City Attorney responded the rate was not outside the norm and was within the realm of legal services costs today. Mayor Johnson stated that she expected the rate to be higher. Vice Mayor Gilmore stated that she thought the rate would be in the $300 to $350 per hour range. Mayor Johnson stated that the rate is reasonable; that there are no fixed duties. The Acting City Manager stated that the Council could provide the outside attorney with a scope of work and inquire how many hours would be anticipated. Councilmember deHaan inquired whether there was a charge for today's meeting with the outside attorney, to which the Mayor responded in the affirmative. Special Meeting Alameda City Council 1 May 12, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-05-12.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-05-12.pdf,2 | CityCouncil | 2005-05-12 | 2 | Councilmember Daysog inquired what the outside attorney could do that the Council could not do. Mayor Johnson stated that the Council does not provide attorney services the City Attorney would have a conflict of interest in advising the Council on her contract. Councilmember deHaan moved approval the recommendation predicated on further discussion of the scope of work in closed session. Vice Mayor Gilmore seconded the motion. Under discussion, Councilmember Daysog stated that a discreet number of issues are of concern; that he was not clear on the conflict. Mayor Johnson stated there would be a conflict if there are legal issues; requested further explanation from the Assistant City Attorney. The Assistant City Attorney stated if Council asks a legal question regarding interpretation of any provision of the City Attorney' S contract or requests the contract be approved as to form, there would be a conflict; the City Attorney would not be able to provide information [legal advice] another attorney's services would be necessary. Mayor Johnson noted that Council has to hire an attorney to sign [approve the form of ] the City Attorney's contract. Councilmember Daysog stated that the City of Oakland requested the City of San Francisco to comment on whether the Oakland City Attorney position should be an elected position. Councilmember deHaan stated the Council needs to understand and clean up the mechanisms of the contract, and ensure the contract language is legal. Mayor Johnson stated when the contract has been changed on a routine basis, outside attorneys have signed [approved the form of ] the contract without communicating with the Council, which is not a very good procedure. Councilmember deHaan stated that the Council is requesting more detailed information. Vice Mayor Gilmore stated that the Council is trying to determine the history of the current situation and review salary scales; an Special Meeting Alameda City Council 2 May 12, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-05-12.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-05-12.pdf,3 | CityCouncil | 2005-05-12 | 3 | outside attorney would need to sign off on [approve as to form] the contract if Council wanted to give the City Attorney a raise. Mayor Johnson stated the entire contract should be reviewed; the Council needs to know whether a new contract or an addendum to the existing contract would be needed if the Council wanted to give the City Attorney a raise. Councilmember deHaan stated that he did not have a problem with proceeding. Councilmember Daysog stated that he would like to protect the Council's bargaining prerogative; there could be some matters of interpretation in the course of bargaining; inquired whether the outside attorney would be a go-between for the Council. Mayor Johnson responded the Council would define the outside attorney's role. The Assistant City Attorney stated that the City Attorney directly represents the Council; the proposed Agreement [with Meyers, Nave, Riback, Silver and Wilson for consultation services] would be executed by the City Attorney's office. Mayor Johnson inquired whether the Assistant City Attorney had a copy of the Agreement. The Assistant City Attorney responded in the affirmative; stated only the City Attorney can hire outside attorneys under the City Charter. Councilmember Daysog stated that the meeting tonight is the result of a review of the City Attorney's budget; that he wants to process to maintain the Council's prerogative. Mayor Johnson stated that the Council maintains all prerogatives and would not give up anything. Councilmember Daysog noted an outside attorney involved could have a possible conflict; stated that he does not want an outside attorney to encroach on budget issues. Vice Mayor Gilmore stated that she did not realize that an Agreement was already drafted; that she does not want to agree to something that she has not reviewed. Mayor Johnson stated that she would like to review the scope of work in the Agreement inquired who drafted the Agreement. Special Meeting Alameda City Council 3 May 12, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-05-12.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-05-12.pdf,4 | CityCouncil | 2005-05-12 | 4 | The Assistant City Attorney responded Mr. Hartinger drafted the Agreement. Vice Mayor Gilmore stated that she thought that the Council was meeting to agree to hire an outside attorney and that the scope of work would be determined later; that she does not want her second to the motion to be considered as an approval of the Agreement. Mayor Johnson stated that the Council should not sign an Agreement without reviewing the scope of work; inquired whether the Council could make a motion to authorize the City Attorney to sign the Agreement hiring the outside attorney to work with the Council and finalize the Agreement when the scope of work is determined. Councilmember deHaan inquired whether the motion could be made in open or closed session, to which the Assistant City Attorney responded the motion must be made in open session. Councilmember Daysog stated that the scope of work would still need to come back to the Council. The Assistant City Attorney stated that the Council's agenda is to consider hiring an outside attorney to help with labor negotiations regarding the City Attorney's contract; the outside attorney would be the labor negotiator in closed session; the City Attorney would have a direct conflict in advising the Council on interpretations regarding her contract. Vice Mayor Gilmore stated that the scope is in paragraph 1 of Mr. Hartinger's letter [proposed Agreement]. The Assistant City Attorney stated that the scope of service is very narrow. Mayor Johnson stated that the scope can always be changed and looks fine; the Council could have the outside attorney do as little or as much as requested. The Assistant City Attorney stated retainers are not normally paid to outside counsel. Mayor Johnson suggested the retainer and the late payment provisions be removed; stated the Agreement should be left as is to allow the Council flexibility; outside counsel would not perform any services the Council does not want. Vice Mayor Gilmore stated that she would like Mr. Hartinger to Special Meeting Alameda City Coun… | CityCouncil/2005-05-12.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-05-12.pdf,5 | CityCouncil | 2005-05-12 | 5 | review all documents [City Attorney contract and amendments) provide a history of the current situation, and advise the Council regarding moving forward with yearly amendments or bundling all the previous amendments into one contract. Mayor Johnson stated that her first intention is to get legal advice. Councilmember Daysog stated that he would like to begin negotiations with the City Attorney first. Mayor Johnson stated that negotiations cannot be initiated because the Council needs legal advice. Councilmember Daysog stated outside counsel might not be necessary ; if issues were not resolved during negotiations, then interpretation would be needed. Mayor Johnson stated that she is not comfortable with initiating negotiations until there is a better understanding of the contract. ; inquired whether the retainer and late payment provisions could be removed from the Agreement. Mr. Hartinger responded in the affirmative. Councilmember Daysog stated negotiating directly with the City Attorney should be the Council's prerogative; inquired whether Mr. Hartinger had any comment on the Council requesting his assistance on interpreting aspects of the negotiations. Mr. Hartinger stated the matter should be discussed at the right time; direction should be given in closed session. Councilmember deHaan moved to approval of the Agreement, with the modifications to remove the retainer and late payment provisions. Mayor Johnson inquired whether the Council is giving up any prerogative by entering into the Agreement, to which Mr. Hartinger responded in the negative. Councilmember Daysog inquired what happens when there is a conflict of interpretations. Mr. Hartinger responded Council should trust the [outside] attorneys it hires or seek another opinion and discharge the attorney. Mayor Johnson stated the ultimate way to settle legal disputes is Special Meeting Alameda City Council 5 May 12, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-05-12.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-05-12.pdf,6 | CityCouncil | 2005-05-12 | 6 | to go through the courts; that she hopes that the Council would not get into said situation. Councilmember Daysog stated that the vote might take the Council to unintended destinations. Vice Mayor Gilmore concurred with Councilmember Daysog but stated the matter could be discussed in closed session. Mayor Johnson stated that the Council has complete control. Councilmember deHaan inquired whether the language should be clarified to: "advising and/or representing the City Council. " Mayor Johnson suggested the language in the scope remain as is, except for the addition of "as directed by the Council" at the end. Councilmember Daysog inquired what would fall within "additional matters" in the scope of engagement. Mr. Hartinger responded "additional matters" is a catchall phrase if the Council requested him to do something else. Councilmember deHaan stated the Agreement would not have to be reopened to have Mr. Hartinger do something else. Vice Mayor Gilmore seconded the modified motion [to approve the Agreement, with modifications to remove the retainer and late payment provisions], which carried by the following voice vote: Ayes : Councilmembers deHaan and Gilmore, and Mayor Johnson - 3. Noes : Councilmember Daysog - 1. [Absent Councilmember Matarrese - 1. ] The Assistant City Attorney stated that the City Attorney hires all attorneys under the City Charter the City Attorney is hiring the outside attorney to advise the Council regarding interpretation of her contract. Mayor Johnson inquired whether the Council is authorizing the City Attorney to sign the Agreement as discussed and whether the outside attorney would work for the Council. The Assistant City Attorney responded that the outside attorney would not work for the Council; the City Attorney controls all legal counsel under the City Charter; the City Attorney is on the hook for the legal advice given. Special Meeting Alameda City Council 6 May 12, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-05-12.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-05-12.pdf,7 | CityCouncil | 2005-05-12 | 7 | Mayor Johnson stated that she is not sure the Council needs legal advice on hiring an attorney; that she does not agree that the City Attorney has control over what the outside attorney would do. The Assistant City Attorney stated that the City Attorney would hire the outside attorney to interpret the City Attorney' S contract. Mayor Johnson stated that the Council has directed the City Attorney to sign the Agreement with changes; inquired whether there would be a problem. The Assistant City Attorney stated any additional matters for which the Council requests [outside counsel's services would have to go through the City Attorney. Mayor Johnson inquired whether the Assistant City Attorney had any problem with the modified Agreement that the Council directed the City Attorney to sign. Councilmember Daysog stated Mr. Hartinger's letter [Agreement ] is addressed to the City Attorney; the word "you" refers to the City Attorney. Mayor Johnson stated that the second "you" in paragraph 1 refers to the City Council; the Council needs to determine Mr. Hartinger's intention; the City Attorney would have a conflict of interest if the outside attorney working for the Council had to go to the City Attorney for advice. The Assistant City Attorney stated that the scope is very narrow; the Council would need to stay within the scope. Mayor Johnson inquired whether "you" in the sentence "provide legal services for additional matters that you request... refers to the Council or City Attorney. Mr. Hartinger stated the Agreement is addressed to the City Attorney; the City Attorney is the conduit through which retention would occur. * Mayor Johnson called a recess at 5:47 p.m. and reconvened the Special Meeting at 6:30 p.m. (05-224) - Adjournment to Closed Session to consider : Conference with Labor Negotiators Agency Negotiators Arthur Hartinger of Special Meeting Alameda City Council 7 May 12, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-05-12.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-05-12.pdf,8 | CityCouncil | 2005-05-12 | 8 | Meyers, Nave, Riback Silver and Wilson; Employee : City Attorney. Following the Closed Session, the Special Meeting was reconvened and Mayor Johnson announced that the Council discussed the City Attorney contract and gave direction to the Negotiator. Adjournment There being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the Special Meeting at 7:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger City Clerk The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act. Special Meeting Alameda City Council 8 May 12, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-05-12.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-05-17.pdf,1 | CityCouncil | 2005-05-17 | 1 | MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING TUESDAY - - MAY 17, 2005 - - 7:30 P.M. Mayor Johnson convened the regular meeting at 8:15 p.m. ROLL CALL - Present : Councilmembers Daysog, deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese and Mayor Johnson - 5. Absent : None. AGENDA CHANGES (05-227) Mayor Johnson announced that the Resolution Declaring Support for Measure A [paragraph no. 05-228] would be addressed first; and next, the Resolution Recognizing the Selection of the City of Wuxi, China as Alameda's Friendship City [paragraph no. 05- 229] would be addressed along with the welcome and presentation honoring Friendship City delegation [paragraph no. 05-229A]. REGULAR AGENDA ITEM (05-228) Resolution No. 13939, "Declaring Support for Measure A, Alameda Unified School District Parcel Tax Measure. Adopted. Michael McMahon, School Board President, stated voters approved a $109 parcel tax in 2001, which gave the schools an additional $1. 8 million; the Board is requesting that the Council adopt a resolution supporting expansion of the tax for the next seven years. Amy Costa, District Director for Senator Don Perata, stated Senator Perata could not be present due to budget negotiations; conveyed Senator Perata's support for Measure A; State funding has been volatile; Measure A would provide funding stability to the school district. Richard Heaps, Alameda Parent Teacher Association (PTA) Council President and 2001 Measure A Oversight Committee Member, stated Measure A has the support of the PTA Council; the Oversight Committee has seen the results of reduced class sizes and other programs supported by the 2001 Measure A funding, and would like to see the funding continue and expand. Ron Mooney, Alamedans for Better Schools Co-Chair, urged adoption of the resolution; thanked the Councilmembers for their individual support; stated school funding is set by the State; the Measure provides funding that the District uses to support critically important programs noted an argument was not filed against the Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 1 Ma… | CityCouncil/2005-05-17.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-05-17.pdf,2 | CityCouncil | 2005-05-17 | 2 | Measure. Councilmember Matarrese moved adoption of the resolution. Councilmember Matarrese stated the schools have an impact on the whole City; the funding will keep programs in place and forestall any possibility of outside control, which would consist of the County or State telling Alameda how to run its school district. Vice Mayor Gilmore stated kids are owed a good, quality education; the City cannot count on the State to provide funding. Councilmember Daysog stated the resolution is of vital interest to the City. Councilmember Daysog seconded the motion. Under discussion, Councilmember deHaan stated the quality of education is one of the most important things in the City. Mayor Johnson stated schools would face cuts if the Measure does not pass Senator Perata is trying to equalize State funding of education; school facilities in other communities are higher quality; the Alameda Unified School District has done an excellent job with the amount of funding it receives; she was impressed with the teacher and students when she visited a second grade class at Miller School. On the call for the question, the motion carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. SPECIAL ORDER OF THE DAY AND REGULAR AGENDA ITEM (05-229) Welcome and presentation honoring Friendship City delegation from Wuxi, China; and (05-229A) Resolution No. 13940, "Recognizing the Selection of the City of Wuxi, China as Alameda's Friendship City and Authorizing the Mayor to Sign a Memorandum of Understanding Regarding the Formulation and Implementation of Sister City Relations. Adopted. Jim Franz and Stuart Chan of the Social Service Human Relations Board introduced interpreter Tu Zhongliang, Deputy Director, Wuxi Municipal Foreign Affairs Office, who introduced the Wuxi delegation: Wang Zhuping, Vice Chairman, Chinese People's Political Consultative Conference (CPPCC) ; Zhou Yonggeng, Secretary General CPPCC; Bian He, Deputy Secretary General CPPCC; and Jiang Guoliang, Director of Study, Culture and History CPPCC. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 2 May … | CityCouncil/2005-05-17.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-05-17.pdf,3 | CityCouncil | 2005-05-17 | 3 | Mayor Johnson introduced the Friends of Wuxi Committee : Nancy Li, Chair; Hans Wong, Vice-Chair; and Otto Huang, Honorary Chair. Mayor Johnson read the resolution, which the translator also read in Chinese. Councilmember Matarrese moved adoption of the resolution. Vice Mayor Gilmore seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. Mayor Johnson and Wang Zhuping signed the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) . Mr. Zhuping stated he is happy to sign the MOU to establish sister City relations with Alameda and hopes relationships will develop further. Mayor Johnson stated the entire community is proud to be moving forward with the Sister City relationship, particularly residents of Chinese heritage and ancestry. The delegation presented gifts to the City. Mayor Johnson presented a pewter plate with the City seal. CONSENT CALENDAR Mayor Johnson announced that the recommendation to authorize installation of an All-Way Stop Control [paragraph no. 5-235 ] was removed from the Consent Calendar for discussion. Councilmember Matarrese moved approval of the remainder of the Consent Calendar. Councilmember deHaan seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. [Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk preceding the paragraph number. . ] ( * 05-230 - ) Minutes of the Special and Regular City Council Meetings held on May 3, 2005 and the Special City Council Meeting held on May 4, 2005. Approved. ( * 05-231) - Ratified bills in the amount of $3,161,657.93. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 3 May 17, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-05-17.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-05-17.pdf,4 | CityCouncil | 2005-05-17 | 4 | (*05-232) Recommendation to accept Quarterly Sales Tax Report for the Period Ending March 31, 2005 for sales transactions in the Fourth Calendar Quarter of 2005. Accepted. ( *05-233) Recommendation to adopt Specifications and authorize Call for Bids for one animal control vehicle. Accepted. (*05-234) Recommendation to adopt Plans and Specifications and authorize Call for Bids for Cyclic Sewer Repair Project, Phase 4, No. P.W. 05-03-11. Accepted. (05-235) Recommendation to authorize installation of an All-Way - Stop Control at the intersection of Santa Clara Avenue and Sherman Street. Don Patterson, Alameda, stated that he opposes the four-way stop sign; the Transportation Technical Team (TTT) did not address the real problem of why Sherman Street is operating as a major thoroughfare; the General Plan Traffic Element's goal and intent is to have a transportation plan with traffic controls and techniques that direct and keep traffic on major streets; questioned how the City can make decisions without the advice of a professional traffic engineer on staff; stated said position has been vacant since October 2003; urged Council to direct the Acting City Manager to hire a traffic engineer suggested the application be withdrawn; noted the individual who filed the application has not participated in any of the public hearings and must not be very serious about the request stated the stop sign should only be addressed in the context of a total transportation plan, not a band-aid approach that would only exacerbate the problem by moving traffic faster along Sherman Street. Stanton Scott, Alameda, stated that he has witnessed many accidents at the intersection; increased traffic has become more aggressive; that he supports some form of traffic controls; stop signs would be good. Mary Amen, Alameda, stated that she represents a group of Santa Clara Avenue residents who are opposed to the stop sign; she gathered signatures in the four blocks directly affected; the residents would like the City to implement traffic calming dev… | CityCouncil/2005-05-17.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-05-17.pdf,5 | CityCouncil | 2005-05-17 | 5 | Department is called to ticket cars parked in red zones at all corners of the intersection on a daily basis; submitted photographs of cars parked in the red zone. Kathy Gardner, Alameda, stated the intersection does not have cross walks; drivers on Santa Clara Avenue do not stop for pedestrians there should be a stoplight, not a stop sign, at the intersection; drivers on Sherman Street cannot see traffic on Santa Clara Avenue something needs to be done; there have been multiple accidents an all-way stop sign is not the best solution; crosswalks and pressure sensitive stoplights should be installed. The Public Works Director stated the intersection meets the traffic volume warrant and accident warrant; the TTT recognized that the stop sign would impact residents; Council is being requested to approve the all-way stop because it is the best short-term way to address the traffic operation issues; the TTT recognized an all-way stop is not the best long-term solution; Public Works staff is to provide long-term traffic operation safety at the intersection, including a review of installing a traffic signal or flashing yellow signal; Public Works will review how to improve traffic circulation in the area, how to de-emphasize Sherman Street, and coordination of traffic corridors. Mayor Johnson stated that she has asked for an overall, comprehensive review of the issue over the years, instead of putting in four-way stops when the City receives requests inquired what impact a four-way stop would have on Sherman Street would the stop encourage more traffic on Sherman Street; should the City discourage additional traffic on Sherman Street stated the City has been trying to equalize traffic on Santa Clara, Lincoln and Buena Vista Avenues; inquired whether the proposed stop sign would put an unfair burden on Lincoln and Buena Vista Avenues; stated every street in Alameda is a neighborhood; pushing traffic from one street to another is not fair; a comprehensive review is needed to address traffic issues; that she wants a better … | CityCouncil/2005-05-17.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-05-17.pdf,6 | CityCouncil | 2005-05-17 | 6 | working on a comprehensive strategic plan and there has only been one accident each of the last four years, Council should postpone review until information from the strategic plan is available. The Public Works Director stated there is a concern that since all way stop warrants are met , the City might open itself up to liability. Mayor Johnson stated there would be many more four-way stop signs if the City studied every intersection to determine whether warrants are met. In response to Mayor Johnson's inquiry about whether the City Attorney wished to address liability, the City Attorney stated not in public; holding the matter over would not be a problem. Councilmember deHaan stated that he travels on Sherman Street; a number of accidents are probably not reported; that he has witnessed accidents ; lateral corridors are impacted when vehicles travel to the South Shore area; vehicles travel 40 mph down Santa Clara Avenue; crossing the intersection is a challenge; hopefully, traffic can be diverted [off of Sherman Street] at some point. Councilmember Daysog inquired whether staff has data on whether peak traffic on Sherman Street has changed; stated there are probably younger families in the Gold Coast now; Sherman Street traffic volumes might be increasing because it is probably easier for workers to commute down Sherman Street rather than traveling down Constitution Way and Eighth Street. Mayor Johnson stated analysis of Councilmember Daysog's idea would be interesting to review and is why the City needs to pay attention to the impacts of stop signs; Constitution Way should handle more traffic; the City should be encouraging drivers to use Constitution Way; the City should review whether drivers are discouraged from using Constitution Way because of the traffic controls. Councilmember Daysog stated Constitution Way narrows down to one lane at Eighth Street there is a bottleneck on Eighth Street at Santa Clara and Central Avenues at commute hours, which makes it more convenient to use alternate routes, such as S… | CityCouncil/2005-05-17.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-05-17.pdf,7 | CityCouncil | 2005-05-17 | 7 | onto Grand Street to travel to South Shore; drivers try to find the easiest path; for example, changes on Buena Vista Avenue are causing Pacific Avenue to become a major road; everything has secondary impacts; that he understands the concerns about a four- way stop; however, a measure of control is needed [at Santa Clara Avenue and Sherman Street] The Public Works Director stated Councilmember Daysog's idea has not been reviewed; data could be analyzed; staff reviewed the traffic characteristio on Sherman Street; the average daily volume along Sherman Street is 5,500 vehicles at Buena Vista Avenue, 3,100 at Pacific Avenue and 2,500 at Santa Clara Avenue the grid system is designed to filter people and is working; both Sherman Street and Santa Clara Avenue are minor streets; traffic volumes on Santa Clara Avenue are higher than Sherman Street; since volumes on Santa Clara Avenue are acceptable, then volumes on Sherman Street must also be acceptable. Mayor Johnson inquired whether Santa Clara Avenue is wider than Sherman Street, to which the Public Works Director responded in the affirmative. stated Santa Clara Avenue is designated as a minor street in the General Plan. Mayor Johnson stated Sherman Street should not be treated the same as Santa Clara Avenue as far as traffic loads. The Public Works Director stated that he agrees there needs to be a strategic plan; the all-way stop is the best option for now with the funding available; noted Council approved funding to complete a Pedestrian Plan tonight, which is an element of the TMP . Councilmember Matarrese stated the City should do anything possible to decrease the volume of traffic on Sherman Street; the character of Sherman Street is different than Santa Clara Avenue; the biggest problem is the excessive speed on Santa Clara Avenue; suggested the Police Department put together a program which tickets people traveling above the speed limit on Santa Clara Avenue to slow down traffic; stated most of the accidents are probably cause by excessive speed, rather than… | CityCouncil/2005-05-17.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-05-17.pdf,8 | CityCouncil | 2005-05-17 | 8 | intersection and review whether traffic would be pushed to Lincoln and Buena Vista Avenues before a four-way stop sign is installed the traffic lights on Constitution Way should be timed to prevent bottlenecking and encourage drivers to use it. Councilmember Matarrese stated speakers mentioned that the City does not have a certified traffic engineer requested staff to comment on the matter. Councilmember Daysog noted there have been two pedestrian deaths on Constitution Way, which should be kept in mind; stated there should be a greater review of the data; requested a comparison with previous levels to determine whether Gold Coast residents are commuting down Sherman Street. Vice Mayor Gilmore stated the problem is traffic traveling to the Gold Coast or South Shore filters down Sherman Street, as well as Bay and Saint Charles Streets, to avoid the bottleneck on Eighth Street. Councilmember deHaan noted people are using other routes because Grand Street is becoming a bottleneck in the morning a remedy is needed while waiting for the traffic study; police activity is temporary; pedestrian crosswalk paddles and blinking lights work well and should be considered; the intersection was a high priority for a traffic signal fifteen years ago; a solution is needed. Councilmember Daysog concurred with Councilmember deHaan's suggestion to install pedestrian paddles; requested the liability issue be addressed related to postponement. The Public Works Director stated paddles could not be installed until there are crosswalks at the intersection; Public Works would need at least four weeks to compile data requested by Council. Councilmember Daysog moved approval of postponing the matter. Mayor Johnson inquired whether the motion included direction for staff to review alternative remedies and other issues raised by the Council. Councilmember Daysog amended the motion to include direction to staff to review alternative remedies and other issues raised by Council. Councilmember Matarrese seconded the motion. Under discussion, Coun… | CityCouncil/2005-05-17.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-05-17.pdf,9 | CityCouncil | 2005-05-17 | 9 | officers begin enforcement in the area immediately to slow down traffic while analysis is being completed. Councilmember deHaan inquired whether the speed board [radar trailer] retains data, to which the Public Works Director responded in the negative. Mayor Johnson inquired whether the equipment has the capacity to retain information, to which the Public Works Director responded in the negative. Mayor Johnson stated Oakland's equipment has messages, such as : "please drive slowly this our neighborhood" or "children at play; suggested use of the radar trailer and, if effective, the purchase of additional radar trailers. Councilmember deHaan stated other cities have permanent speed display devices. The Public Works Director stated staff applied for grants and may have received funding for a smaller device showing traveling speed on Lincoln Avenue; suggested staff be authorized to proceed with putting up pedestrian and speed limit signs, along with the enforcement and radar trailer. Mayor Johnson stated that Council would not object to staff taking said actions; drivers forget everywhere in Alameda is someone's neighborhood. On the call for the question, the motion carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. ( *05-236) Resolution No. 13941, "Authorizing the use of Measure B Countywide Discretionary Fund Grant from Alameda County Transportation Improvement Authority (ACTIA) and Matching Funds from the City's Local Measure B Allocation to Complete a Citywide Pedestrian Plan. Adopted. (*05-237) Resolution No. 13942, "Extending Period for Providing Low and Moderate Income Housing Pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 33334.16 for 30 Units Within the Bachelor Officers' Quarters at Alameda Point. Adopted. ( *05-238) Resolution No. 13943, "Resolution of Intention to Levy an Annual Assessment on the Alameda Business Improvement Area of the City of Alameda for FY 2005-06 and Set a Public Hearing for June 7, 2005 " Adopted. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 9 May 17, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-05-17.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-05-17.pdf,10 | CityCouncil | 2005-05-17 | 10 | (*05-239) Introduction of Ordinance Amending the Alameda Municipal Code to Increase the Composition of the Recreation and Park Commission from Five to Seven Members by Amending Subsections 2-7.2 (Membership; Appointment ; Removal). 2-7.3 (Qualification: Voting of Section 2-7 (City Recreation and Park Commission) Introduced. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS (05-240 ) Public Hearing to establish Proposition 4 Limit (Appropriation Limit for Fiscal Year 2005-06; - and (05-241) Resolution No. 13944, "Establishing Appropriations Limit for Fiscal Year 2005-06. Adopted. Councilmember Daysog moved adoption of the resolution. Councilmember Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. (05-242) Public Hearing to consider collection of Delinquent Business License Fees via the Property Tax Bills. Mayor Johnson opened the Public Hearing. Huong Anh Silver, SOS Urethane Foam Roofing, stated the company has been closed since 1996 and does not have a contractor license. Mayor Johnson inquired whether Ms. Silver contacted the Finance Department, to which Ms. Silver responded in the affirmative; stated the Finance Department stated paperwork was not adequate and SOS Urethane Foam Roofing has been listed in the telephone book. Sherman Silver, SOS Urethane Foam Roofing, stated that he shut down the roofing company ; that he is keeping his license with the State contractors board until he dies; he removed the sign in his front yard tonight; outlined his medical condition; stated he is not roofing anymore. Mayor Johnson inquired whether Council could vote on the rest and hold over SOS Roofing to allow staff to take a closer look, to which staff responded in the affirmative. In response to Mr. Silver's question about review of his materials, Mayor Johnson stated the Finance Director would review everything. There being no further speakers, Mayor Johnson closed the public portion of the Hearing. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 10 May 17, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-05-17.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-05-17.pdf,11 | CityCouncil | 2005-05-17 | 11 | Councilmember Matarrese moved approval of the staff recommendation. Vice Mayor Gilmore seconded the motion. Mayor Johnson inquired whether the motion was to exclude SOS Urethane Foam Roofing, to which Councilmember Matarrese responded in the affirmative. On the call for the question, the motion carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. Mayor Johnson inquired whether the matter would come back to Council if additional action was necessary, to which staff responded in the affirmative (05-243) Public Hearing to consider an Appeal of the Historical Advisory Board's approval of a Landscaping Plan for planting two Coast Live Oak trees on the vacant property at 301 Spruce Street. The submittal of a Landscaping Plan, as part of new development proposals, was required by the Historical Advisory Board as a condition for the removal of one Coast Live Oak tree in 2001; and adoption of related resolution. The site is located at 301 Spruce Street within the R-4 Neighborhood Residential Zoning District. Applicant Bill Wong for Hai Ky Lam. Appellant: Patrick Lynch and Jeanne Nader. Mayor Johnson opened the Public Hearing. Proponents (In Favor of Appeal) : Patrick Lynch, Appellant; Jeanne Nader, Appellant. Opponents (Opposed to Appeal) : Ivan Chiu, representing Applicant. There being no further speakers Mayor Johnson closed the public portion of the hearing. Following the Appellant's comments, Mayor Johnson inquired why there has been uncertainty about whether there was a Code violation. The Supervising Planner responded the Police were called when removal of the oak tree began; the officer was not aware Coast Live Oaks are protected; Planning staff was very clear that there was a violation when contacted about the tree. Mayor Johnson requested the Appellants to provide staff with a copy of a letter from former City Manager Jim Flint. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 11 May 17, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-05-17.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-05-17.pdf,12 | CityCouncil | 2005-05-17 | 12 | The Supervising Planner noted the Council is considering the Historical Advisory Board (HAB) approval that the two replacement oaks are in the proper place; a requirement of allowing the tree to be removed was that the HAB would review the landscaping plan. Councilmember deHaan inquired whether the existing two oaks would remain in place, to which the Supervising Planner responded in the affirmative; noted one is partially on City property. Councilmember deHaan inquired whether staff reviewed damage to the remaining trees. The Supervising Planner stated the HAB required that the oak trees be protected during development and required a registered arborist advise the Applicant. Vice Mayor Gilmore stated the two existing oak trees are being maintained in their present condition and two more oak trees are being planted in positions determined by a landscape architect; inquired whether the complaint is that the two new oak trees are not in the correct position. The Supervising Planner responded the complaints are that the HAB determined that the project was categorically exempt from California Environment Quality Act (CEQA) and the two trees on the site are not properly protected. Vice Mayor Gilmore inquired whether the landscape plan has been modified since approved by the HAB. The Supervising Planner responded the site plan has been modified, not the landscape plan; the building was moved five feet from the existing tree. In response to Vice Mayor Gilmore's inquiry about whether building a single family home is categorically exempt from CEQA, the Supervising Planner stated CEQA permits construction of single family homes to be categorically exempt. Vice Mayor Gilmore inquired why building of the house, which is exempt from CEQA, could not proceed even if a CEQA review were required for adding new trees. The Supervising Planner responded Mr. Lynch is referring to segmentation; CEQA and the courts do not look kindly upon segmenting a project into pieces, which would be exempt individually, but which taken together wou… | CityCouncil/2005-05-17.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-05-17.pdf,13 | CityCouncil | 2005-05-17 | 13 | Vice Mayor Gilmore inquired whether segmenting is clearly not the case for the project, to which the Supervising Planner responded staff does not believe segmenting has occurred. Councilmember Daysog inquired why CEQA would be required for the trees. The Supervising Planner stated the project is a single family home ; there is a landscape plan which is part of the project; the HAB had purview over the two new oak trees in the landscape plan as a condition of a previous approval [to allow removal of an oak tree] ; the HAB was concerned with ensuring the two new replacement trees, which are required when an oak tree is allowed to be removed, would be located in a spot where the trees would thrive. In response to Vice Mayor Gilmore's inquiry regarding the basis for the appeal, Mayor Johnson stated the concern is the construction process and the impact on and protection of the two existing trees. Mayor Johnson inquired whether an arborist was hired, to which the Supervising Planner responded in the affirmative. Mayor Johnson inquired whether staff believes there are adequate measures in place to protect the two existing trees, to which the Supervising Planner responded in the affirmative. Councilmember Daysog inquired whether the Appellants believe the measures are adequate. Ms. Nader responded the problem is she understood there would be no construction activity after the Appeal was filed; the Applicant used a front end loader on top of the root system of the trees on April 25, which the arborist instructed him not to do without protection; the Applicant exposed and cut into several tree roots; the certified arborist, which she hired to look at the trees, determined the damage could be mortally wounding; that she was informed by City staff that the City does not have money for a certified arborist to ensure the trees are protected; the damage occurred after the appeal; the owner has blatantly disregarded the recommendation from his own arborist; the Applicant drove over the root system to move fill across the proper… | CityCouncil/2005-05-17.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-05-17.pdf,14 | CityCouncil | 2005-05-17 | 14 | Mayor Johnson inquired whether the City could require the arborist to submit a periodic report regarding compliance with recommendations, to which the Supervising Planner responded the suggestion might be a good solution. Councilmember Daysog inquired whether Ms. Nader's comments are factually correct, to which the Supervising Planner responded that she did not know. Councilmember Daysog inquired whether the Appellants provided information to staff, to which the Supervising Planner responded staff probably visited the site since Ms. Nader mentioned Code Enforcement. Councilmember deHaan inquired whether Code Enforcement staff provided feedback about the site visit, to which the Chief Building Official responded that he would review the matter and report back to Council. Councilmember deHaan stated that he visited the site; that he is concerned about the disruption around the tree; the owner should be requested to agree to stipulations overseeing the construction activity. Bill Wong, Architect for Applicant, stated the arborist recommended a fence around the tree during construction. Mayor Johnson stated the Council wants to allow the Applicant to proceed, but the Applicant needs to protect the trees. Mr. Wong stated the fence would be put in place once the project is approved. Mayor Johnson requested the arborist to explain what needs to be done to protect the trees during construction; inquired whether he was retained to provide oversight during construction. Christopher Bowen, Project Arborist, stated that he discussed the matter with Planning staff and determined the drip line should be fenced off. Mayor Johnson inquired whether other measures were being recommended. Mr. Bowen responded the fence was to be installed prior to construction; that he recommends bails of hay be placed around the three, the trunk be wrapped in carpet, and 2" X 4" lumber be Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 14 May 17, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-05-17.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-05-17.pdf,15 | CityCouncil | 2005-05-17 | 15 | strapped to branches when construction commences protecting the root system is the most important action; that he recommends placing a thin layer of compost, wood chips, and plywood to protect the root system. Vice Mayor Gilmore inquired when Mr. Bowen last visited the sight, to which Mr. Bowen responded about a month ago, on April 7. Vice Mayor Gilmore inquired whether Mr. Bowen has visited the site to witness the activity. Councilmember deHaan inquired whether Mr. Bowen has seen the exposed root system, to which Mr. Bowen responded in the negative. Councilmember deHaan noted the fenced off area is only five feet. Mayor Johnson stated Mr. Bowen should conduct further analysis and determine whether restoration is needed before other measures are implemented. Vice Mayor Gilmore stated Mr. Bowen visited the site a month ago and created a plan for protection of the tree; apparently the plan was ignored; that she is not convinced a plan will be followed; that she understands the neighbors' concern; inquired whether the City could require the owners to post a bond for the security of the trees. The City Attorney responded in the affirmative; noted the resolution states: "prior to issuance of building permits for the development on the site, the Applicants shall sign and record with the County Recorder's Office a Landscape Maintenance Agreement with the City to ensure maintenance of the Coast Live Oak Trees on the property. The Landscape Maintenance Agreement shall be in effect for five years from the date of the recording; Council is discussing having specific terms and conditions as part of the recorded Agreement that runs with the land and any violations can be enforced through Code Enforcement; the terms and conditions could include posting of a bond to ensure protection. Councilmember Daysog noted that the City Council has certain powers under the City Charter with regard to compelling testimony; inquired when the arborist heard about the disturbance at the site. Mr. Bowen responded tonight; the last time he spoke… | CityCouncil/2005-05-17.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-05-17.pdf,16 | CityCouncil | 2005-05-17 | 16 | began; he was informed that the fence was installed; that he was not hired to install the fence. Mayor Johnson suggested the matter be continued since there has been some disruption on the site; the arborist could inform the City about ways to protect the tree, which could be used as conditions in the approval and the matter could return to Council; the owner needs to understand the conditions are serious and cannot be disregarded, and there should not be any other activity on the site. Councilmember Matarrese moved approval of continuing the hearing. Councilmember Matarrese stated the arborist's assessment should include whether the damage jeopardizes the tree; the City needs to take a close look and have a binding report. Councilmember Daysog stated that he is interested in determining what occurred at the site: were conditions disregarded, was there an accident or did nothing happen. Councilmember deHaan stated the soil brought onto the site does not look clean; the City should review the source of the soil and determine if there is a problem. Councilmember Matarrese stated the owner should be liable for making the determination; the City should request that the owner conduct a soil test. The City Attorney stated a design review appeal could be forthcoming in four weeks and the two issues could be combined. Mayor Johnson stated the City should not assume there would be an appeal of the design review. Councilmember Matarrese stated the tree issue should be resolved. Mayor Johnson requested the matter return at the next Council meeting. Vice Mayor Gilmore stated the conditions of approval should have teeth, which could be anything from having a bond posted or recording documentation; encouraged the City Attorney to be creative. Councilmember deHaan inquired whether Councilmember Matarrese would amend the motion to include requiring a review of the soil condition. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 16 May 17, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-05-17.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-05-17.pdf,17 | CityCouncil | 2005-05-17 | 17 | Counci lmember Matarrese agreed to amend the motion accordingly. Councilmember deHaan seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. (05-244) Recommendation to develop two separate voluntary seismic retrofit programs. Ken Gutleben, Alameda, thanked City staff for making long overdue recommendations stated the program will lay down the foundation for developing a safer community; Victorians are extremely vulnerable to seismic activity; obtaining permits to retrofit Victorians is difficult due to strict design review laws. Councilmember deHaan stated Victorian homes often have brick foundations, are not bolted and do not have any kind of earthquake bracing. Councilmember deHaan moved approval of the staff recommendation. Councilmember Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. (05-245) Recommendation to accept Report on results of Actuarial Valuations of the Police and Fire Retirement 1079 and 1082 Plans and the Retiree Health Care Plan. The Finance Director gave a brief review of the reports. Councilmember Daysog inquired whether the new Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) rules are different and how the City proceeded in the past. The Finance Director stated the current rule requires a valuation of the 1079 and 1082 plans once each three years; a roll forward letter is completed and there is a footnote in the City's Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) in between years; there is not a lot to report since the City funds on a pay as you go basis; there will be a new rule pertaining to other post employment benefits in 2007; the actuarial was completed to look ahead and determine the value of the Retiree Health Care Plan benefits in the future; the new GASB rules require a lot of the data to be reported; the reporting for the Retiree Health Care Plan will become almost as extensive as the reporting for the 1079 and 1082 plans; additionally, the City will have to decide whether to fund pay as you go or find a way to fund the entire plan, which needs f… | CityCouncil/2005-05-17.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-05-17.pdf,18 | CityCouncil | 2005-05-17 | 18 | Councilmember Daysog inquired whether the reports attempt to make the information more transparent and look at future liabilities, to which the Finance Director responded in the affirmative. Councilmember deHaan inquired whether the City would develop a plan, to which the Finance Director responded in the affirmative. Mayor Johnson inquired whether the 10-year plan being formulated would include the liabilities. The Finance Director responded in the affirmative; stated how the City funds the liability needs to be determined. Councilmember Matarrese inquired whether the two plans are limited and new employees are not being added. The Finance Director responded the 1079 and 1082 plans are closed the other post employment benefits are for employees who have or will retire under the current agreements in place. Councilmember Daysog stated the City is making plans and examining liabilities other cities, such as San Diego, raided funds that should have gone toward liabilities and are almost bankrupt ; inquired whether the reports are related to said case. The Finance Director responded the rule was in place and had not been implemented; the San Diego crisis just occurred at the same time. Mayor Johnson stated the actuarials, along with the 10-year plan, are very important i the City needs to consider current obligations in evaluating economic decisions in the future. The Acting City Manager stated the point in evaluating the liability and establishing a plan is to ensure the City does not end up like San Diego in the future; the City should start mitigation and establish a plan. louncilmember deHaan inquired whether the costs appear under the retirees' names on the monthly expenditures check register [bills for ratification], to which the Finance Director responded affirmative. Councilmember deHaan inquired whether one plan is $68,000 and the other is $37,000 per month, the Finance Director responded that she could review and confirm the figures. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 18 May 17, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-05-17.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-05-17.pdf,19 | CityCouncil | 2005-05-17 | 19 | Vice Mayor Gilmore inquired whether the actuarial accrued liability is in excess of $70 million for both the closed plans and the on- going retiree benefits. The Finance Director responded in the negative; stated $70 million is for the retiree benefit plan; the actuarial accrued liability for the 1079 and 1082 plans is $31,683,000 as of January 1, 2005. Councilmember Daysog inquired whether the outstanding liabilities are reported to bond underwriters. The Finance Director responded bond underwriters receive the CAFR for three prior years; the liabilities are included in the footnotes. Councilmember Daysog inquired whether the outstanding liabilities would affect the City's bond rating. The Finance Director responded in the affirmative; stated the City is judged on whether or not a plan has been established; pay as you go is one plan. In response to Mayor Johnson's inquiry whether a plan would be brought to Council, the Finance Director stated a report would be brought back shortly after the first draft of the 10-year plan. Councilmember Daysog inquired whether Alameda's liabilities are typical for a city of its size. The Finance Director stated the City's consultant who completed the study could respond. John Bartel, Bartel Associates, stated the City of Alameda's 1079 and 1082 plans are a little unique; most agencies do not have frozen plans; the retiree health care plan is a $70 million unfunded liability with two separate promises : safety and non- safety; the promise to the non-safety group is at the lower quartile of what other agencies promise the promise to the safety group is in line with an upper quartile of what agencies promise. Councilmember Daysog requested a background report on the matter to understand the quartiles and median being used. (05-246) Presentation on the Operating Budget and Capital Improvements for Fiscal Year 2005-06. The Acting City Manager provided a brief report on the budget and provided examples of surrounding cities budget problems. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 19 May … | CityCouncil/2005-05-17.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-05-17.pdf,20 | CityCouncil | 2005-05-17 | 20 | Counci lmember Matarrese stated that he appreciates the clarity of the staff report. Mayor Johnson stated the proposal is a good approach to balancing the budget, which Council needs to continue working on; savings are the result of keeping positions vacant; a more permanent solution is needed to address on-going decreases and shortfalls in revenues the proposed budget is a good place to start; despite numerous budget sessions last year, a balanced budget was not reached thanked the Acting City Manager for his work; stated that she would like to see a combination of legal expenses in one place; legal expenses are under the City Attorney's office, Risk Management, and Alameda Power and Telecom; the legal budget should be more apparent; tracking is difficult when the entire legal budget is not in one place. The Acting City Manager stated staff would provide the information. Councilmember Daysog stated that he appreciates the summary highlighting the $1.9 million gap and how the gap was filled; inquired whether the budget includes the $1.8 million decrease in Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment (ARRA) funds. The Acting City Manager responded in the affirmative; stated the $1.8 million reduced ARRA revenue caused part of the problem. Councilmember Daysog stated the Recreation and Park Director position is being left vacant, which is leading to a policy issue of how the Council wants to organize department heads; under the Charter, the Council is responsible for organizing departments; a background on the issue should be provided when the budget adoption is considered. Mayor Johnson stated Councilmember Daysog is raising the type of long-term issues she was raising Council will probably look at reducing the number of department heads. Councilmember Matarrese stated the recommendation is simply for the next fiscal year; the position is not being eliminated; Council needs to make a decision about structure at some point. The Acting City Manager stated staff is not requesting the position be eliminated, but is requesting tha… | CityCouncil/2005-05-17.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-05-17.pdf,21 | CityCouncil | 2005-05-17 | 21 | Mayor Johnson stated Council could begin working on the larger issue; the Acting City Manager should not be expected to deal with the budget problem and the major project of restructuring the City's government, which is a longer term issue that needs to be addressed separate from the budget. The Acting City Manager stated the proposed budget gets the City through the next year; hopefully the State will live up to the requirements of Constitutional Amendment 1A and no longer take city revenues, which would put the City in a better position the following year. Councilmember deHaan stated that he would not exclude reviewing reorganization for the next year budget; staff has the knowledge to determine service impacts; the budget is a major step in the right direction; all budgets should be reviewed, not just the General Fund. The Acting City Manager stated the Council should be aware of other funds in the City; the budget document addresses other funds, but other funds were not highlighted in the staff report; the major deficit is in the General Fund, which funds most departments. Councilmember deHaan stated deficits would occur in some of the funded programs and adjustments would be necessary. Vice Mayor Gilmore thanked staff for the clarity of the report. stated the Council is concerned about not filling vacant positions and about reductions in force; Department Head presentations [at the next meeting] should address how reductions affect service delivery to citizens; the Council should adopt the budget with eyes wide open and the citizens should know what is coming down the pike; if it will take staff longer to respond to questions after budget adoption, people should know before it occurs; the community should be involved; hopefully, there will be more citizen participation at the next meeting; suggested the matter be placed earlier on the agenda. Councilmember Daysog stated the City should know the profile of a full service city; if the police force is down to 104 officers, the Council should know whether simila… | CityCouncil/2005-05-17.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-05-17.pdf,22 | CityCouncil | 2005-05-17 | 22 | The Acting City Manager stated an across the board cut was not implemented; some departments have been hit more heavily than others ; the cuts were based upon a judgment he conveyed to departments based on his understanding of the Council's service delivery priorities; cuts were made in departments with the ability to provide the level of service that the Council has indicated should continue. Mayor Johnson stated the Council has expressed that across the board cuts are not the correct approach; the proposed budget is a good attempt to reflect the Council's priorities. Councilmember Daysog stated that he was not opposed to implementing a one-day furlough instead of eliminating actual positions; the proposed budget does not trigger the need for one-day furloughs ; the trigger would have been met if more positions were being cut. The Acting City Manager noted four positions are being eliminated. Councilmember Daysog stated if a number of police officers and fire fighters were being eliminated, considering options would have been necessary. Mayor Johnson stated the proposed budget is a solution for next year, not a long-term solution; the Council will have to decide whether positions remaining vacant should be eliminated or funded at some point. Councilmember deHaan stated staff and service levels for the last five or ten years should be reviewed to determine where the belt needs to be tightened or where positions should be added. Mayor Johnson suggested staffing levels for the last seven years be reviewed. The Acting City Manager responded said information would be provided. Councilmember Matarrese stated the public should know the impact of eliminating four positions; Council needs to understand impacts to evaluate whether the Council's priorities are being met prior to voting. The Acting City Manager inquired whether Council would like a short impact statement from each department head. Councilmember Matarrese responded only for the four departments Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 22 May 17, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-05-17.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-05-17.pdf,23 | CityCouncil | 2005-05-17 | 23 | with cuts. Mayor Johnson concurred. Vice Mayor Gilmore stated there is not a need to go through each department, especially departments not losing actual employees. Councilmember Daysog stated that he is interested in creating a profile for Alameda's budget the International City Management Association (ICMA) has certain ratios on the number of police officers and fire fighters; inquired whether ratios were available for the public works, planning and recreation departments; stated ratios might indicate additional funding is needed for a department; a standard other than ICMA could be used; that he would like to know where the City should be. The Acting City Manager inquired whether louncilmember Daysog was requesting information on ideal staffing levels. Councilmember Daysog responded in the affirmative; noted Alameda County uses said standards to produce its budget. Mayor Johnson inquired whether Alameda County uses ICMA standards, to which Councilmember Daysog responded in the negative. Councilmember Matarrese stated standards are useful for touching base, but historic review of staffing and service levels is very valuable because it is reality; the City has certain realities, such as being an island which has advantages and disadvantages that must be taken into account. Councilmember Daysog concurred that historic data is good, too; stated ICMA standards probably correlate to what staff is requesting. Vice Mayor Gilmore stated in addition to presenting information from departments losing a staff person, departments with a large number of vacant positions that interface with the public, such as public safety, should also be discussed at the next Council meeting so the public would be aware of changes in service. The Acting City Manager noted there would be reductions in force in Development Services, which is funded through sources other than the General Fund. Mayor Johnson inquired whether there would be a reduction in positions at Alameda Power and Telecom, to which the Acting City Manager responded in the a… | CityCouncil/2005-05-17.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-05-17.pdf,24 | CityCouncil | 2005-05-17 | 24 | Councilmember deHaan stated Council has been alluding to the inability to live off of billets being attrited down; cuts might not be appropriate; the City needs to be realistic; the easy way, such as 5% cuts, cannot be used; service needs to be reviewed. Mayor Johnson stated that she inquired about purchasing goods and contracting locally; creation of central purchasing was a suggested way to do so; requested other ways to ensure as much money as possible is spent in Alameda and not generating tax revenues for other cities if the budget does not allow for the creation of central purchasing. The Acting City Manager responded staff is addressing the matter the budget was prepared prior to the request; the matter would return separate from the budget perhaps a position could be converted. Councilmember Daysog stated the proposed budget is fabulous, particularly the page reflecting salaries and benefits by department and the statement that: "if adopted, there would be no impact on the General Fund reserve.' John Oldham, Acting President of the Management and Confidential Employees Association (MCEA) thanked the Acting City Manager, Finance Director and Human Resources Department for outlining what is happening with the City budget stated the MCEA membership is concerned about the proposed cuts and the impact on workload as jobs of association members are eliminated; employees are the foundation of what the City does, which is serve the citizens; the proposed budget requests that employees do more with less, which will erode the customer experience; that he started his career with the City in the Recreation and Park Department as a Park Director; the proposed budget eliminates the position that supervises park directors, which is a loss of a mentor who understands the operation; MCEA understands every position has a similar story and choices will be difficult; MCEA has had just over a week to review the budget and proposed reduction in force; MCEA would like to partner with the City to resolve the budget shortfall, wh… | CityCouncil/2005-05-17.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-05-17.pdf,25 | CityCouncil | 2005-05-17 | 25 | (05-247) Presentation on the City's infrastructure investment challenges. Mayor Johnson stated that she considers infrastructure the part of the City's budget deficit; the maintenance of infrastructure has declined in the last several years; although money was saved, it creates a bigger deficit that must be dealt with in the future; the Council needs to decide whether to continue to allow the infrastructure to continue declining or to deal with the deficit and prevent it from growing. The Public Works Director gave a Power Point presentation on the City's infrastructure. Mayor Johnson inquired whether the Public Works Director had information on the percent of streets and sidewalks not in good condition, to which the Public Works Director responded that he included said information for streets. Mayor Johnson stated the information was needed for sidewalks; sidewalks are in bad condition; sidewalks should be made a priority in addition to streets. Councilmember Daysog inquired whether the annual funding shortfall is $2 million. The Public Work Director responded in the affirmative; stated currently $4 million is funded and $6.6 million should be funded; the $2.7 million shortfall does not take into consideration the $33 million deficit; under-funding each year continues to add to the deficit. Mayor Johnson stated the economic result of under-funding would be more than $2.7 million; not completing maintenance causes greater damage. The Public Works Director concurred; stated there is an optimum point when resurfacing should be completed to be cost effective. many streets are beyond the cost effective point, which results in more costly repair, such as a repair which would have cost $1 three years prior would now cost $4. Mayor Johnson requested pie charts showing the condition of infrastructure other than streets, such as sidewalks and sewers. Mayor Johnson inquired whether only spending $750,000 on street resurfacing during the next fiscal year would add to the deficit, Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 25 May … | CityCouncil/2005-05-17.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-05-17.pdf,26 | CityCouncil | 2005-05-17 | 26 | to which the Public Works Director responded in the affirmative. Mayor Johnson stated priorities should be determined. The Public Works Director stated the department has had a reduction in staff; both the pothole and sidewalk crews had reductions and, as a result, were combined. Mayor Johnson inquired whether annual contracts included pothole and sidewalk repair. The Public Works Director responded an annual contractor is responsible for sidewalk repairs; Public Works employees are responsible for inspections, fillets, grinding and minor concrete replacement. In response to Mayor Johnson's inquiry regarding the contractor's duties, the Public Works Director stated the contractor completes the backlog of permanent concrete repair in 300 to 400 locations. Councilmember Daysog stated residents would understand budget shortfalls for capital projects, but would not understand the City failing to have a plan, timeline and priorities. Councilmember Matarrese noted that he would prefer areas be paved over, rather than installing manufactured turf. (05-248) - ) Councilmember Daysog moved approval of continuing the meeting past 12:00 midnight. Councilmember Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. Councilmember Daysog stated there is probably $8 million undesignated in General Fund reserve; the City should change course if the reserve was built up at the expense of sidewalks and streets; the Council should consider allocating above $300,000; there needs to be a plan; the Council should receive a report on how to proceed. Mayor Johnson stated the City is reaching the point where something has to be done; people are upset about the condition of sidewalks and streets. Councilmember Matarrese stated a structural change should be made ; spending money upfront will save money later. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 26 May 17, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-05-17.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-05-17.pdf,27 | CityCouncil | 2005-05-17 | 27 | Councilmember deHaan inquired whether residents are required to pay for sidewalk repair, to which the Public Works Director responded the City only repairs sidewalks damaged by street trees. In response to Mayor Johnson's inquiry about sewers, the Public Works Director responded the City's sewers are doing fairly well because there is a dedicated funding source; dedicated funding sources or fees would allow the City to keep up with on-going maintenance. Councilmember deHaan inquired whether Measure B funds were used for the pothole crew, to which the Public Works Director responded in the affirmative. In response to Councilmember deHaan's inquiry regarding Measure B funds being a fixed amount, the Public Works Director stated the amount varies because it is based on sales tax. Councilmember deHaan inquired whether the pothole crew defers the need for maintenance, to which the Public Works Director responded resurfacing is still often needed. Councilmember Daysog stated little changes can change people's perception; people think negatively of their surroundings if streets and sidewalks are not maintained; people might have confidence the City is on the right track if improvements cannot be fully funded but common areas are improved. Mayor Johnson stated not dealing with the problem creates a bigger deficit; the Council needs to review the issue; a long-term plan is needed to get infrastructure back in shape. Councilmember Matarrese stated the sewer system is in good shape because it has a dedicated funding source; a similar option for streets, sidewalks, and median strips should be presented to the public; other funding sources will not solve the problem. The Acting City Manager stated the presentation was the first step to identify the problem; the next step is to find ways to fund improvements; having something similar to the sewer fund would be good. Mayor Johnson stated the City must be able to assure the public that a thorough review was completed and there is not any money available in the budget before rais… | CityCouncil/2005-05-17.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-05-17.pdf,28 | CityCouncil | 2005-05-17 | 28 | steady funding stream; providing a large amount of money one time would not work; a plan should be established. Councilmember Daysog stated use of the General Fund reserve should be considered. Mayor Johnson and Councilmember deHaan concurred with Councilmember Daysog. Mayor Johnson stated the City is actually losing money and should be spending the money [ on infrastructure] if money is sitting in the General Fund reserve while a huge debt is being incurred; there needs to be a plan to ensure the City does not end up in the same situation in 10 years. Councilmember Daysog stated the General Fund reserve is at the current level because money was borrowed from infrastructure maintenance. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (05-249) - Robb Ratto, PSBA, stated City staff is handling the budget situation excellently; PSBA would be happy to identify resources to help the City purchase in Alameda; that he would enlist other business associations to partner with the City to ensure the City purchases as much as possible in Alameda; thanked Council for showing the courage and persistence to proceed with the Theatre project. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS (05-250) Councilmember deHaan stated Council approved going forward with the purchase of a vehicle tonight [paragraph no. 05- 233] ; there is not a Ford dealership in Alameda, encouraged staff to consider Chevrolet. The Acting City Manager stated the Animal Control vehicle could be a Ford or equivalent. (05-251) Councilmember deHaan stated at one point, CalTrans was going to upgrade the lighting in the tube; requested a report on the matter. (05-252) Councilmember deHaan thanked staff for staying for the budget discussion. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 28 May 17, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-05-17.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-05-17.pdf,29 | CityCouncil | 2005-05-17 | 29 | ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the regular meeting at 12:19 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger City Clerk The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 29 May 17, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-05-17.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-05-17.pdf,30 | CityCouncil | 2005-05-17 | 30 | MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING TUESDAY- - -MAY 17, 2005- - -7:10 P. .M. Mayor Johnson convened the special meeting at 7:20 p.m. Roll Call - Present : Councilmembers Daysog, deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese and Mayor Johnson - 5. Absent : None. The special meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider : (05-225) Conference with Legal Counsel - Existing Litigation; Name of case St. Paul Property and Liability Insurance V. City of Alameda. Following the closed session, the special meeting was reconvened and Mayor Johnson announced that the Council gave direction to the City Attorney. Adjournment There being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the special meeting at 7:25 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger City Clerk The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act. Special Meeting Alameda City Council May 17, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-05-17.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-05-17.pdf,31 | CityCouncil | 2005-05-17 | 31 | TUESDAY- - -MAY 17, 2005- - -7:25 P.I M. Mayor/Chair Johnson convened the Special Joint meeting at 7:35 p.m. Councilmember/Commissioner/Board Member deHaan led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL - Present : louncilmembers / Commissioners / Board Members Daysog, deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese and Mayor Johnson - 5. Absent : None. CONSENT CALENDAR Councilmember/Commissioner Matarrese moved approval of the Consent Calendar. Vice Mayor/Commissioner Gilmore seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. (05-226CC/05-024CIC) Minutes of the Special Joint City Council and Community Improvement Commission Meeting of May 3, 2005. Approved. (05-025CIC) Recommendation to approve an Amended Contract with Michael Stanton Architecture (MSA) by increasing the Contract amount an additional $40,000 for design review services for the proposed Civic Center Parking Garage Project. Accepted. ( 05-026CIC) Recommendation to receive and file revised Alameda West Strategic Retail Implementation recommendations. Received and filed. AGENDA ITEMS ( 05-027CIC) Recommendation to approve a First Amendment to an Acquisition Agreement by which the Community Improvement Commission acquired an Affordable Housing Covenant from the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority for thirty units of very low income housing at the Bachelor Officers' Quarters located within the Alameda Point Improvement Project. Commissioner/Board Member deHaan moved approval of the staff recommendation. Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Community 1 Improvement Commission and Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority May 17, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-05-17.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-05-17.pdf,32 | CityCouncil | 2005-05-17 | 32 | Commissioner/Board Member Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. (05-028CIC) Resolution No. 05-136, "Resolution of Necessity to Acquire Property by Eminent Domain for Redevelopment Purposes Authorizing Commencement of Litigation to Acquire Property and for Order of Possession; Code of Civil Procedure Section 1245.235 et seq. (APN 071-0203-014 and APN 071-0203-015; 2315-2323 Central Avenue, Alameda, California - Alameda Theatre/Cineplex and Parking Structure. Adopted. Lester Cabral, Tenant, stated that a lot of information has just been received; that he opposes the resolution until the tenants are notified about what is going on; that he understands an eviction notice might be forthcoming. Chair Johnson requested staff to meet with Mr. Cabral to answer his questions. In response to Commissioner deHaan's question about the property Mr. Cabral is concerned about, Mr. Cabral responded Hair Shapers at 2321 Central Avenue. Lars Hansson, Park Street Business Association (PSBA) Board President, stated the PSBA Board supports the staff recommendation and urges adoption of the resolution; the resolution will springboard negotiations with the owner to allow reaching a fair market value within a short period of time. Duane Watson, PSBA Board Vice President, urged moving forward with the project. Robb Ratto, PSBA Executive Director, stated the project is important for PSBA and all of Alameda; the restoration of the historic theatre was identified as the number one priority in the downtown vision process; urged support of the staff recommendation stated Video Maniacs has been successfully relocated with the assistance of Development Services. Daniel A. Muller, Attorney for Cocores Development Company submitted a letter; stated the letter submitted includes five categories of objections to the Resolution of Necessity and right to take the property; the offer of $1.5 million recently submitted is less than half of the value that a qualified, MAI [Masters of the Appraisal Institute] appraiser p… | CityCouncil/2005-05-17.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-05-17.pdf,33 | CityCouncil | 2005-05-17 | 33 | appraiser, Mike Dunn, was jointly retained by the City and Cocores and came up with a value of $3.7 million; the appraisal the City is using is over a year old; for a jointly hired appraiser to come up with $3. 7 million and the City to disregard the offer and use a year old appraisal that is less than half of the jointly appraised value is fundamentally flawed; secondly, the City has not followed the adopted owner participation rules required by law; the rules specify that the City will give preference to property owners within the project area, which has not occurred; the City allowed Cocores to jointly pay for an appraisal and took half of the $25,000 price for a feasibility study in 1996 that has been shelved; the City has been willing to take Cocores's money in partnership, but has not continued to follow through with any owner participation rules; the third problem is that the City claims the justification for the public use of the project is remediation of blight the area is not blighted; the blight findings are unfounded and not supported by the evidence; additionally, there is evidence that the outcome of the hearing is predetermined; news articles indicate the City has commissioned construction reports and studies and committed itself contractually towards the condemnation and project; the City is conducting a sham hearing and is committed to going forward with the project; requested adoption of the resolution be delayed for a couple of meetings to allow the City to re-engage Mr. Cocores on the fair market value issue; stated City staff offered $2.5 million to Mr. Cocores at one point and even offered $3 million if structured as $2 million upfront and $1 million over a period of years; similar negotiations could continue if the resolution is delayed; if not, the City will face a right to take challenge; good faith negotiations seem to have terminated but could be restarted; additional evidence of predetermination is the Disposition and Development Agreement (DDA) that has been entered into with a develo… | CityCouncil/2005-05-17.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-05-17.pdf,34 | CityCouncil | 2005-05-17 | 34 | resolution and give direction to staff to continue negotiations, to which Legal Counsel responded in the affirmative. The Development Services Director stated staff would continue to talk to the owner about acquiring the property; staff has attempted to talk to the owner and has not had success. Chair Johnson stated it appears the owner is now willing to talk and the City should enter into discussions if the owner is willing. The Development Services Director stated the City has been working on the project for many years; a Request for Proposals (RFP ) for redevelopment of the project was sent to the owner in December 2000; the owner sent a letter in January 2001 which thanked the City for sending the RFP and stated: "the owner's desire is to wholeheartedly endorse the City's effort to locate a developer to redevelop the Alameda Theatre; staff has been proceeding on said basis for sometime; the DDA does not pre-commit the condemnation action; staff has always intended and hoped to acquire the property amicably; noted the property owner did not object at the CEQA hearings or DDA adoption. Commissioner Matarrese requested staff to comment on the claim of defects in the appraisal. Legal Counsel responded the Commission's action is not predicated on the joint appraisal; staff has full faith and confidence in the appraisal upon which the action is being based. Commissioner Matarrese stated the project is important; the City has an opportunity to save the Alameda Theatre; the City should continue negotiating with the owner. Commissioner Matarrese moved adoption of the resolution. Chair Johnson inquired whether Commissioner Matarrese would amend the motion to include approval of direction to continue negotiations. Commissioner Matarrese agreed to amend the motion to include direction to continue to negotiate [with Mr. Cocores]. Chair Johnson stated negotiations should continue if the owner is willing the owner has indicated a willingness to continue to negotiate; the City hopes to resolve the matter by agreement ; hopef… | CityCouncil/2005-05-17.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-05-17.pdf,35 | CityCouncil | 2005-05-17 | 35 | Commissioner Gilmore seconded the motion. Under discussion, Commissioner Daysog stated moving forward is in the best interest of the City. Commissioner deHaan requested staff to clarify whether Hair Shapers received notification. The Development Services Director stated that on March 22, all the tenants were notified that the City made a bona fide offer to the owner the City's relocation and acquisition agents provided information to all of the tenants at that time staff would ensure the tenant has all the facts. Commissioner deHaan stated that he supports the action to go forward to allow a common position to be reached. On the call for the question, the motion carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Mayor/Chair Johnson adjourned the Special Joint meeting at 8:02 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger, City Clerk Secretary, Community Improvement Commission The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act. Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Community 5 Improvement Commission and Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority May 17, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-05-17.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-06-01.pdf,1 | CityCouncil | 2005-06-01 | 1 | MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING WEDNESDAY -JUNE 1, 2005- - -6:00 P.M. Mayor Johnson convened the Special Meeting at 6:05 p.m. Roll Call - Present : Councilmembers Daysog, deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese, and Mayor Johnson - 5. Absent : None. The Special Meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider: (05-253) Public Employment; Title: City Manager. Following the Closed Session, the Special Meeting was reconvened and Mayor Johnson announced that the Council gave direction regarding City Manager recruitment. Adjournment There being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the Special Meeting at 7:10 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger City Clerk The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act. Special Meeting Alameda City Council June 1, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-06-01.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-06-07.pdf,1 | CityCouncil | 2005-06-07 | 1 | MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING TUESDAY- - -JUNE 7, 2005- - -7:30 P. M. Mayor Johnson convened the Regular Meeting at 7:45 p.m. Councilmember Matarrese led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL - Present : Councilmembers Daysog, deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese, and Mayor Johnson - 5. Absent : None. AGENDA CHANGES (05-259) Mayor Johnson announced that she would present the Proclamation expressing appreciation to Pacific Gas & Electric and Alameda Power & Telecom [paragraph no. 05-260], the Proclamation recognizing contributions to the City by our Gay and Lesbian Citizens [paragraph no.05-261] and the Resolution Commending Officer Frank Damian [paragraph no. 05-262] prior to the Consent Calendar. PROCLAMATIONS, SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY AND ANNOUNCEMENTS (05-260) Proclamation expressing appreciation to Pacific Gas & Electric and Alameda Power & Telecom for the prompt response in relocating a gas line, thereby greatly aiding the City's efforts in the construction of the new Main Library. Mayor Johnson read and presented the proclamation to Susan Yee and Tom Gaurino from Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E) and Dean Batchelor from Alameda Power & Telecom (AP&T). Susan Yee thanked the Council for the proclamation; stated PG&E's priory has always been to be customer focused and provide the best level of service possible. Tom Gaurino thanked the Council for the recognition. Dean Batchelor stated that AP&T appreciates the proclamation and looks forward to working with departments to ensure the Library project's success. 05-261) Proclamation recognizing contributions to the City by our Gay and Lesbian Citizens and encouraging the community to recognize these contributions particularly during the month of June, Gay Pride Month. Mayor Johnson read and presented the proclamation to Debra Arbuckle Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 1 June 7, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-06-07.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-06-07.pdf,2 | CityCouncil | 2005-06-07 | 2 | from Out on the Island and the Alameda Lesbian Potluck Society. Ms. Arbuckle thanked the Council for the proclamation and for the recognition of the Gay and Lesbian citizens. REGULAR AGENDA ITEM (05-262) Resolution No. 13846, "Commending Alameda Police Department Officer Frank Damian for His Contributions to the City of Alameda. Adopted. Mayor Johnson read and presented the Resolution to Officer Frank Damian. Officer Damian thanked the Council for the Resolution and stated that it has been an honor to serve with such a great department. The resolution was adopted by consensus - 5. *** Mayor Johnson called a recess at 7:58 p.m. and reconvened the Regular City Council Meeting at 9:55 p.m. *** PROCLAMATIONS, SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY AND ANNOUNCEMENTS (05-263) Update on the new main library project. The Project Manager provided a brief update. Councilmember Matarrese thanked the Project Manager for ensuring that the project is on time and on budget; stated that it would be nice not to have to draw down on the $2 million fund redevelopment bond money that has been earmarked for the project. CONSENT CALENDAR Mayor Johnson announced that the recommendation to accept the City of Alameda Long-Term Park Use Policy [paragraph no. 05-267] and the recommendations regarding Alameda Ferry Services [paragraph no. 05- 270) ] were removed from the Consent Calendar for discussion. Vice Mayor Gilmore moved approval of the remainder of the Consent Calendar. Councilmember Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 2 June 7, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-06-07.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]) );