pages
521 rows where page = 12
This data as json, CSV (advanced)
Suggested facets: body, date, text
date (date) 520 ✖
- 2012-06-06 2
- 2005-01-04 1
- 2005-01-10 1
- 2005-01-18 1
- 2005-01-24 1
- 2005-01-31 1
- 2005-02-01 1
- 2005-02-14 1
- 2005-02-15 1
- 2005-02-28 1
- 2005-03-15 1
- 2005-03-28 1
- 2005-04-05 1
- 2005-04-11 1
- 2005-04-19 1
- 2005-04-25 1
- 2005-05-03 1
- 2005-05-09 1
- 2005-05-17 1
- 2005-05-23 1
- 2005-06-07 1
- 2005-06-13 1
- 2005-06-21 1
- 2005-06-27 1
- 2005-07-19 1
- 2005-08-02 1
- 2005-08-16 1
- 2005-08-22 1
- 2005-09-06 1
- 2005-09-12 1
- 2005-09-20 1
- 2005-09-29 1
- 2005-10-18 1
- 2005-10-24 1
- 2005-11-01 1
- 2005-11-14 1
- 2005-12-06 1
- 2005-12-20 1
- 2006-01-09 1
- 2006-02-07 1
- 2006-02-21 1
- 2006-02-27 1
- 2006-03-07 1
- 2006-03-21 1
- 2006-04-04 1
- 2006-04-18 1
- 2006-04-24 1
- 2006-05-02 1
- 2006-05-08 1
- 2006-05-16 1
- 2006-05-22 1
- 2006-06-06 1
- 2006-06-20 1
- 2006-07-05 1
- 2006-07-10 1
- 2006-07-18 1
- 2006-07-24 1
- 2006-07-26 1
- 2006-09-05 1
- 2006-09-19 1
- 2006-09-25 1
- 2006-09-27 1
- 2006-10-03 1
- 2006-10-09 1
- 2006-10-17 1
- 2006-10-23 1
- 2006-11-13 1
- 2006-11-21 1
- 2006-12-05 1
- 2006-12-11 1
- 2007-01-02 1
- 2007-01-08 1
- 2007-01-16 1
- 2007-01-31 1
- 2007-02-06 1
- 2007-02-12 1
- 2007-02-20 1
- 2007-02-26 1
- 2007-03-06 1
- 2007-03-12 1
- 2007-03-20 1
- 2007-03-26 1
- 2007-04-17 1
- 2007-04-23 1
- 2007-04-25 1
- 2007-05-14 1
- 2007-05-15 1
- 2007-05-23 1
- 2007-05-29 1
- 2007-06-05 1
- 2007-06-11 1
- 2007-06-19 1
- 2007-06-25 1
- 2007-07-03 1
- 2007-07-17 1
- 2007-08-07 1
- 2007-08-21 1
- 2007-09-04 1
- 2007-09-11 1
- 2007-09-18 1
- 2007-09-24 1
- 2007-10-02 1
- 2007-10-08 1
- 2007-10-16 1
- 2007-10-24 1
- 2007-11-06 1
- 2007-11-13 1
- 2007-11-20 1
- 2007-12-04 1
- 2007-12-10 1
- 2008-01-02 1
- 2008-01-14 1
- 2008-01-15 1
- 2008-01-28 1
- 2008-02-05 1
- 2008-02-11 1
- 2008-02-19 1
- 2008-02-25 1
- 2008-03-04 1
- 2008-03-18 1
- 2008-04-01 1
- 2008-04-15 1
- 2008-04-23 1
- 2008-04-28 1
- 2008-05-06 1
- 2008-05-12 1
- 2008-05-20 1
- 2008-05-28 1
- 2008-06-03 1
- 2008-06-17 1
- 2008-06-23 1
- 2008-07-01 1
- 2008-07-14 1
- 2008-07-15 1
- 2008-07-23 1
- 2008-08-05 1
- 2008-08-11 1
- 2008-08-19 1
- 2008-09-16 1
- 2008-10-07 1
- 2008-10-21 1
- 2008-11-06 1
- 2008-11-18 1
- 2008-11-24 1
- 2008-12-02 1
- 2008-12-08 1
- 2008-12-16 1
- 2009-01-06 1
- 2009-01-20 1
- 2009-02-03 1
- 2009-02-07 1
- 2009-02-17 1
- 2009-02-25 1
- 2009-03-03 1
- 2009-03-17 1
- 2009-03-23 1
- 2009-04-07 1
- 2009-04-21 1
- 2009-04-22 1
- 2009-05-05 1
- 2009-05-19 1
- 2009-06-02 1
- 2009-06-16 1
- 2009-07-07 1
- 2009-07-21 1
- 2009-08-03 1
- 2009-09-01 1
- 2009-09-15 1
- 2009-10-06 1
- 2009-10-20 1
- 2009-11-03 1
- 2009-11-17 1
- 2009-12-01 1
- 2009-12-02 1
- 2009-12-15 1
- 2010-01-05 1
- 2010-01-06 1
- 2010-01-26 1
- 2010-02-16 1
- 2010-03-16 1
- 2010-04-06 1
- 2010-04-20 1
- 2010-05-04 1
- 2010-05-18 1
- 2010-06-01 1
- 2010-06-15 1
- 2010-06-24 1
- 2010-07-06 1
- 2010-07-07 1
- 2010-07-20 1
- 2010-07-27 1
- 2010-09-07 1
- 2010-09-21 1
- 2010-10-05 1
- 2010-10-19 1
- 2010-11-03 1
- 2010-11-16 1
- 2010-12-07 1
- 2011-01-04 1
- 2011-01-18 1
- 2011-01-25 1
- 2011-02-01 1
- 2011-02-15 1
- 2011-02-23 1
- 2011-03-15 1
- 2011-03-29 1
- 2011-04-05 1
- 2011-05-03 1
- 2011-06-21 1
- 2011-06-28 1
- 2011-07-05 1
- 2011-07-12 1
- 2011-07-19 1
- 2011-09-20 1
- 2011-10-10 1
- 2011-10-18 1
- 2011-11-01 1
- 2011-11-15 1
- 2011-12-12 1
- 2011-12-20 1
- 2012-01-09 1
- 2012-01-25 1
- 2012-02-07 1
- 2012-02-13 1
- 2012-02-21 1
- 2012-02-27 1
- 2012-03-12 1
- 2012-03-20 1
- 2012-03-28 1
- 2012-04-03 1
- 2012-04-17 1
- 2012-04-25 1
- 2012-05-08 1
- 2012-05-14 1
- 2012-05-15 1
- 2012-05-30 1
- 2012-06-19 1
- 2012-07-03 1
- 2012-07-17 1
- 2012-07-24 1
- 2012-08-27 1
- 2012-10-16 1
- 2012-11-07 1
- 2012-11-28 1
- 2013-01-23 1
- 2013-02-19 1
- 2013-03-05 1
- 2013-04-02 1
- 2013-04-16 1
- 2013-05-07 1
- 2013-06-18 1
- 2013-06-26 1
- 2013-07-23 1
- 2013-09-17 1
- 2013-09-25 1
- 2013-10-15 1
- 2013-10-23 1
- 2013-11-05 1
- 2013-11-19 1
- 2013-12-03 1
- 2013-12-17 1
- 2014-01-09 1
- 2014-02-04 1
- 2014-03-18 1
- 2014-03-26 1
- 2014-04-15 1
- 2014-05-06 1
- 2014-05-20 1
- 2014-06-03 1
- 2014-06-17 1
- 2014-07-01 1
- 2014-07-15 1
- 2014-07-29 1
- 2014-09-02 1
- 2014-09-16 1
- 2014-11-18 1
- 2014-12-02 1
- 2015-01-06 1
- 2015-01-20 1
- 2015-01-21 1
- 2015-02-02 1
- 2015-02-03 1
- 2015-02-17 1
- 2015-03-03 1
- 2015-03-10 1
- 2015-03-17 1
- 2015-03-25 1
- 2015-04-07 1
- 2015-04-21 1
- 2015-04-29 1
- 2015-05-05 1
- 2015-05-19 1
- 2015-05-27 1
- 2015-06-02 1
- 2015-06-11 1
- 2015-07-07 1
- 2015-07-21 1
- 2015-07-22 1
- 2015-09-01 1
- 2015-09-15 1
- 2015-10-06 1
- 2015-10-20 1
- 2015-11-03 1
- 2015-11-04 1
- 2015-11-18 1
- 2015-12-01 1
- 2015-12-15 1
- 2016-01-05 1
- 2016-01-27 1
- 2016-02-01 1
- 2016-02-02 1
- 2016-02-16 1
- 2016-02-24 1
- 2016-03-01 1
- 2016-03-15 1
- 2016-03-23 1
- 2016-04-05 1
- 2016-04-19 1
- 2016-05-03 1
- 2016-05-17 1
- 2016-05-25 1
- 2016-06-07 1
- 2016-06-08 1
- 2016-06-21 1
- 2016-06-27 1
- 2016-07-05 1
- 2016-07-19 1
- 2016-09-06 1
- 2016-09-20 1
- 2016-10-04 1
- 2016-10-12 1
- 2016-10-18 1
- 2016-11-01 1
- 2016-11-15 1
- 2016-12-06 1
- 2016-12-14 1
- 2016-12-20 1
- 2017-01-03 1
- 2017-01-17 1
- 2017-01-23 1
- 2017-02-07 1
- 2017-02-08 1
- 2017-02-21 1
- 2017-02-23 1
- 2017-03-07 1
- 2017-03-21 1
- 2017-03-22 1
- 2017-04-04 1
- 2017-04-07 1
- 2017-04-12 1
- 2017-04-18 1
- 2017-05-01 1
- 2017-05-02 1
- 2017-05-16 1
- 2017-06-06 1
- 2017-06-14 1
- 2017-06-20 1
- 2017-07-05 1
- 2017-07-18 1
- 2017-07-25 1
- 2017-09-05 1
- 2017-09-19 1
- 2017-10-03 1
- 2017-10-11 1
- 2017-10-17 1
- 2017-11-07 1
- 2017-11-21 1
- 2017-12-05 1
- 2017-12-14 1
- 2017-12-19 1
- 2018-01-02 1
- 2018-01-16 1
- 2018-02-05 1
- 2018-02-06 1
- 2018-02-14 1
- 2018-02-15 1
- 2018-02-20 1
- 2018-03-05 1
- 2018-03-06 1
- 2018-03-20 1
- 2018-04-03 1
- 2018-04-11 1
- 2018-04-17 1
- 2018-05-01 1
- 2018-05-09 1
- 2018-05-15 1
- 2018-06-05 1
- 2018-06-19 1
- 2018-07-10 1
- 2018-07-11 1
- 2018-07-24 1
- 2018-09-04 1
- 2018-09-12 1
- 2018-09-18 1
- 2018-10-02 1
- 2018-10-16 1
- 2018-11-07 1
- 2018-11-27 1
- 2018-11-28 1
- 2018-12-04 1
- 2019-01-02 1
- 2019-01-15 1
- 2019-01-16 1
- 2019-01-29 1
- 2019-02-05 1
- 2019-02-14 1
- 2019-02-19 1
- 2019-03-05 1
- 2019-03-13 1
- 2019-03-16 1
- 2019-03-19 1
- 2019-04-02 1
- 2019-04-16 1
- 2019-05-07 1
- 2019-06-04 1
- 2019-06-18 1
- 2019-07-02 1
- 2019-07-16 1
- 2019-09-03 1
- 2019-09-12 1
- 2019-09-17 1
- 2019-10-01 1
- 2019-10-08 1
- 2019-10-15 1
- 2019-11-05 1
- 2019-11-19 1
- 2019-12-03 1
- 2019-12-12 1
- 2019-12-17 1
- 2019-12-18 1
- 2020-01-07 1
- 2020-01-21 1
- 2020-02-04 1
- 2020-02-18 1
- 2020-03-03 1
- 2020-03-17 1
- 2020-04-07 1
- 2020-04-21 1
- 2020-04-22 1
- 2020-05-05 1
- 2020-05-19 1
- 2020-05-20 1
- 2020-06-02 1
- 2020-06-16 1
- 2020-06-17 1
- 2020-06-24 1
- 2020-06-29 1
- 2020-07-07 1
- 2020-07-14 1
- 2020-07-21 1
- 2020-07-25 1
- 2020-08-17 1
- 2020-09-01 1
- 2020-09-15 1
- 2020-10-06 1
- 2020-10-20 1
- 2020-11-17 1
- 2020-11-23 1
- 2020-12-01 1
- 2021-01-05 1
- 2021-01-14 1
- 2021-01-19 1
- 2021-01-27 1
- 2021-02-01 1
- 2021-02-02 1
- 2021-02-16 1
- 2021-02-22 1
- 2021-03-01 1
- 2021-03-02 1
- 2021-03-04 1
- 2021-03-08 1
- 2021-03-11 1
- 2021-03-16 1
- 2021-03-24 1
- 2021-03-30 1
- 2021-04-05 1
- 2021-04-06 1
- 2021-04-20 1
- 2021-04-26 1
- 2021-05-03 1
- 2021-05-04 1
- 2021-05-06 1
- 2021-05-08 1
- 2021-05-18 1
- 2021-05-26 1
- 2021-06-01 1
- 2021-06-14 1
- 2021-06-15 1
- 2021-06-28 1
- 2021-07-06 1
- 2021-07-12 1
- 2021-07-19 1
- 2021-07-20 1
- 2021-07-26 1
- 2021-09-07 1
- 2021-09-20 1
- 2021-09-21 1
- 2021-10-04 1
- 2021-10-05 1
- 2021-10-19 1
- 2021-11-01 1
- 2021-11-02 1
- 2021-11-16 1
- 2021-11-30 1
- 2021-12-06 1
- 2021-12-07 1
- 2021-12-21 1
- 2022-01-04 1
- 2022-01-18 1
- 2022-02-01 1
- 2022-02-15 1
- 2022-03-01 1
- 2022-03-15 1
- 2022-04-05 1
- 2022-04-12 1
- 2022-04-19 1
- 2022-05-03 1
- 2022-05-10 1
- 2022-05-17 1
- 2022-06-07 1
Link | body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
CityCouncil/2005-01-04.pdf,12 | CityCouncil | 2005-01-04 | 12 | Council Meeting. ADJOURNMEN'T (05-024) - There being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the Regular City Council meeting at 11:15 in a moment of silence and sympathy for the tsunami victims in Southeast Asia. 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 January 4, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-01-04.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-01-18.pdf,12 | CityCouncil | 2005-01-18 | 12 | MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY - JANUARY 18, 2005 - - - 7:25 P. M. Acting Chair Gilmore convened the Special Meeting at 7:42 p.m. Commissioner Daysog led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL - Present : Commissioners Daysog, deHaan, Matarrese, and Acting Chair Gilmore - 4. Absent : Chair Johnson - 1. MINUTES (05-003) Minutes of the Special Community Improvement Commission (CIC) Meetings of December 7, 2004; the Special Joint City Council and CIC Meeting of December 21, 2004; and the Special Joint City Council, CIC and Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority Meeting of January 5, 2005. Approved. Commissioner Matarrese moved approval of the minutes. Commissioner Daysog seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 4. [Absent : Chair Johnson - 1. ] Note: Commissioner deHaan abstained from voting on the December 7 and 21, 2004 Minutes. AGENDA ITEM (05-004) Recommendation to approve a contract with Michael Stanton Architecture for design review services for the proposed Historic Alameda Theatre, Parking Structure and Cinema Multiplex Project in an amount not to exceed $92,500. Commissioner Matarrese stated the contract is one step closer to getting the theatre; moved approval of the staff recommendation. Commissioner deHaan seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 4. [Absent Chair Johnson - 1. ] ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Acting Chair Gilmore adjourned the Special Meeting at 7:45 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger Secretary Agenda for meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act. Special Meeting Community Improvement Commission January 18, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-01-18.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-01-31.pdf,12 | CityCouncil | 2005-01-31 | 12 | MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING TUESDAY- - -JANUARY 17, 2006- -6:05 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. [Note : Councilmember Daysog arrived at 6:35 p.m. ] Absent : None. The Special Meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider : (06-025) - Conference with Legal Counsel - Existing Litigation; Name of case : Citizens for a Megaplex-Free Alameda V. City of Alameda. Rosemary McNally stated that she was not a party to the lawsuit, but had followed the Cineplex project since the Historical Advisory Board meeting in 2005; cited the Indemnificatior Clause in the Disposition and Development Agreement with the developer, Kyle Connor questioned why the City is paying for Mr. Connor's defense costs when the City says it does not have enough money for services. The City Attorney responded that the developer has his own attorney; the City has a large investment risk in the project and chose to retain its own counsel in order to best protect its own interests in the project. Ms. McNally thanked the Council for clarification and submitted copy of her statement for the record. (06-026) Conference with Labor Negotiators - Agency Negotiators : Craig Jory and Human Resources Director; Employee Organizations : Alameda City Employees Association, International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, and Management and Confidential Employees Association. *** Mayor Johnson called a recess at 7:55 p.m. and reconvened the Special Meeting at 9:45 p.m. (06-027) Conference with Labor Negotiators - Agency Negotiators: Marie Gilmore and Frank Matarrese; Employee: City Attorney. . Following the Closed Session, the Special Meeting was reconvened Special Meeting 1 Alameda City Council January 17, 2006 | CityCouncil/2005-01-31.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-02-01.pdf,12 | CityCouncil | 2005-02-01 | 12 | Lara Weisiger City Clerk The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 12 February 1, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-02-01.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-02-15.pdf,12 | CityCouncil | 2005-02-15 | 12 | MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL JOINT CITY COUNCIL AND COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY - -FEBRUARY 15, 2005- -6:10 P.M. Acting Mayor/Chair Gilmore convened the Special Joint Meeting at 6:20 p.m. Roll Call - Present : Councilmember/Commissioners Daysog, deHaan, Matarrese, and Acting Mayor/Chair Gilmore - 4. Absent : Mayor/Chair Johnson - 1. The Special Meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider : (05-070CC/05-007CIC 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. Prior to the Regular City Council Meeting, Mayor/Chair Johnson announced that a briefing was given by the City Attorney's office. Adjournment There being no further business, Acting Mayor/Chair Gilmore adjourned the Special Joint Meeting at 6:45 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 Community Improvement Commission February 15, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-02-15.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-03-15.pdf,12 | CityCouncil | 2005-03-15 | 12 | ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (05-122) Mina Talebzadeh, Alameda, requested the City to recognize Spring Equinox as a day of peace and harmony. Mayor Johnson requested Ms. Talebzadeh to provide language for a proclamation Gina Mariani was not present but wanted to be on record in support of Ms. Talebzadeh's request. (05-123) Michael J. McGhee, Volunteer Veterans Advocate, submitted a letter; stated that the City currently offers services for veterans but there is no office or City official assigned to coordinate the services urged the City to appoint a committee to investigate veterans' services, to clarify the City's jurisdiction over veteran programs, and create a City office of Veterans Affairs for benefits. (05-124) Jon Spangler, Alameda, stated that he and Audrey Lord Hausman, co-founder of Pedestrian Friendly Alameda, will be training at a conference in April; stated that it is wonderful to see the Alameda Police Department enforcing pedestrian rights and safety. (05-125) Al Wright, Alameda, stated that on several occasions the American flag has been improperly displayed in front of City buildings flags flown at the Police Department are not consistent with City Hall; stated that he objects to the American flag being flown at half mast to honor local citizens; stated that all flags on City property should be in compliance with when the President of the United States directs the flag to be flown at half mast ; requested that Council direct staff to issue appropriate directives to all departments. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS (05-126) Councilmember Daysog stated that the Chipman Middle School Drum and Flag Corps requested a City flag for display in parades. (05-127) Councilmember Daysog stated there is a professor at the University of California, Berkeley who is moving forward with an initiative regarding urban casinos; requested staff to analyze the initiative and provide a recommendation as to whether Council should support the initiative. (05-128) - Councilmember deHaan requested that the Transportation Commiss… | CityCouncil/2005-03-15.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/2005-04-19.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/2005-05-03.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/2005-05-17.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/2005-06-07.pdf,12 | CityCouncil | 2005-06-07 | 12 | Council. (05-284) Richard Neveln, Alameda, stated that public transit is still a problem in Alameda; parking is allowed at bus stops; temporary bus stops should be fixed to allow accessibility. (05-285) Michael Ferraro, Alameda, stated that the proposed coffee vendor [who would like to park near City parks] is seeking a working permit for the whole City; he is not proposing to do business within the Park Street or Webster Street areas; stated Mr. Siden, East Bay Regional Park District, suggested seeing if there was a way the proposed vendor could have access to the park for his business. (05-286) Sherri Stieg, WABA, stated that the Grand Opening of the Webster Street Farmers Market would be Thursday from 4:00 p.m. to Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 12 June 7, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-06-07.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-06-21.pdf,12 | CityCouncil | 2005-06-21 | 12 | Councilmember deHaan stated taking one trip out per day is a major change. Steve Brimhall, President HBM, stated the capital reserve funds do not apply against the fare box; HBM is not in a funding position. The Ferry Services Manager stated that the City has an obligation to maintain ferryboats or pay back the grants used to acquire the boats. The Public Works Director suggested the recommendation might be to accept the three-month trial subject to MTC's approval and reaching an agreement with HBM. Mayor Johnson suggested conveying to MTC that the City does not want to lose more riders by cutting service and wants to do everything possible to maintain the level of service and increase the number of riders above the current level. Councilmember Daysog inquired whether there is any indication that the June fare box recovery is trending upwards, to which the Public Works Direction responded that he did not know. Councilmember Daysog inquired how eliminating the 7:30 p.m. run would impact ratios, to which the Acting City Manager responded by 1%. Councilmember Matarrese stated that he is in favor of presenting the proposal to MTC ; eliminated services are never recovered. Councilmember Daysog concurred with Councilmember Matarrese. Councilmember Matarrese stated a month-and-a-half trial period would be fine if a three-month trial period were too long. Councilmember Matarrese moved approval of the staff recommendation with the exception of eliminating the 7:30 p.m. run contingent upon MTC allowing the City to preserve the 7:30 p.m. run for an approximate three-month trial period and agreement with HBM. Councilmember Daysog seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 12 June 21, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-06-21.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-07-19.pdf,12 | CityCouncil | 2005-07-19 | 12 | Haskett sells his business to someone else, they might not like the types of movies the next operator shows. Mr. Clark stated the issues being raised are valid; there should not be concern over the type of movies showing, other than adult movies the use would be revoked if anything caused a public nuisance, such as being too loud. Mayor Johnson stated that she would not want a theater in her neighborhood; that she has concerns with imposing the regulation on the sixteen other C-1 zoning areas and is not convinced that the zoning could not be changed for just the one area. Vice Mayor Gilmore stated the permit runs with the land; basing a decision on a particular owner is a bad policy; her decision will be based on the merit of the use, not the owner. Councilmember deHaan requested staff to address whether the use could be limited to just one area. The City Attorney stated the Mayor prefers to deal with the one case, rather than Citywide; after analyzing the law carefully and understanding said preference, she has to take responsibility for the legal opinion that the issue must be dealt with Citywide. Mayor Johnson inquired why two or three [C-1] districts in more commercial areas could not be made a different zone; stated there are C-1 zones in the Park Street and Webster Street areas adjacent to more commercial areas; some C-1 zones are in very residential areas; inquired why a few C-1 zones could not be called something different and boutique theaters could be allowed in said areas, without changing the existing geographic boundaries. The Supervising Planner stated staff tried to create criteria for the C-1 districts; finding a solution is very difficult because the areas are so diverse; the amount of traffic was reviewed all districts have adjacent residential areas. Mayor Johnson inquired why three districts in more commercial areas could not be renamed and boutique theaters could be allowed in said areas; stated the geographic area of the zoning district would not be changed; only the name would be changed an… | CityCouncil/2005-07-19.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-08-02.pdf,12 | CityCouncil | 2005-08-02 | 12 | MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL JOINT CITY COUNCIL, COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION, ALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, AND HOUSING AUTHORITY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS MEETING TUESDAY - - - AUGUST 2, 2005 - - 7:05 P.M. Mayor/Chair Johnson convened the Special Joint Meeting at 7:07 p.m. Roll Call - Present: Councilmembers/Commissioners/Authority/Board Members Daysog, deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese and Mayor/Chair Johnson - 5. Absent : None (05-374CC/05-036CIC) Conference with Legal Counsel - Existing Litigation; Name of case Operation Dignity, Inc. V. City of Alameda, Community Improvement Commission, Alameda Reuse and Development Authority and Housing Authority Following the Closed Session, the Special Meeting was reconvened and Mayor/Chair Johnson announced that the Council/Commissioners/ Authority/Board Members obtained briefing and gave direction to the City Attorney/Legal Counsel. Adjournment There being no further business, Mayor/Chair Johnson adjourned the Special Joint Meeting at 7:50 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 Improvement Commission, Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority, and Housing Authority Board of Commissioners August 2, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-08-02.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-08-16.pdf,12 | CityCouncil | 2005-08-16 | 12 | requested staff to address said assumptions. The Development Services Director stated the assumptions are extremely conservative; staff assumed the project would gross approximately $2 million per year in ticket sales and another $900,000 to $1 million in concessions, for a total of $3 million; the financial analysis has determined that the project obligations to the CIC would be met at the achievement of said $3 million; the percentage rent is based on the business producing $3 million; the assumption is that 60-65% of the Alameda market will be captured the Bay Area is an anomaly with respect to theater-going trends; Bay Area theater attendance is almost twice the national average ; theaters in the area are doing twice the amount of business that staff estimated per screen; staff also wanted to ensure that the project has enough revenue to maintain the facilities; DDA provisions require that the buildings need be operated in a certain manner. Councilmember Daysog inquired what the square foot rent would be for the historic theater. The Development Services Director responded staff would have to calculate the amount; the rent has been $2,000 per month for the past few years. Councilmember Daysog inquired what is the square footage of the historic theater, to which the Development Services Director responded that the entire building is 33,000 square feet, which includes space that would not be used. Mayor Johnson requested an overview of the current condition of the historic theater and the status of the acquisition. The Development Services Director responded the Council took action to begin the eminent domain process late last spring; the building estimate, based on an appraisal, was deposited with the courts; the owner has picked up the deposit and advised the court that he would not contest the sale and is only interested in the value; the value will now be established through the eminent domain processi the City will take possession of the theater on October 3 or 4; the City has worked with the owner to gain… | CityCouncil/2005-08-16.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-09-06.pdf,12 | CityCouncil | 2005-09-06 | 12 | requested to consider re-design; noted the Appellant has already pulled permits and has vested the construction. Mayor Johnson stated people would question why the project was approved in ten years. Councilmember Daysog stated that he understands Mayor Johnson's concern with the size, but that the footprint is appropriate for the parcel. Mayor Johnson stated lot coverage cannot be dealt with in a vacuum; the rest of the neighborhood needs to be addressed. requested that staff inquire whether the Appellant would be willing to look at the design review issue. Vice Mayor Gilmore stated that she sympathizes with Mayor Johnson's concern about the size of the house; Alameda property owners have certain rights if the structure fits within the box of the zoning code; zoning for every other property in the City would be changed unless the zoning code is changed. Mayor Johnson stated that the issue should be re-examined; lot coverage is not an entitlement there is a design review standard for neighborhood compatibility. Councilmember deHaan stated that the house would be architecturally the same if cut back by 800 to 1,000 square feet. Councilmember Daysog inquired what the neighbors thought about the project. The Acting Planning and Building Director responded that there was a ten-day notice and no comments were received. Mayor Johnson inquired who received the notice, to which the Acting Planning and Building Director responded the property owners. Mayor Johnson stated renters would not be informed about the project. The Acting Planning and Building Director stated that the neighborhood is predominately owner occupied; County records indicate that 15 of the 21 buildings are owner occupied; 6 of the buildings are rental. Mayor Johnson requested staff to address the possibility of redesign with the Appellant. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 12 September 6, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-09-06.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-09-20.pdf,12 | CityCouncil | 2005-09-20 | 12 | City tried to get the former property owner's attention by filing a lawsuit; some of the tenants could have filed lawsuits if Legal Aid stepped up earlier to help the tenants and provide support. Councilmember Matarrese inquired whether the Task Force was discharged; recommended that a meeting be scheduled with Kennedy Wilson to provide background information, advise what the Council wants, and to determine what Kennedy Wilson wants; requested that staff outline a plan for how to put all the pieces together with multiple City department involvement directed the City Manager to put together a plan on how to enforce the Code, as well as State and federal laws; stated a conscious direction should be given to all players to provide a warning light before a melt down; he would like to review the Minority Report before making any condominium conversion comments. Mayor Johnson inquired how tenants know where to complain about property conditions. The Acting Planning and Building Director responded there are complaint forms on the website; departments refer complaints to Code Enforcement; outreach is not currently available. The City Manager stated that people coming to the counter are referred to the Planning and Building Department; changes will be incorporated on the forms to ensure that people are not discouraged to report a complaint. Mayor Johnson stated that the Council needs to review prioritization of code compliance cases to ensure that resources are correctly targeted; conditions at the Harbor Island Apartments were raised by the Council for the past three years. Vice Mayor Gilmore stated that Kennedy Wilson is somewhat aware of the Harbor Island Apartment history; the City and either the Task Force or the Harbor Island Tenant Association members should meet with Kennedy Wilson sooner rather than later; Kennedy Wilson would be more conscious in the beginning to put their best foot forward and would be more amiable to meet with members of the community; scheduling a meeting with Kennedy Wilson should be a prior… | CityCouncil/2005-09-20.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-10-18.pdf,12 | CityCouncil | 2005-10-18 | 12 | MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING TUESDAY- - -OCTOBER 18, 2005 - -7:31 P.M. Mayor Johnson convened the Special Meeting at 9:04 p.m. Roll Call - Present : Councilmembers Daysog, deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese, and Mayor Johnson - 5. Absent : None. Public Comment Bill Smith, Alameda, showed renderings of a transit rail. (05-510) Study Session on Disaster Preparedness/Emergency Operations Plan. The Fire Chief gave a Power Point presentation. The Council requested information on the following: designated decision makers, policy versus non-policy decisions, the earthquake level that bridges can endure, School District and hospital assistance coordination, long-term drinking water options, hospital interaction in the event of an epidemic, utilization of the Hornet for storing supplies, and clearer direction to participants in the Citizen Emergency Response Team (CERT) program. Adjournment There being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the Special Meeting at 10:32 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 October 18, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-10-18.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-11-01.pdf,12 | CityCouncil | 2005-11-01 | 12 | The Development Services Director responded the Police Department would be notified a couple of weeks before the special event. Councilmember deHaan inquired whether special showings would be in the bigger or smaller theater. The Development Services Director responded special showings could be a combination of both; the intent is to have all the big blockbusters start in the bigger theater. Councilmember deHaan inquired whether there was a caveat to review the Use Permit after a year, to which the Development Services Director responded in the affirmative. Councilmember deHaan inquired how often the Developer ran late night movies. The Developer responded that the new Harry Potter movie was being released Thursday at midnight; Star Wars and Serenity ran at 12:01 a.m.; approximately six movies have been shown past midnight this year. Councilmember deHaan inquired whether lowering the number of late night movies would be acceptable. Mayor Johnson stated that the Planning Board had a very thorough discussion on midnight showings; there should be flexibility. Councilmember deHaan stated there was no Planning Board resolution regarding cueing. The Development Services Director stated she spoke to the Police Chief regarding the matter and concluded that nobody believes cueing would occur. The City Attorney stated that there is a section in the Resolution regarding cueing; there are five conditions on blockbuster releases and special venues. Councilmember deHaan inquired whether there would be contract overtime for cueing, to which the Development Services Director responded in the affirmative. Councilmember deHaan inquired why a Public Works and Police Department review was requested. The Development Services Director responded the Public Works review Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 12 November 1, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-11-01.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-12-06.pdf,12 | CityCouncil | 2005-12-06 | 12 | of the key issues at the Joint City Council and Recreation and Park Commission meeting he was glad to see some of the major elements tackled. (05-572) Councilmember Daysog stated that a resident asked him about the price of fire inspections for homes and the amount of revenue that has been generated over the last five years; requested background data on the matter. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the regular meeting at 10:26 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 December 6, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-12-06.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-12-20.pdf,12 | CityCouncil | 2005-12-20 | 12 | precipitated the need for the requested funding and what type of cuts have been made to deal with the current situation. Mr. Allen stated that the $10 fee has not increased since 1992; operating costs have increased; the fee was new and did not include cost escalation; $19 million has been leveraged from the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) funding into the four County Service Area (CSA) cities; last year was the first year that the program did not have a full year of HUD funding six out of thirteen rounds of grants have been received from the Office of Healthy Homes and Lead Hazard Control; program income has been generated from of no-interest loans to property owners. payment is made when the property is transferred; the loans need to be recycled for the same type of activity services were carried for three years on program income; six people were laid off last year because all program income was used; efforts are being made to identify whether there is a mechanism to correct the fact that there has not been an increase in base funding since 1992; the budget has been reduced from $5 million to $2.5 million over three years; audits are preformed every year; the program has won National awards. Councilmember Daysog stated that the loss of HUD funding has dropped the annual budget by $3 million; the policy question is whether the residents should pick up the loss of the HUD funding. Mr. Allen stated that the policy question is whether or not property owners should have a say in whether they value the service enough to increase the fee; questioned how the level of service can be maintained when the service has exceeded $10 per year. Mayor Johnson inquired whether programs that have been funded through HUD could not be funded because of funding source limitations. Mr. Allen responded yes and no; the program cuts from HUD took place in one year; a $3 million HUD grant was received the next year; the CSA fee is restricted to property owner services HUD dollars are used for project remediation and tena… | CityCouncil/2005-12-20.pdf |
CityCouncil/2006-02-07.pdf,12 | CityCouncil | 2006-02-07 | 12 | $200,000 or $35,000; the resolution is correct in stating that the matter should be brought to the CIC at the earliest convenience if the estimated costs exceeds $35,0000. The General Counsel stated the policy was adopted by the Council on September 6; noted Page 2, Item #3 states "Comply with the Community Improvement Commission Policy regarding Procedures for Hiring of Special Legal Counsel. Chair Johnson stated that the policy and resolution state two different things ARRA may have the same inconsistency the intent was that matters be brought to the CIC if estimated outside counsel legal fees are more than $35,000. Commissioner deHaan stated the Commission would approve the resolution. Commissioner Gilmore and Chair Johnson concurred with Commissioner deHaan. Commissioner Matarrese stated the ground rule should be that the matter comes to the appropriate governing body if the estimate is over $35,000 but General Counsel can spend up to $35,000 per matter to initiate the process. Chair Johnson stated that bullet point 1 [General Counsel is authorized by CIC to spend up to $35,000 per matter from appropriate project budget without prior CIC approval] should be omitted; the correction should be made to the ARRA policy also. Commissioner deHaan moved adoption of the resolution and approval of the policy with modification to omit bullet point 1 [General Counsel is authorized by CIC to spend up to $35,000 per matter from appropriated project budget without prior CIC approval]. Commissioner Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. AGENDA ITEM (06-057CC/06-003CIC) Recommendation to accept Quarterly Financial Report and approve mid-year budget adjustments, including General Fund reserve policy and infrastructure review. The Finance Director gave a brief presentation. The Public Works Director gave a brief update on the December 6, Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council and 2 Community Improvement Commission February 7, 2006 | CityCouncil/2006-02-07.pdf |
CityCouncil/2006-02-21.pdf,12 | CityCouncil | 2006-02-21 | 12 | Councilmember Daysog stated the language as amended still includes military logistics that go beyond the scope of the City Council; the resolution is another contribution to the level of rancor between the far left and far right. Vice Mayor Gilmore requested clarification on how the amended resolution would read. Councilmember Matarrese responded that the paragraph referencing Congressman Murtha and Assembly Member Hancock would be removed; the second to the last paragraph would read: "NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Alameda calls upon the President, Congress and the Governor of California to take immediate steps to withdraw the California National Guard." Mayor Johnson stated she has no problem in stating that adequate California National Guard levels are needed here to deal with emergencies and disasters, which is different than the proposed language ; the community does not want the Council to speak about withdrawing all troops from Iraq; maintaining adequate levels of the California National Guard is different; State and local governments have been left at risk. Councilmember Daysog stated the key phrase in the resolution is "to take immediate steps to establish a date and timetable to withdraw U.S. troops" he is not a military logistics planner; the best he can do is to offer prayers for a safe and speedy return. On the call for the question, the MOTION FAILED by the following voice vote: Ayes: Vice Mayor Gilmore and Councilmember Matarrese - 2. Noes : Councilmember deHaan and Mayor Johnson - 2. Abstentions : Councilmember Daysog - 1. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA None. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS (06-086) - Consideration of Mayor's nomination for appointment to the Planning Board. Mayor Johnson nominated Marilyn Ezzy Ashcraft for appointment to the Planning Board. (06-087) Councilmember deHaan stated that he attended the Catellus workshop; approximately 40 people attended; concerns were expressed regarding properly utilizing the waterfront; at least 1 million Regular Meeting… | CityCouncil/2006-02-21.pdf |
CityCouncil/2006-03-07.pdf,12 | CityCouncil | 2006-03-07 | 12 | Councilmember deHaan congratulated the Assistant City Manager for the new addition to his family. Mayor Johnson thanked the Interim Assistant City Manager for doing a great job for the last two months. Councilmember deHaan stated the Interim Assistant City Manager stepped into the position and did not miss a beat. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the Regular Meeting at 9:13 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 March 7, 2006 | CityCouncil/2006-03-07.pdf |
CityCouncil/2006-03-21.pdf,12 | CityCouncil | 2006-03-21 | 12 | Councilmember/Commissioner deHaan stated expansion was iffy at best. The Development Services Director stated Alameda has a very close, local market that would continue to draw patrons because of convenience and appeal. the business district and Alameda Theater are catalytic and create a draw. Councilmember/Commissioner deHaan stated the community looks forward to having movies in Alameda; the Jack London area is not the best environment; stated the 20-inch overhand had been a concern; inquired how the 20-inch overhand was corrected. The Development Services Director responded five inches were gained because the owner was able to utilize different speakers with different dimensions; additional inches were captured throughout the theater. Councilmember/Commissioner deHaan stated that it appeared that inches were captured in the stair structure. The Development Services Director concurred with Councilmember/Commissioner deHaan. Councilmember/Commissioner Daysog stated most of the computer - assisted drawings were taken from a certain distance; inquired whether scale drawings could be provided from an up-close, upward angle. Vice Mayor/Commissioner Gilmore thanked everyone for continuing to come out to support their position; discussions have been decisive and helpful; the historic theater closed over twenty years agoi restoring the theater was intimately tied to going to a theater in Alameda; changes in the theater industry have been discussed; a USA Today article noted that theater owners are not worried about which way the industry would goi preserving the historic theater does not make sense if there was a possibility that the theater industry would not be successful in the future; discussions have addressed single screens not being economically feasible because of maintenance and operation costs; 80% of ticket revenue goes to the studios when a film initially comes out the percentage is higher with certain blockbusters; theater operators do not make a lot of money from ticket sales in the first couple of weeks … | CityCouncil/2006-03-21.pdf |
CityCouncil/2006-04-04.pdf,12 | CityCouncil | 2006-04-04 | 12 | over the Miller Sweeney Bridge AC Transit estimated the cost would be an additional $20,000 per year; Line 63's continued service to Alameda Point was discussed; Alameda residents requested Line 63 not be cut, particularly from the Homeless Collaborative the need for a bus shelter was also addressed; Line 51's bus bunching needs to be revisited; route changes may be contemplated for Line 51; electric bus information was provided; Ecopass discounts would not be an option for the City; another option is being considered the deadhead buses exceed the 3 ton limit; the reason for the 3 ton limit is unknown; recommended that the Council give direction to do something about the noise problem. The Council interrupted the discussion to address the recommendation to award contract to east Bay Construction [paragraph no. 06-179]. Dave Needle, Alameda, stated that AC Transit's measurements have a significant flaw; 37 buses cross the High Street Bridge daily; AC Transit disagrees that moving the bus route to Hegenberger was less expensive; AC Transit shows a 1 minute to 4 minute time difference in trip time; $12,000 of the estimated $19,000 cost is wrong; recommended that the Council request AC Transit to try new routes for a month. Ed Payne, Alameda, stated the High Street Bridge was built in 1937 for lightweight traffici shockwaves are felt when the buses cross the span; the routes are two minutes shorter by going to Hegenberger and Doolittle Drive. Ron Valentine, Alameda, stated the 3 ton limit is posted at both ends of the Bridge buses are not the only vehicles causing the noise recommended that the buses use commercial streets instead of residential streets; requested Council to urge AC Transit to try the alternate route. Mayor Johnson clarified that in-service bus routes are not being discussed only empty buses. Councilmember Matarrese directed the City Manager to request AC Transit to try re-routing for a month. (06-188 - ) Councilmember Matarrese requested that a meeting be scheduled with the Transportation Commission… | CityCouncil/2006-04-04.pdf |
CityCouncil/2006-04-18.pdf,12 | CityCouncil | 2006-04-18 | 12 | Counci lmember/Board Member/Commissioner Daysog stated residents were led to believe that the City needed a fully staffed Attorneys Office in 1937; the City has not been flying with all wings in place over the past year; Option One seems consistent with what prompted creating the City Attorney': office in 1937. Mayor/Chair Johnson stated she would prefer to have Vice Mayor/Board Member/Commissioner Gilmore's input; outside counsel costs have ranged from $2.5 to $3 million; the Council/Board/Commission have been receiving monthly reports on the costs of outside counsel; now the costs are within a reasonable range; the Council/Board/Commission should have a better understanding on the operation of the City Attorney's Office; the Council/Board/Commission should not focus on the number of attorneys on staff but on how to deal with outside counsel costs and the combined costs; $1.4 million is budgeted for outside counsel this year. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan stated the costs for outside counsel have gone down; the Council/Board/Commission should concentrate on filling the City Attorney's position; suggested filling one of the attorney vacancies immediately. Mayor/Chair Johnson stated the Council/Board/Commission would have a better understanding on how to model the rest of the City Attorney's Office once the City Attorney's position is discussed. ouncilmember/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan stated hiring from within the City is a possibility. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Matarrese stated the City Attorney position should be posted as soon as possible; he would prefer to discuss filling the vacancies when Vice Mayor Gilmore is present. louncilmember/Boar Member/Commissioner deHaan moved approval of announcing the City Attorney position and filling one other attorney position. Mayor/Chair Johnson concurred that the City Attorney position should be announced; stated she would want to have Vice Mayor/Board Member/Commissioner Gilmore's input. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Daysog s… | CityCouncil/2006-04-18.pdf |
CityCouncil/2006-05-02.pdf,12 | CityCouncil | 2006-05-02 | 12 | Vice Mayor Gilmore requested Council be provided a detailed report on the outcome, what happened, and why it happened. Councilmember deHaan stated the report should include how other applicants could be affected. Councilmember Matarrese stated the report should address and provide exhibits of what applicants are told when applying, documentatior of the point system, how points can change and what documentation goes with point changes. The Assistant City Manager stated what applicants were told might be difficult to reconstruct due to ADC staffing changes. Councilmember Matarrese stated anything in writing should be provided. Vice Mayor Gilmore stated there should be a system; applicants should receive a handout clearly spelling out the requirements. The Assistant City Manager stated the City used ADC as a contractor. Councilmember Matarrese stated there should be contractor performance requirement. Mayor Johnson inquired whether ADC contracted with the City or the developer, to which the Assistant City Manager responded the City. Mayor Johnson stated the City should have specifications in place when entering into a contract. Councilmember deHaan stated the evaluation process should not have changed; consistency is all-important; further requested staff to review the recourse and how applicants appeal the matter to a different level. (06-238 - ) Mark Irons, Alameda, stated that he has concerns about the use of alternative fuels; the process for reviewing use of alternative fuel vehicles should be thorough; questioned whether electric vehicles should be selected over hybrids; hybrids are the fastest way to stop the greenhouse effect. Mayor Johnson stated the City's electric power is over 80% green; inquired whether Mr. Iron's had concerns with using electric vehicles given Alameda's circumstance. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 12 May 2, 2006 | CityCouncil/2006-05-02.pdf |
CityCouncil/2006-05-16.pdf,12 | CityCouncil | 2006-05-16 | 12 | has been received from the Recreation and Parks Commission; the City provides full range sport opportunities; providing baseball fields for the Miracle League fills the one gap; encouraged the City to lend a kind ear to the opportunity and move forward. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the Regular Meeting at 9:01 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 May 16, 2006 | CityCouncil/2006-05-16.pdf |
CityCouncil/2006-06-06.pdf,12 | CityCouncil | 2006-06-06 | 12 | indicate the accident involved a pedestrian. Councilmember Matarrese requested information on the status of calling 911 from cell phones. Councilmember Daysog stated that the Police Department has been vigilant on traffic injuries and fatalities in the past several years; traffic related deaths have occurred on Constitution Way. Councilmember deHaan inquired whether Ms. Solomon addressed the matter with City staff. Ms. Soloman responded she spoke to the Fire Department Duty Chief regarding the matter. (06-298) Michael John Torrey, Alameda, stated the Federal Communications Commission and the American Radio Relay League have declared the week of June 18 through the 25 as Amateur Radio Week. (06-299) Duane Rutledge, Dublin, stated he received a disqualification letter from Alameda Development Corporation (ADC) ; all statements in the letter are incorrect; no written policy was presented regarding the appeal process. Vice Mayor Gilmore inquired when Mr. Rutledge received the letter, to which Mr. Rutledge responded approximately a week ago. The Assistant City Manager stated ADC disqualified Mr. Rutledge's application; the letter should outline the appeal process. Mr. Rutledge stated he received no response to his inquires regarding details of the appeal process. Vice Mayor Gilmore inquired who would adjudicate the appeal. The Assistant City Manager responded first the appeal would go to the ADC Board and then the Community Improvement Commission. Councilmember Daysog inquired whether Mr. Rutledge asked the ADC specific questions, to which Mr. Rutledge responded in the affirmative. Councilmember deHaan inquired who is the ADC point of contact, to which the Assistant City Manager responded the Executive Director. Councilmember deHaan inquired who would respond to Mr. Rutledge, to which the Assistant City Manager responded the ADC Board. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 12 June 6, 2006 | CityCouncil/2006-06-06.pdf |
CityCouncil/2006-06-20.pdf,12 | CityCouncil | 2006-06-20 | 12 | Confidential Employees Association. Following the Closed Session, the Special Joint Meeting was reconvened and Mayor/Chair Johnson announced that regarding Operation Dignity V. Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority, the Council/Commission were provided with an update and direction was given regarding settlement parameters; regarding Community Improvement Commission V. Cocores Development Company, the Commission received a briefing from Legal Counsel and gave parameters for settlement discussion; regarding Conference with Real Property Negotiators, the Commission received a briefing from Real Property Negotiators and direction was given to Real Property Negotiators; regarding Conference with Labor Negotiators, Council received a briefing on the status of negotiations and gave direction to Labor Negotiators. Adjournment There being no further business, Mayor/Chair Johnson adjourned the Special Joint Meeting at 8:55 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 2 Alameda City Council, Community Improvement Commission, Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority, and Housing Authority Board of Commissioners June 20, 2006 | CityCouncil/2006-06-20.pdf |
CityCouncil/2006-07-05.pdf,12 | CityCouncil | 2006-07-05 | 12 | Counci lmember/Board Member/Commissioner Daysog stated the current budget process was seamless and transparent; three components are involved with approving the operating budget : City Council, Community Improvement, and Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority; that he is not ready to endorse shifting from retail/office redevelopment to residential redevelopment [at the Fleet Industrial Supply Center], which has a $6.9 million cost; suggested that the resolutions be adopted separately. Mayor/Chair Johnson stated the budget adoption should move forward and the Alameda Power and Telecom briefing should be scheduled. Councilmember/Boar Member/Commissioner Matarrese stated a follow- up joint meeting [with the Public Utilities Board] is needed to address unanswered, time-dependent assessment and evaluation questions raised at the last joint meeting. Mayor/Chair Johnson stated scheduling a joint meeting might take longer ; scheduling a briefing first would allow for better preparation; both a briefing and joint meeting should be scheduled. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan inquired whether quarterly reports are provided. The City Manager/Executive Director responded that information provided to the Public Utilities Board would be shared. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan stated quarterly reports should be the minimum key indicators need to be reviewed. Councilmember Matarrese moved adoption of the City Council resolution. Councilmember Daysog seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. Commissioner Matarrese moved adoption of the Community Improvement Commission resolution. Commissioner Gilmore seconded the motion, which carried by the following voice vote: Ayes : Commissioners deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese, and Chair Johnson - 4. Abstentions Commissioner Daysog - 1. Board Member Daysog moved adoption of the Alameda Reuse and Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Alameda 5 Reuse and Redevelopment Authority, and Community Improvement Commission July 5, 2006 | CityCouncil/2006-07-05.pdf |
CityCouncil/2006-07-18.pdf,12 | CityCouncil | 2006-07-18 | 12 | Vice Mayor Gilmore stated the City needs to get some tangible benefit for transferring the ferry service. Councilmember Matarrese stated that he does not want to waste staff's or WTA's time if there are no good, solid reasons for the transfer. Councilmember Matarrese moved approval of bringing the matter back to Council with consolidated information. Councilmember deHaan stated the matter does not need to be fast tracked; Council needs to better understand what the parties bring to the table; more information needs to be gathered he would like to have staunch, feedback points brought back to Council to ensure that the WTA is right on track; the transfer could be the marriage of the century, or possibly not. Councilmember deHaan seconded the motion. Under discussion, Councilmember Daysog stated that he previously abstained on the matter; he will vote no on the matter tonight the City should get back to the regular business of running and managing the ferry system. Councilmember deHaan stated an agreement does not need to be signed, and negotiations do not need to be initiated; Council is requesting that both sides get together to provide information on the future and commitments that can be made. Councilmember Daysog stated that he will still vote no on the matter; he may change his vote in the future. On the call for the question, the motion carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: louncilmembers deHaan, Gilmore and Matarrese - 3. Noes: Councilmember Daysog - 1. Abstentions: Mayor Johnson - 1. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (06-375) Michael John Torrey, Alameda, requested status on the Parrot Park northern waterfront project; stated the children have nowhere to play. The Acting City Manager stated the Environmental Impact Report is being prepared for the northern waterfront. Mayor Johnson suggested the matter be referred to the Housing Authority. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 12 July 18, 2006 | CityCouncil/2006-07-18.pdf |
CityCouncil/2006-07-26.pdf,12 | CityCouncil | 2006-07-26 | 12 | Councilmember/Commissioner deHaan inquired what would be the cost to put the wheelchair lift back in as a line item, to which the Development Manager responded approximately $80,000. Mayor/Chair Johnson recommended that the motion include direction for staff to provide the cost and budget source for the rental of a wheelchair lift. Councilmember/Commissioner Matarrese and Vice Mayor/Commissioner Gilmore agreed to amend the motion to include Mayor/Chair Johnson's recommendation. On the call for the question, the motion carried by the following voice vote: Ayes : Councilmembers/Commissioners Gilmore, Matarrese and Mayor/Chair Johnson - 3. Noes : Councilmembers/Commissioners Daysog and deHaan -2. (06-047CIC) Recommendation to authorize substitution of Surety Bond for 2003 Merged Area Bond Issue Cash Reserve Account consistent with Bond Indenture. Withdrawn. Chair Johnson announced that the matter was withdrawn from the agenda. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Mayor/Chair Johnson adjourned the Special Joint Meeting at 10:05 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 12 Community Improvement Commission July 26, 2006 | CityCouncil/2006-07-26.pdf |
CityCouncil/2006-09-05.pdf,12 | CityCouncil | 2006-09-05 | 12 | negative. Councilmember deHaan questioned whether precedence would be set; inquired about the driveway width. The Supervising Planner stated the driveway is eight feet. Mayor Johnson opened the Public Hearing. Proponents (In favor of appeal) : Li-Sheng Fu, Architect. Opponents (Opposed to appeal) : Candace Fitzgerald, Alameda. Neutral Christopher Buckley, AAPS; Richard W. Rutter, AAPS; and Mark Irons, Historical Advisory Board (provided handout) Mayor Johnson closed the public portion of the Hearing. * * * (06-444) Following Mr. Buckley's comments, Councilmember Matarrese moved approval of continuing the meeting past 12:00 midnight. Vice Mayor Gilmore seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. * * * Mayor Johnson stated the house reminds her of a house on Pacific Avenue. she would like more detail to make the buildings' appearance look like the original character of the house; the side views are not attractive; she is concerned with the size of the structures. Councilmember deHaan stated the project provides the key to compromising the Golden Mean; further stated the project done with the City's help on San Jose Avenue is disproportionate with the rest of the community; in addition to the Golden Mean, the width of the driveway is of concern. Mayor Johnson clarified although AAPS is not supporting the project, its position is not opposed. Councilmember Matarrese stated the Golden Mean is a visual presentation based on aesthetics; achieving the Golden Mean by grading is a legitimate approach; squeezing in the number of units and parking spaces seems difficult; however, the project cannot be turned down if it meets the Code. the Code should be changed if Council does not like the way the Code works; that he would prefer the front path to go straight to the door; the project is not Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 12 September 5, 2006 | CityCouncil/2006-09-05.pdf |
CityCouncil/2006-09-19.pdf,12 | CityCouncil | 2006-09-19 | 12 | Mayor Johnson inquired what would be the extra cost for new construction. The Fire Marshal responded the proposed ordinance has language that allows fire sprinkler systems to be combined with the domestic water service, which eliminates the dedicated fire main system; the East Bay Municipal Utility District allows the use of dual service meters which supplies the fire sprinkler system and the domestic water system for the house and reduces the cost. Councilmember Daysog stated a range of questions have been presented which could be addressed at a workshop with affected stakeholders; workshops help in the rule making process; inquired how information was obtained from the stakeholders. The Fire Marshal responded groups meetings were held. Councilmember Matarrese concurred with Councilmember Daysog; stated the current code is unfair because the threshold is based on assessed value; another valuation is needed; the threshold needs to be tested; jurisdictions that use the replacement value should be reviewed to see were the range of threshold sits. Councilmember deHaan stated the concerning factors are with retrofitting of older homes : 25% of construction cost seems to be very low; concurred with Councilmember Matarrese regarding reviewing other jurisdictions. Councilmember Matarrese stated a four unit apartment bathroom remodel could trigger quite an expense. the issue seems to be rectifying the disparity between using assessed value as the valuation upon which the threshold percentage is based and reviewing what the appropriate threshold should be once the threshold is leveled. Councilmember deHaan stated termite and foundation damage could trigger the threshold. Mayor Johnson stated she is concerned with how the work is calculated. Councilmember Daysog requesting different scenarios showing how the proposed ordinance was better than what is currently in place; stated workshops provide an opportunity to have a range of issues discussed. Former Councilmember Barbara Kerr stated workshops are a good idea; Regular Me… | CityCouncil/2006-09-19.pdf |
CityCouncil/2006-10-03.pdf,12 | CityCouncil | 2006-10-03 | 12 | year. Mayor Johnson requested that the matter be brought back to Council in six months to make sure that the fee schedule works as intended. Councilmember Daysog read the resolution paragraph addressing administrative adjustments. Mayor Johnson stated the intent is to make fees more predictable; she hopes that the fee schedule works as intended. Councilmember deHaan stated past, hard issues have been tackled, particularly the flat rate; he hopes that a proper estimate can be given for time and materials. The Building Official responded efforts are made to provide proper estimates; deposits should cover the full project. Councilmember Daysog inquired what is the percentage for local fees on new residential construction. Te Building Official responded a Bayport home is valued at $350 to $400 based on square footage. fees are about 4% of the value. ouncilmember Daysog moved adoption of the resolution. Councilmember deHaan seconded the motion. Under discussion Councilmember Matarrese stated the motion should include direction to bring a report back to Council in six months to make sure that the fee schedule works as intended, especially with feedback on commercial fees. The City Manager clarified that the fire inspection and alarm fees are not included in the resolution. Councilmembers Daysog and deHaan agreed to amend the motion to incorporate Councilmember Matarrese's comments and clarification that fire inspection and alarm fees are not included in the fee schedule. On the call for the question, the motion carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (06-504) - Jimmie Lee Marks, Alameda, stated he was representing the Encinal Alumni Association: the end of 3rd Street has no name ; Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 12 October 3, 2006 | CityCouncil/2006-10-03.pdf |
CityCouncil/2006-10-17.pdf,12 | CityCouncil | 2006-10-17 | 12 | Mayor Johnson stated the open space is defined by the General Plan. Councilmember deHaan stated he is concerned that there should be more property than what is shown. The Supervising Planner stated the proposal is based on the General Plan language; the General Plan provides guidance in some of the explanatory text. Mayor Johnson stated Council is not adopting a diagram of how the open space would be configured. The Supervising Planner stated the diagram shows the general distribution of land use throughout the City. Councilmember Matarrese stated the previous motion upheld the 300- - foot description as written in the General Plan. Councilmember Matarrese moved approval of rezoning to R-2/PD the MU-5 area encompassed within the proposed project plot that does not include the required portion for the Estuary Park, as per the description in the General Plan, and bringing the other MU-5 parcels back to the Planning Board for a recommendation to the Council at a future date. Councilmember Daysog inquired whether the proposed rezoning precludes the densities that the Collins' property originally reviewed, to which the Supervising Planner responded in the affirmative. Vice Mayor Gilmore seconded the motion, which carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Councilmembers Daysog, Gilmore, Matarrese and Mayor Johnson - 4. Noes : Councilmember deHaan -1. Mayor Johnson stated Mr. Siden indicated that potential funding would be available in the next couple years through ballot measures the City should review how the property could be acquired; a General Plan open space designation is one thing, but someone else owning the land is another thing to do; Council gave direction to bring back a proposal for a Beltline Task Force; suggested having a similar Task Force, or perhaps use the same Task Force, to determine how to purchase the property. Councilmember Matarrese concurred with Mayor Johnson; clarified that the City has been serious about the matter before; Council put a million on the table and the Parks and Recreation Dep… | CityCouncil/2006-10-17.pdf |
CityCouncil/2006-11-21.pdf,12 | CityCouncil | 2006-11-21 | 12 | MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL JOINT CITY COUNCIL AND ALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (ARRA) MEETING TUESDAY - -NOVEMBER 21, 2006- -5:30 P.M. Mayor/Chair Johnson convened the Special Joint Meeting at 5:52 p.m. Roll Call - Present : Councilmembers/Authority Members Daysog, deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese and Mayor/Chair Johnson - 5. Absent : None. [Note: Councilmember Daysog was absent during the discussion on Ballena Isle Marina (paragraph no. 06-553) . ] The Joint Meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider : (06-552) Conference with Labor Negotiators; Agency negotiators : Craig Jory and Human Resources Director; Employee organizations: Alameda City Employees Association (ACEA) , Management and Confidential Employees Association (MCEA) and Police Association Non-Sworn (PANS) (06-553) Conference with Property Negotiator; Property : Ballena Isle Marina; Negotiating parties City of Alameda and Ballena Isle Marina LLP Negotiating parties; Under negotiation: Price and terms (ARRA) Conference with Real Property Negotiatori Property: Alameda Naval Air Station; Negotiating parties : ARRA and Area 51 Productions: Under negotiation: Price and Terms Following the Closed Session, the Special Joint Meeting was reconvened and Mayor/Chair Johnson announced that regarding Labor, Council received a briefing from the City's Labor Negotiator regarding negotiations with ACEA, MCEA, and PANS and staff was given direction; regarding Ballena Isle Marina, Council received a briefing by the City Property Negotiator and direction was given to staff; regarding Alameda Naval Air Station, Authority Members gave direction to staff regarding terms for a new lease. Adjournment There being no further business, Mayor/Chair Johnson adjourned the Special Joint Meeting at 7:03 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger City Clerk Agenda for meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act. Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council and Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority November 21, 2006 | CityCouncil/2006-11-21.pdf |
CityCouncil/2006-12-05.pdf,12 | CityCouncil | 2006-12-05 | 12 | MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL JOINT CITY COUNCIL, ALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (ARRA), AND COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION (CIC) MEETING TUESDAY- - -DECEMBER 5, 2006- -7:31 P.M. Mayor/Chair Johnson convened the Special Joint Meeting at 7:55 p.m. ROLL CALL - Present : Councilmembers / Authority Members / Commissioners Daysog, deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese, and Mayor / Chair Johnson - 5. Absent : None. CONSENT CALENDAR Councilmember/Authority Member/Commissioner Gilmore moved approval of the Consent Calendar. Councilmember/Authority Member/Commissioner Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. [Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk preceding the paragraph number. ] ( *06-597CC/06-073CIC) Minutes of the Special Joint City Council and Community Improvement Commission Meeting held on November 21, 2006. Approved. ( *06-074CIC) Recommendation to accept the Annual Report and authorize transmittal to the State Controller's Office and the City Council. Accepted. AGENDA ITEMS (06-598CC/06-075CIC) Recommendation to accept transmittal of the : 1) Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) for Fiscal Year ended June 30, 2006; 2) Auditor's Agreed Upon Procedures Report on compliance with Vehicle Code Section 40200.1 3 Parking Citation Processing; 3) Agreed Upon Procedures Report on compliance with the Proposition 111 21005-06 Appropriations Limit Increment 4) Police and Fire Retirement System Pension Plans 1079 and 1092 Audit Report for Fiscal Year ended June 30, 2006; 5) Metropolitan Transportation Commission Grant Programs Financial Statements for Year ended June 30, 2006; 6) Community Improvement Commission Basic Component Unit Financial Statements for the Year ended June 30, 2006; and 7) Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority Basic Component Unit Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Alameda Reuse and 1 Redevelopment Authority, and Community Improvement Commission December 5, 2006 | CityCouncil/2006-12-05.pdf |
CityCouncil/2007-01-02.pdf,12 | CityCouncil | 2007-01-02 | 12 | along the way are dependent upon the particular tenants and how the tenants use the building Mervyns' design would be known as the project progresses and would need to go through design review. Councilmember deHaan stated the whole picture needs to be reviewed and understood; the matter should be sent back to the Planning Board; a precedent is being set when a timeline cannot be met; the developer has known the tenants for over two years. On the call for the question, the motion carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: louncilmembers Gilmore, Matarrese, Tam, and Mayor Johnson - 4. Noes: Councilmember deHaan - 1. Counci lmember Matarrese stated that he shares some of Councilmember deHaan's concerns; he would like the Planning Board and staff to go back and formalize the conditions of the project and do a measurement; the conditions are misaligned because of an administrative call ; the administrative call is going back to the Planning Board; the Planning Board should make sure nothing else is buried that would cause further misalignment each phase and building would have design review. The Planning and Building Director stated a spreadsheet is almost complete which shows if and when the condition has been met. Councilmember Matarrese inquired when the results would go to the Planning Board, to which the Planning and Building Director responded if not the coming meeting, the next. Vice Mayor Tam stated the Design Review did not need to go to the Planning Board and could have been approved at the staff level; staff decided to bring the matter to the Planning Board because to heighten community input; inquired whether every building Design Review would go to the Planning Board. The Planning and Building Director responded in the negative; stated high public interest projects would go to the Planning Board; staff approves Design Review everyday. Vice Mayor Tam stated she underscores Councilmember Matarrese' issue of trying to make sure there is some reconciliation between what staff approves at the administrative le… | CityCouncil/2007-01-02.pdf |
CityCouncil/2007-01-16.pdf,12 | CityCouncil | 2007-01-16 | 12 | Councilmember deHaan stated unauthorized tree pruning is concerning because trees are important to the City. The Public Works Director stated that he does not have the staff to police tree pruning; residents deny knowledge of tree trimming. Councilmember deHaan inquired whether tree infill plans are underway, to which the Public Works Director responded in the affirmative. Councilmember deHaan stated the rest of Alameda would be impacted by how trees are infilled. Vice Mayor Tam stated Ms. Guthrie invited her to view the trees and visit Mr. Matz's unit; some residents have chopped the trees inquired whether the trees could be moved. The Public Works Director responded he was not sure whether the trees would remain healthy; stated the move would be very expensive. Councilmember Gilmore stated trees grow; questioned whether the same issue would come up in twenty years if the trees are replaced; she does not want to get into a cycle of replacing healthy trees periodically; the City has higher uses for money than replacing trees cyclically. The Public Works Director stated Mr. Matz's Master Tree Plan reference is not the section that addresses when trees should be removed; the section addresses how trees are selected. Councilmember Matarrese stated a trimming and pruning option has been suggested to increase the view line and preserve mature trees; the Tree Master Plan needs some updating; carbon sequesters are of greater importance; view restoration can be accomplished now is the time to take a second look at the Tree Master Plan. Councilmember deHaan stated sometimes mistakes are made when trees are planted; the intent is to add more trees down Shoreline Drive and help the eco system; street trees should be uniform; tree infilling opportunities exist throughout the City; he is not sure whether views would improve if the trees are replaced. Mayor Johnson stated many trees have died and have not been replaced; inquired whether trees are planted in existing planting areas Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 12 Januar… | CityCouncil/2007-01-16.pdf |
CityCouncil/2007-02-06.pdf,12 | CityCouncil | 2007-02-06 | 12 | concrete; many trees are missing throughout the City; infill needs to be aggressive. Mayor Johnson stated cement needs to be removed from the areas around the Shoreline Drive trees; an ordinance might be necessary to deal with the problem. Councilmember Matarrese moved approval of staff recommendation. Mayor Johnson stated the motion should include that the Master Tree Plan come back to Council. Councilmember Matarrese amended his motion to include that the Master Tree Plan return to Council. Councilmember deHaan seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (07-060) Eugenie Young, Alameda, submitted handout ; discussed bringing a cruise port to Alameda Point. (07-061) Art Javier, Alameda, expressed his support for a cruise port at Alameda Point. Mayor Johnson stated the Development Services Department is looking into the matter. (07-062) Deborah James, Alameda, stated existing bus routes need to be serviced; AC Transit does not respond to complaints. Mayor Johnson stated AC Transit representatives attend some of the Transportation Commission meetings. Councilmember Gilmore stated Elsa Ortiz is the City's AC Transit representative suggested that Ms. James contact Ms. Ortiz. Ms. James noted Ruth Herch passed away in September; Ms. Herch helped the Harbor Island Apartment residents through difficult times. (07-063) Bill Smith, Alameda, discussed cruise ships. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS ( 07-064) Selection of Councilmember and alternate to serve as the League of California Cities East Bay Division representative. Mayor Johnson stated Vice Mayor Tam and Councilmember deHaan Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 12 February 6, 2007 | CityCouncil/2007-02-06.pdf |
CityCouncil/2007-02-20.pdf,12 | CityCouncil | 2007-02-20 | 12 | MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING TUESDAY - -FEBRUARY 20, 2007-6:45 p.m. Mayor Johnson convened the Special Meeting at 6:50 p.m. Roll Call - Present : Councilmembers deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese, Tam, and Mayor Johnson - 5. Absent : None. The Special Meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider : (07-072) Conference with Labor Negotiators: Agency Negotiators : Craig Jory and Human Resources Director; Employee Organizations : All City Bargaining Units. Following the Closed Session, the Special Meeting was reconvened and Mayor Johnson announced that Council received a briefing from Labor Negotiators on the status of negotiations with various City bargaining units; no action was taken. Adjournment There being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the Special Meeting at 7:35 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 February 20, 2007 | CityCouncil/2007-02-20.pdf |
CityCouncil/2007-03-06.pdf,12 | CityCouncil | 2007-03-06 | 12 | an update on Oakland's upcoming projects. (07 7-119 - ) Councilmember deHaan stated the City adopted a resolution in 1996 stating that the City would prepare for an electric vehicle model City program; a commitment was made and needs to be pursued further. ADJOURNMEN'T There being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the Regular Meeting at 10:10 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 March 6, 2007 | CityCouncil/2007-03-06.pdf |
CityCouncil/2007-03-20.pdf,12 | CityCouncil | 2007-03-20 | 12 | Mr. Wood responded after twilight on the Earl Fry Course and at all times on the Jack Clark Course. Mayor Johnson inquired whether the $1 fee would be maintained for juniors. Mr. Wood responded the $1 fee would be maintained for resident juniors. Councilmember Gilmore inquired whether Golf Commission policy discussions would include monthly pass abuse. The Interim Golf Manager responded monthly pass abuse would not be discussed tomorrow night because the matter was not included on the agenda; stated he would be reviewing the matter. Mayor Johnson stated identification should be required for monthly passes. Councilmember deHaan stated that everyone agrees that Friday rates should be the same as weekday rates; recommended that Friday tournament rates be dropped to the Monday through Thursday rate; he would like to have the non-resident monthly pass stay at $130 with a $3 surcharge. Ms. Sullwold stated non-residents would not be bearing any of the additional expense that residents would bear if the rate stays the same. Mayor Johnson stated a senior non-resident monthly pass should be considered; the senior resident monthly pass is reasonable. Ms. Sullwold stated most non-resident pass holders play ten rounds a month, which amounts to $19.50 per round. Mayor Johnson stated monthly passes provide a huge discount. Councilmember Matarrese suggested that the senior non-resident monthly pass fee be $130. Mayor Johnson suggested that the senior non-resident monthly pass fee be $160 with no surcharge. Mayor Johnson inquired whether the Golf Commission was comfortable with making policy changes, to which Ms. Sullwold responded in the affirmative. Councilmember Matarrese moved adoption of the resolution with Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 12 March 20, 2007 | CityCouncil/2007-03-20.pdf |
CityCouncil/2007-04-17.pdf,12 | CityCouncil | 2007-04-17 | 12 | The Base Reuse and Community Development Manager responded in the affirmative stated staff participated in the development of the Plan; a commitment is needed to work on a regional level to end homelessness; staff will continue to participate on the leadership structure and the various committees set up to implement the Plan on behalf of the City through the larger, County-wide process. Councilmember Matarrese inquired whether the Plan should be adopted since the City is already measuring against the Plan. The City Attorney responded that adoption of the Plan is not on the agenda this evening stated Council could consider adoption of the Plan in the future; there is a distinction between adoption of any plan or policy that becomes an official act of the City and can be cited as an official City policy for which the City is then responsible and its own adopted policy which is a slight distinction between receiving and supporting participation, all of which the City has actively done with regard to the Plan and can continue to do SO. founcilmember Matarrese suggested reviewing the Plan against the City's activities and if there are any liabilities that can be assumed, Council can request that the Plan be adopted with said liabilities in mind; otherwise, Council can move forward. Mayor Johnson inquired how the creation of 15,000 supportive housing units in Alameda County would work in relation to the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) allocation. The City Attorney responded the issue would be analyzed. Councilmember deHaan inquired whether ABAG has endorsed the Plan. Ms. Gardener responded ABAG has not been requested to endorse the Plan; stated the adoption of the Plan does not commit a City to any specific action and is only the adoption of the Plan's broadened goals. Councilmember Matarrese stated a lot of time went into putting the Plan together; Council needs to know whether the ABAG allotment and 15,000 units overlap; details need to be analyzed; the Plan needs to come back to Council. Councilmember deH… | CityCouncil/2007-04-17.pdf |
CityCouncil/2007-05-15.pdf,12 | CityCouncil | 2007-05-15 | 12 | The City Attorney stated the Brown Act does not constrain the Council from setting up a meeting that has more public participation than is legally required. Councilmember Gilmore stated a Task Force set up to address Harbor Island [apartment evictions] allowed members of the public to attend the meetings and listen to deliberations, but not provide input. Mayor Johnson inquired whether said meetings were noticed, to which Councilmember deHaan responded the meetings were announced at Council meetings. Councilmember Matarrese stated said idea is good; the Ad Hoc Committee will work on the structure that would return to the Planning Board for consideration; the Planning Board would make a decision on the structure of the forum and there would be discussion. Councilmember Matarrese moved approval of denying the Appeal and upholding the Planning Board's decision to assign an Ad Hoc Committee to work on a structure for a public forum on Measure A with the following conditions that it includes in the context of the housing element and transportation issues, that it is limited to establishing the facts on limitations and benefits of Measure A and prohibits advocacy, that it obtains public input and a written record of the workshop and its deliberations be provided, that its intent is to be used as a basis for the upcoming housing element as well as other decisions related to future development in Alameda, and that the Ad Hoc Committee be expanded to include three members of the Appellant group to be determined by the Appellants. Mayor Johnson suggested the motion be kept simple since structuring the forum itself is being discussed; stated the end result should not be set. Councilmember Matarrese stated the end result can be struck from the motion, but knowing the goal is important to know the work product. Mayor Johnson stated the goal is getting to the workshop itself. Councilmember deHaan inquired whether the Ad Hoc Committee would report back to the Council or Planning Board. Councilmember Matarrese responded the Ad H… | CityCouncil/2007-05-15.pdf |
CityCouncil/2007-06-05.pdf,12 | CityCouncil | 2007-06-05 | 12 | The Public Works Director responded services offered vary from one jurisdiction to the next; stated Alameda is the only city in Alameda County to offer food waste collection for commercial and multi-families; Alameda has curbside collections for motor oil and battery drop off at Blanding Avenue ; said services increase costs; the City of Livermore has very low rates because similar services are not provided and landfill is in close proximity. Councilmember deHaan inquired whether other areas are having similar rate increases. The Public Works Director responded seven cities are in the rate increase process; stated some rates are increased because of the Consumer Price Index (CPI) other increases are as high as 14%. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 12 June 5, 2007 | CityCouncil/2007-06-05.pdf |
CityCouncil/2007-06-19.pdf,12 | CityCouncil | 2007-06-19 | 12 | MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL JOINT CITY COUNCIL, ALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (ARRA, , AND COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION (CIC) MEETING TUESDAY- -JUNE 19, 2007- - - -7:31 P. M. Chair Johnson convened the Special Joint Meeting at 8:33 p.m. ROLL CALL - Present : Councilmembers/Board Members/Commissioners deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese, Tam and Mayor/Chair Johnson - 5. Absent : None. CONSENT Councilmember/Commissioner Matarrese moved approval of the Consent Calendar. Counci member/Commissioner 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. . ] (*07-302 CC/*07-022 CIC) Recommendatior to approve the Fiscal Year 2007-2008 - Operating and Capital Improvement Budget for the Bayport Project. Accepted. Councilmember/Commissioner Matarrese moved approval of the staff recommendation. Councilmember/CommissionereHaan seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. AGENDA ITEMS (07-303 CC/07-023 CIC) Public Hearing to review and approve development of affordable rental housing at Island High as an eligible use of the District Housing Fund. The Development Services Director gave a brief presentation. louncilmember/Commissioner Matarrese inquired whether preference points would be given to School District employees and teachers. The Development Services Director responded that [giving preference points] is anticipated; stated housing would be made available on a first-come first-serve basis; units would not be reserved. Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Alameda 1 Reuse and Redevelopment Authority, and Community Improvement Commission June 19, 2007 | CityCouncil/2007-06-19.pdf |
CityCouncil/2007-07-03.pdf,12 | CityCouncil | 2007-07-03 | 12 | rest of the draft resolution; stated Alameda is directly impacted; initially, the Base transfer was a no-cost transfer; now the City is paying $108 million for unclean land that the City gave to the Department of Defense in a clean state; subsidies have been taken away from the School District; housing budgets have been cut year after year; the draft resolution would make it known that Alameda is being affected and wants a change; the draft resolution is an appropriate measure to discuss at the City level. Vice Mayor Tam stated that she is supportive of Councilmember Matarrese's efforts to discuss the matter at a following Council meeting; she recognizes that significant sacrifices have been made by the military in order to preserve people's rights to speak; communication between local, regional, State or federal governments is appropriate; recent communications have taken place with the Governor to make sure that the Governor recognizes that public transit dollars should not be cut; the federal budget deficit has taken a toll on health care; Medicare reimbursements have diminished significantly the City has discussed building an appropriate facility to serve veterans at Alameda Point she would like to have the draft resolution recognize impacts on Alameda's health care needs. Mayor Johnson stated that now is the appropriate time to give Alameda residents an opportunity to discuss the matter; she has no objection to discussing the matter at a Council meeting. Councilmember deHaan stated that he has an on-going concern with the war; Congress changed in November; a referendum could be coming to California residents in April; SB 924 calls for an advisory vote; all avenues need to be discussed; four years is a long period of time; he does not want to send the wrong signal to the men and women serving the country; treatment was less than satisfactory for Vietnam War veterans further discussion should go forward, but other avenues should be reviewed. Mayor Johnson suggested adding language to the resolution regarding p… | CityCouncil/2007-07-03.pdf |
CityCouncil/2007-07-17.pdf,12 | CityCouncil | 2007-07-17 | 12 | Councilmember Matarrese stated he does not want the City to get into the landlord business. Mayor Johnson concurred with Councilmember Matarrese; stated the issue needs to be resolved between the property owner and tenant. Vice Mayor Tam inquired whether staff responded to Mr. Allen, to which the Public Works Director responded in the affirmative. Councilmember Matarrese moved adoption of the resolution with the proviso that staff work with the three property owners who submitted letters. Councilmember deHaan seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote -5. (07-348) Introduction of Ordinance Amending the Alameda Municipal Code by Amending Subsection 13-2.2(e) (Modifications, Amendments and Deletions to the California Building Code) of Section 13-2 (Alameda Building Code) of Chapter XIII (Building and Housing) to Incorporate Specific Requirements for the Installation of Fire Extinguishing Systems. Introduced. The Fire Marshall gave a brief presentation. Councilmember Gilmore inquired what was the feedback from the community. The Fire Marshall responded commercial property owners did not attend the community forum meetings stated attendees included people interested in residential properties, particularly buildings that are three units and larger feedback was positive. Mayor Johnson inquired whether business associations were notified. The Fire Marshall responded that he met with all business associations i stated information was taken back to respective Boards articles were published in each business association newsletter. . Mayor Johnson inquired whether 25% is a typical threshold. Regular Meeting 12 Alameda City Council July 17, 2007 | CityCouncil/2007-07-17.pdf |
CityCouncil/2007-08-07.pdf,12 | CityCouncil | 2007-08-07 | 12 | The Development Services Director responded money was given to ADC to purchase the property in 2000. Councilmember deHaan stated that the process has been long; Habitat for Humanities made the project happen; the partnership is great ; inquired whether ADC could partner with Habitat for Humanities on other projects. The Development Services Director responded the City always looks for future projects; stated the Community Improvement Commission (CIC) housing funds are committed for the next five to seven years. Dan Lachman, ADC Executive Director, stated all necessary agreements have been completed between ADC and Habitat for Humanities the project has taken longer than expected; Habitat for Humanities would be playing the role of co-developer and general contractor. Councilmember deHaan inquired whether ownership guidelines have been developed, to which Mr. Lachman responded in the negative. Councilmember deHaan inquired whether Habitat for Humanities' guidelines would be used. Mr. Lachman responded Habitat for Humanities has selected four households that would be involved in the self-help portion; ADC would be selecting two moderate and two low-income buyers; a lottery would be conducted. Councilmember deHaan moved approval of the staff recommendation. Councilmember Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 4. [Absent Councilmember Gilmore - 1. ] ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (07-375) Dylan Saloner, Alameda, stated that Alameda Point should be developed as a car free community; more information can be obtained on his website carfreepoint.net. (07-376) Nancy Schlegel, Alameda, stated her trash bins are blocked by recycling bins; requested help with the issue. Mayor Johnson suggested that Ms. Schlegel contact the Public Works Director. Regular Meeting 12 Alameda City Council August 7, 2007 | CityCouncil/2007-08-07.pdf |
CityCouncil/2007-08-21.pdf,12 | CityCouncil | 2007-08-21 | 12 | station because gas prices are less. Councilmember deHaan inquired whether volume is important, to which the Appellant responded in the affirmative. Councilmember Gilmore stated that Use Permits run with the land, not the operator; the current owners took over the gas station and asked for an extension of hours when she was on the Planning Board; the previous owner caused a lot of problems for the neighborhood ; the Use Permit was denied because the Planning Board thought that the current owners had not proven themselves yet; the owners requested an extension of hours three years later the neighborhood complained: the current owners have established a good record for keeping the place clean and controlling noise; the Planning Board voted to extend the hours and were overturned on appeal by the City Council she has a lot of sympathy for the owners; the owners could decide to sell the business; she might be more sympathetic to extend the hours if there was a review period. Councilmember Matarrese inquired whether Council could grant the additional hours with a condition that the Use Permit could be revoked if there was abuse. The City Attorney responded some unwanted burdens could be drafted into the conditions; stated a trail period could be established. Mayor Johnson stated that she likes Councilmember Matarrese': suggestion [revoking the Use Permit if abused occurs] Councilmember Gilmore stated the current owners have been under a trial period; neighborhood impacts of extending the hours are unknown; the matter should be reviewed after a period of time. Councilmember Matarrese stated Council could require a review in six months and also provide a clause that would allow Council to have the ability to revoke the Use Permit if abuse occurs. Councilmember deHaan inquired what is the condition of the intersection. The Planning Services Manager responded he does not know the Level of Service stated the intersection is not critical. Councilmember deHaan stated the intersection is very accident prone. The Planning Serv… | CityCouncil/2007-08-21.pdf |
CityCouncil/2007-09-04.pdf,12 | CityCouncil | 2007-09-04 | 12 | CalTrans has made on lighting replacement in the Webster Street and Posey Tubes. The Assistant City Manager stated lights have been replaced on one side. Councilmember Gilmore stated lights were replaced on one side of the inbound tube; the other side has not been completed CalTrans is now taking down the lights in the outbound tube. The Assistant City Manager stated both tubes will have one set of lights. Mayor Johnson requested that CalTrans be invited to the next Council meeting to explain the situation. The City Manager noted Supervisor Lai-Bitker is conducting a meeting with CalTrans on September 10; stated CalTrans would be invited to the next Council meeting. (07-438) Mayor Johnson stated that the City needs to insist that the County maintain Alameda's bridges Measure B funds should be used for streets and roads in Alameda and should not be used to pay the County's obligation of maintaining the bridges. Councilmember deHaan inquired whether any City funds were used in the past. Mayor Johnson requested that Council be provided a report on the recent funding history stated a resolution might be needed regarding the use of City funding for streets, roads, and County bridges. Vice Mayor Tam requested that background information be provided on whether there have been joint agreements in the past. Mayor Johnson stated that the bridges should be maintained by the County the County contracted with the Army Corps of Engineers to operate and maintain the railroad bridge. Councilmember deHaan stated discussions took place ten or fifteen years ago regarding the County requesting money from the City due to of lack of funds. (07-439) Councilmember Matarrese stated that there are a lot of on-going issues with AC Transit; a formula has been established for an Eco Pass system for City employees; sworn police officers and firefighters can ride buses free and need to be encouraged to do Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 12 September 4, 2007 | CityCouncil/2007-09-04.pdf |
CityCouncil/2007-09-11.pdf,12 | CityCouncil | 2007-09-11 | 12 | City of Alameda Summary of Priority Setting Workshop - September 11, 2007 Work Plan Notes A Council member expressed an interest in the following information as part of the work plans: Date when Council direction was set Timelines for each project Indicate if the project is a result of a Council directive or other requirement Next Steps At the end of the workshop, the next steps in the priority setting process were reviewed, as follows: EMT will discuss Council comments and questions received at the workshop Second Council/EMT workshop will be scheduled in November, with the following preliminary agenda: Finalize citywide objectives and mission statement Finalize City Council priorities and direction Agree on a progress reporting process Create process for modifying priorities After the second Council/EMT workshop, staff will finalize a prioritization plan that incorporates the City Council's comments and feedback from the November workshop. The information in that plan will be incorporated into the decision-making process for the next two-year budget. Management Partners, Inc. 8 | CityCouncil/2007-09-11.pdf |
CityCouncil/2007-09-18.pdf,12 | CityCouncil | 2007-09-18 | 12 | retrofit the Fruitvale Bridge. she and Supervisor Lai-Bitker will send a letter to CalTrans requesting that the matter be included in long-range plans. (07-466) Mayor Johnson stated that she and the City Manager met with Navy representatives this morning she is amazed at the Navy's efforts and resources regarding sustainability research, power, and green issues; the Navy conducts a quarterly Partners Sustainability Meeting; she requested information on said meeting; Alameda can learn a lot from the Navy's research; the Navy is very impressed with Alameda's electric cars. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the Regular Meeting at 9:35 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 September 18, 2007 | CityCouncil/2007-09-18.pdf |
CityCouncil/2007-10-02.pdf,12 | CityCouncil | 2007-10-02 | 12 | welfare commission; urged that the results of the internal affair probe be released to the public. Mayor Johnson stated that the Police Department is preparing a report to Council that will be made public; internal affair investigation reports are not public. (07-487) Bill Smith, Alameda, discussed volunteering. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS (07-488) Councilmember deHaan stated that Alameda Power and Telecom had a meeting regarding the Solar Rebate Program last week; the meeting was well attended; a policy will come to Council. The City Manager stated a policy will go to the Public Utilities Board in November with input from the meeting. Councilmember deHaan stated many people are interested in the program even though solar energy does not seem to be very efficient in Alameda. Mayor Johnson requested staff to look into the Navy's quarterly Partners Sustainability Meetings; stated that the Navy has done a lot of research on alternative and solar energy. (07-489) Mayor Johnson stated that she and Councilmember Matarrese met with staff and Oakland Council President Ignacio de La Fuente regarding the realignment of a train route and re-routing of more trains onto the track that crosses 29th Avenue; Alameda and Oakland are planning a workshop on October 11; Alameda motorists need to be able to continue on once over the [Park Street ] bridge; the issue is significant and affects Oakland Councilmember Kernighan's district; the purpose of the meeting is to inform Oakland and Alameda residents on what is known at the time. Councilmember Matarrese stated a railroad track is crossed when motorists proceed outbound on the Park Street Bridge said railroad track would have increased train traffic inbound; the train traffic would go through the neighborhood along Fruitvale Avenue and cross the off ramp to I-880 southbound onto Fruitvale Avenuel Councilmember de La Fuente's office found out about the situation when the Union Pacific Railroad sought permits for traffic diversion on 29th Avenue to start repairing the tracks. The City Man… | CityCouncil/2007-10-02.pdf |
CityCouncil/2007-10-16.pdf,12 | CityCouncil | 2007-10-16 | 12 | MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING TUESDAY- - -OCTOBER 16, 2007 - -6:50 p.m. Mayor Johnson convened the Special Meeting at 7:00 p.m. ROLL CALL - Present : Councilmembers deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese, Tam, and Mayor Johnson - 5. Absent : None. The Special Meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider: (07-492) Conference with Legal Counsel - Existing Litigation (54953.9 i Name of Case: Mikiten V. City of Alameda, et al. Following the Closed session, the Special Meeting was reconvened and Mayor Johnson announced that Council received a brief on the status of this litigation. (07-493) Mayor Johnson stated that Council met in Closed Session on October 9, 2007 with its City Attorney to discuss the status of the Harbor Bay Isle Association (HBIA) V. City of Alameda lawsuit and a potential settlement of the lawsuit; the Council approved a settlement of the lawsuit; a copy of the written settlement agreement is on file in the City Clerk's office; the settlement agreement resolves this litigation; the settlement provides that the maximum number of residential units that HBIA may have the potential to develop is 3,200 per the 1989 Development Agreement ; the settlement also provides that the proposed Village 6 project constitutes a minor amendment of the 1989 Development Agreement and that, therefore, no impact fees or exactions beyond those in place in 1989 will be applicable to the Village 6 project, pursuant to the 1989 Development Agreement; because the 1989 Development Agreement preceded the City's Inclusionary Housing Ordinance, the proposed Village 6 project is not required to develop affordable housing on the site; HBIA will make a voluntary contribution of $1 million to the City's low and moderate income housing fund, and make a $500,000 contribution to a fund for the maintenance of Harbor Bay Parkway; this settlement agreement does not approve the Village 6 project and it does not commit the Council to any future legislative action; the proposed Village 6 project must still go through the normal publ… | CityCouncil/2007-10-16.pdf |
CityCouncil/2007-11-06.pdf,12 | CityCouncil | 2007-11-06 | 12 | raised crosswalk would force traffic to slow down. The Planning Services Manager responded that a speed table would cause cars to slow. Councilmember Gilmore inquired whether the resolution includes new language regarding the right turn lane addressed in [Planning Board] Condition 6. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 12 November 6, 2007 | CityCouncil/2007-11-06.pdf |
CityCouncil/2007-11-13.pdf,12 | CityCouncil | 2007-11-13 | 12 | City of Alameda Summary of Priority Setting Workshop - November 13, 2007 e almen 28. Recreation, Parks and Review business and financial plan of the 1 high Golf Alameda Museum 29. Recreation, Parks and Estuary Park Task Force - initiate meetings with 1 high Golf Task Force to identify potential funding 30. Administrative/Support Develop a compliance plan for GASB-45 1 high Services regulations by performing an actual study and reviewing options with Council 31. Administrative/Support Labor agreement negotiations with public safety 1 high Services bargaining units 32. Public Works Transportation - Safe Routes to School 1 high (Implement innovative approach to encourage walk/bike/carpool to school Management Partners, Inc. 9 | CityCouncil/2007-11-13.pdf |
CityCouncil/2007-11-20.pdf,12 | CityCouncil | 2007-11-20 | 12 | Ms. Muller stated 25% is typically added to construction cost estimates to get the complete project cost. The City Manager stated $2.4 million was included in the CIP budget prior to the completion of the work by the architect, which provides a better estimate; the new estimate would be used to update the $2.4 million listed in the budget document. Mayor Johnson stated that the number is more refined. Ms. Muller stated there are still a lot of holes to be filled since the building has not been designed; the number is high enough that it should be okay. The Planning and Building Director summarized the staff recommendation; noted Council could direct staff to provide a financing plan prior to authorizing the contract. Councilmember deHaan stated the project itself is a restoration project trying to retain some of the City's history in a building, which is worthwhile; inquired whether Planning currently occupies 6,000 square feet and would move into an 18,000 square foot building. Ms. Muller responded the Carnegie building is 10,800 square feet. Councilmember deHaan inquired whether the effort to save the building would be subsidized by Planning Department funds, to which the Planning and Building Director responded in the affirmative. Councilmember deHaan inquired whether taking a step to save something historic would cost more than renting or building office space somewhere else. The Planning and Building Director responded the attempt is to serve the public in a certain area; stated the larger space would Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 12 November 20, 2007 | CityCouncil/2007-11-20.pdf |
CityCouncil/2007-12-04.pdf,12 | CityCouncil | 2007-12-04 | 12 | category. Councilmember Matarrese stated the business that fabricates windows on Oak Street would be classified in said category; the report is good; a two-year budget will be adopted next June; the revenue stream is flat; auto dealerships will be on the decline; requested that the report be posted to the website for public review. Councilmember deHaan inquired whether taxes would be impacted by approximately one third because of a decline in auto sales tax. The Finance Director responded there are a variety of auto dealers such as used auto dealers and yacht sales. Councilmember deHaan stated yacht sales have declined because a portion of a Marina was closed down for housing development ; used car dealerships will be lost when the new car dealership moves out. The Finance Director stated there are independent used car lots. Councilmember Gilmore stated the report is timely because a local newspaper editorial exhorted residents to spend money locally; the City needs to promote businesses on the Island. The Finance Director stated the referenced editorial noted that every penny of the sales tax comes to Alameda, which is not true; Alameda only receives three-quarters of one percent. Vice Mayor Tam stated that the Alameda Towne Center has been undergoing construction in the last two years; inquired whether the new stores would offer hope for some minor recovery to offset the auto dealership. The Finance Director responded that she is not sure that there will be a total offset stated some improvement has been made; more improvement is anticipated as newer stores finish construction and come on line; the impacts from Old Navy and TJ Max are not known because the report only covers the period ending June 30. Mayor Johnson stated that Park Street sales tax generation north and south of Lincoln Avenue is over $500,000 for the second quarter of 2007; inquired what the City of Albany has that makes sales tax generation higher than Alameda. Councilmember Gilmore responded the City of Albany has a Target. Councilmember deHa… | CityCouncil/2007-12-04.pdf |
CityCouncil/2008-01-02.pdf,12 | CityCouncil | 2008-01-02 | 12 | Mayor Johnson stated another arrangement would be a public/private partnership. Mr. Singer stated a hybrid arrangement would be possible but would require the City to come up with a portion of the capital. Councilmember deHaan inquired when the Master Plan would need to be done. Councilmember Gilmore responded nine months to a year; staff needs to initiate tasks as soon as humanly possible. Mayor Johnson stated a balance budget is needed as soon as possible. Councilmember Gilmore stated that she understands that the Golf Fund would have a small profit without the ROI and surcharge; the consultant's projections show that a dip into the reserves would be necessary if operations continued as is even without the ROI and surcharge. Vice Mayor Tam stated the concern is allocating funding into a depleting fund; a fund is being depleted right now to off set operating losses at the Golf Course and would be used to pay for a Master Plan. Councilmember deHaan stated that an advertising plan needs to be reviewed. Mayor Johnson stated $70,000 or $80,000 was allocated when the budget came to Council in June; allocations have increased to approximately $200,000; measures need to taken now. The City Manager stated that the motion is three fold: 1) identify efforts needed to balance the current year budget through operational efficiencies; 2) work with staff to identify a Master Plan process and bring back the costs and process; and 3) review the Golf Commission list to identify the feasibility and costs savings. Mayor Johnson inquired how much of the reserve fund was approved for operational shortfalls, whether a cap was set for last fiscal year, and whether a cap has been set now. The City Manager responded a cap has not been set but is something that has been identified in terms of a monthly report. Regular Meeting 12 Alameda City Council January 2, 2008 | CityCouncil/2008-01-02.pdf |
CityCouncil/2008-01-15.pdf,12 | CityCouncil | 2008-01-15 | 12 | Mayor Johnson stated healthcare benefits are only one part of pension costs; it is important for people to know how costs impact the General Fund and City services. Councilmember deHaan inquired whether the City Manager and Finance Director will come back with recommendations to which the City Manager responded recommendations will be presented during budget discussions. Councilmember deHaan inquired whether guidelines are requested from Council at this time, to which the City Manager responded not at this time. Mayor Johnson requested that the report and Power Point presentation be posted on the website. Councilmember Matarrese stated that all options should be presented during discussions Mayor Johnson inquired what is the discretionary portion of the General Fund, to which the Finance Director responded she does not have the number. The Finance Director stated that $58 million pays for salaries, benefits, and pensions. Councilmember Gilmore stated pension and retiree benefits need to be discussed; knowing the overall number would be useful. Councilmember Matarrese thanked Mr. Bartel for the clear presentation; stated that the charts depict where the impacts are and the seriousness of the situation. Mayor Johnson requested that the charts on Page 13 and 14 be changed so as to not assume a 4.5% medical inflation after ten years. Mr. Bartel stated the logic of going beyond ten years is not to attach precision to the numbers. Mayor Johnson stated that numbers should be provided for both the miracle case and worst case. Mr. Bartel stated that the worst case could be double digit inflation in the CalPERS premiums for the next thirty years; other things might happen before then he would like to talk with staff Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 12 January 15, 2008 | CityCouncil/2008-01-15.pdf |
CityCouncil/2008-02-05.pdf,12 | CityCouncil | 2008-02-05 | 12 | MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING TUESDAY- - -FEBRUARY 5, 2008 - -6:00 p.m. Mayor Johnson convened the Special Meeting at 6:15 p.m. ROLL CALL - Present : Councilmembers deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese, Tam, and Mayor Johnson - 5. Absent : None. The Special Meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider: (08-039) Conference with Labor Negotiators; Agency Negotiators : Craig Jory and Human Resources Director; Employee Organizations : All Public Safety Bargaining Units. (08-040) Conference with Labor Negotiators (954957.6) ; Agency Negotiators : Marie Gilmore and Frank Matarrese; Employee : City Attorney. (08-041) Workers' Compensation Claim (54956.95 ; Claimant : John Cayanne. Agency Claimed Against: City of Alameda. Following the Closed Session, the Special Meeting was reconvened and Mayor Johnson announced that regarding All Public Safety Bargaining Units, Council received an update on negotiations ; regarding City Attorney, Council reviewed potential changes to the City Attorney Contract regarding Workers' Compensation, Council gave direction on the terms of a settlement with an injured worker. 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 February 5, 2008 | CityCouncil/2008-02-05.pdf |
CityCouncil/2008-02-19.pdf,12 | CityCouncil | 2008-02-19 | 12 | MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL JOINT CITY COUNCIL AND COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION (CIC) MEETING TUESDAY- - -FEBRUARY 19, 2008- -6:30 P.M. Mayor/Chair Johnson convened the Special Meeting at 6:35 p.m. ROLL CALL - Present : Councilmembers/Commissioners deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese, Tam, and Mayor/Chair Johnson - 5. Absent : None. The Special Meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider: (08-065 CC) Conference with Labor Negotiators; Agency Negotiators : Craig Jory and Human Resources Director Employee Organizations : All Public Safety Bargaining Units. (08-066CC/08-09CIC) Conference with Real Property Negotiators; Property: 555 Ralph Appezzato Memorial Parkway (APN Number: Portion of 074-0905-06-2, Portion of 074-0905-07-2) ; Negotiating parties : CIC/City of Alameda and Peralta Community College District; Under negotiation: Price and terms. Following the Closed Session, the Special Meeting was reconvened and Mayor/Chair Johnson announced that regarding Labor, Council received an update on public safety negotiations; no action was taken; regarding Real Property, Council and the Commission received an update regarding potential acquisition of real property needed to complete the proposed Stargell Avenue extension and provided direction to Real Property Negotiators. Adjournment There being no further business, Mayor/Chair Johnson adjourned the Special Meeting at 7:35 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 Community Improvement Commission February 19, 2008 | CityCouncil/2008-02-19.pdf |
CityCouncil/2008-03-04.pdf,12 | CityCouncil | 2008-03-04 | 12 | in writing is a new provision or cleanup. Councilmember Gilmore responded there is consensus on what is being presented in terms of cleanup; stated Article IV, V and a new provision requiring contracts to be in writing should be added to the cleanup list. Mayor Johnson stated that Item 6 [eliminating "transportation" from Article XII, Section 12-1(A) ] and Item 8 [eliminating three reasons for removal of Historical Advisory Board Members) should be cleanup also. Councilmember Gilmore stated that consensus indicates that Item 3 [formal bidding requirements) should be on fast track but some language should come back to Council before further action is taken; the City's insurance policy would be reviewed. Mayor Johnson stated the insurance policy should not be discussed because the issue is not a Charter issue; bond requirements need to be removed. Councilmember Gilmore inquired whether insurance language should be added to protect the City if bond requirements are removed. Vice Mayor Tam responded removing the bond language would be more modern; stated thirty years from now insurance may be replaced by something else; inquired whether there would be any downside by not having specific insurance requirement language. Councilmember Gilmore inquired whether the issue could be deferred to an ordinance. The Senior Assistant City Attorney responded in the affirmative; stated the matter could remain silent also. Vice Mayor Tam inquired whether closing offices is considered a cleanup issue. Councilmember Gilmore responded in the affirmative; stated that the following items will be discussed further : board and commission nominations; amendments to Section 2-11 regarding federal, State, County or local office incumbents holding City board or commission positions; City Manager appointments of department heads to be on the advice and consent of Council; stated the City of Berkeley's form of government will be reviewed. Councilmember Matarrese stated the elimination of the provision that subjects the appointment, discipline an… | CityCouncil/2008-03-04.pdf |
CityCouncil/2008-03-18.pdf,12 | CityCouncil | 2008-03-18 | 12 | affirmative. Vice Mayor Tam stated that the staff report makes reference to T.J. Maxx and Bed Bath and Beyond as being typical large format-type stores with 30,000 square feet 30,000 square feet triggers the need for a Conditional Use Permit; inquired whether there was any discussion regarding the type of use within a retail site during the Planning Board or Economic Development Commission deliberations stated the United Food Workers have brought up concerns regarding having a grocery store within a large center ; 30,000 square feet would not cover a Target, Walmart, or Ikea type development. The Supervising Planner responded the matter did not come up during discussions; stated the Planning Board viewed the matter as a land use question. Councilmember deHaan stated that the July 17, 2007 City Council Meeting reflects that Councilmember Matarrese discussed non-taxable items sold in a superstore; that he [ Councilmember deHaan] discussed wages and health benefits; inquired whether said issues are addressed in the proposed ordinance. The Supervising Planner responded that there was no discussion on the issues. Mayor Johnson opening the public portion of the hearing. Neutral Bill Smith, Alameda. Proponents (In favor of Ordinance) : Mike Henneberry, Alameda [in favor with modification] ; Patricia Curtin, Harsh Development. There being no further speakers, Mayor Johnson closed the public portion of the hearing. Mayor Johnson thanked Ms. Curtin for participating in the process. Councilmember Matarrese thanked staff and the Planning Board for working on the issue; stated the 30,000 square foot threshold surprised him but he understands the reasoning; inquired whether specific projects would be reviewed by the Planning Board as Planned Developments instead of a Conditional Use Permits. The Supervising Planner responded in the affirmative. stated Planned Developments and Conditional Use Permits require the same findings. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 12 March 18, 2008 | CityCouncil/2008-03-18.pdf |
CityCouncil/2008-04-01.pdf,12 | CityCouncil | 2008-04-01 | 12 | Ms. Perkins stated said proposal combines separate things that are interrelated the items all require separate work efforts; priority setting is an attempt to establish enough separation between items to provide staff direction as to use of resources. Mayor Johnson stated that she is not combining the items; she is suggesting that the item become the tenth priority; how it would be done and the structure would need to come back to Council: the task would be to implement the overriding goal of short-term and long- term financial feasibility; GASB-45 is something that the City has to do. Ms. Perkins inquired whether the suggestion is to move up Item 28 [GASB-45]. to which Mayor Johnson responded that it could be put with the budget task [ Item 18]. Vice Mayor Tam inquired whether the suggestion is that GASB-45 is a separate effort. Mayor Johnson responded GASB-45 is not something the City has to plan for or study; stated it is something that the City has to pay for and costs money; not paying is like making interest only loans on a mortgage; the State says a plan has to be adopted, but the City actually has to pay. Councilmember Gilmore stated it does have to be paid for, but should be part of the budget. Mayor Johnson stated the budget is only one or two years; these are things that have to be paid for forever; further stated when Council makes commitments they go well beyond the current budget and the cost grows. Ms. Perkins inquired whether Item 28 should become one of the top priorities. Mayor Johnson stated the item relates to community stakeholders developing a long-term and short-term economic strategy; the two could be combined. Ms. Perkins inquired how broad Council would like to make the priority because the items are really different work efforts. Mayor Johnson responded GASB-45 states the City has made commitments and has to tell everyone how the commitments will be paid for the City might want to take it one step further and actually pay. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council April 1, 2008 | CityCouncil/2008-04-01.pdf |
CityCouncil/2008-04-15.pdf,12 | CityCouncil | 2008-04-15 | 12 | Alameda City Council April 15, 2008 | CityCouncil/2008-04-15.pdf |
CityCouncil/2008-05-06.pdf,12 | CityCouncil | 2008-05-06 | 12 | document considered the historic theater and Cineplex no parking zone. The Supervising Civil Engineer responded the analysis focused on significant criteria; stated traffic signal operations were reviewed; parking in front of the theater was not addressed because the issue was not significant. The Police Lieutenant gave a brief presentation. Vice Mayor Tam stated the traffic study assumed 100% occupancy in 2005 and found that there was no emergency access impact i the Transportation Commission looked at unintended safety consequences from creating a defacto right-turn lane; Oakland Chinatown has an incredible amount of pedestrian traffic; the Metropolitan Transportation Commission put in bulb-outs; viewing bulb-outs as being a potential problem seems counter intuitive. Mayor Johnson stated John Knox-White thinks that Central Avenue is effectively being widened, which is unsafe. The Police Lieutenant stated the lane widths would remain exactly the same whether there is metered parking or passenger loading zones. Mayor Johnson stated that Mr. Knox-White stated that the proposed right-turn lane creates a possible safety hazard for pedestrians by increasing the number of traffic lanes. The Police Lieutenant stated people go around stopped traffic by crossing bike lanes, which is perfectly legal; the Transportation Commission's main focus was on pedestrian and bicycle traffic; congestion is expected in a downtown area and can be a good thing for overall safety because traffic slows down; the concern is that emergency vehicle access would be impeded. Mayor Johnson stated adjustments can be made; bulb-outs would create a problem. The Police Lieutenant stated there is concern about whether the Fire Department could make the right turn in the event of an emergency at the garage or the 1400 block of Oak Street. Mayor Johnson stated that merging in and out [of the bike lane ] is a safety issue; there is no disagreement about the parking on Central Avenue. Councilmember deHaan stated the bicycle lane could be crossed three R… | CityCouncil/2008-05-06.pdf |
CityCouncil/2008-05-20.pdf,12 | CityCouncil | 2008-05-20 | 12 | once the budget is adopted. Mayor Johnson stated it is easy for people to be uninformed but provide lots of opinions i the committee could consist of fifteen or twenty members. Councilmember Gilmore stated economic stability is a long-term process and should not only include the City budget but should also have a component such as a rainy day fund so that the City is not at the whim of the State budget; the committee would need to make plans to weather the storm. Councilmember deHaan stated it is never too soon to start a committee; budget information could be shared with the committee; suggested that the City Manager come back with a recommendation; all municipalities are starting to have an uneasy feeling. Vice Mayor Tam stated that Alameda is better off than other cities because of reserves the City and County of San Francisco was able to spot some cost offset for the School District because it developed a rainy day fund; taxpayers, community businesses, the media, School District, and hospital representatives were involved in the discussions; the San Francisco model was a short duration and resulted in a voter initiative that established a rainy day fund; the City is very tight on resources now; she would like to get a feel for how much staff time would be required and staffing recommendations. Councilmember Gilmore stated bringing together diverse groups and interests is more about community welfare, not the economic stability of the City. Councilmember Matarrese stated the City had an Economic Development Strategic Plan Task Force; the Task Force had a limit duration, specific end points, and a large cast of people representing various sectors of the community, including the School District; a prospective should be available on what the costs were. Mayor Johnson stated that she would like to emphasize reviewing true long-term costs for long-term commitments. Councilmember Matarrese suggested using the ten-year planning tool the City invested in a couple of years ago. Councilmember deHaan inquired whether th… | CityCouncil/2008-05-20.pdf |
CityCouncil/2008-06-03.pdf,12 | CityCouncil | 2008-06-03 | 12 | Mayor Johnson stated the committee would need to be high profile and should be used to educate the public about budgeting and economic realities. Kevin Kearney, City Auditor, stated some ideas are already in place; reinventing the wheel is not necessary ; information needs to be updated; the main goal is to educate the public. Councilmember deHaan stated past, good faith decisions are starting to bite the City today; future needs should be reviewed; having everyone [committee members) show up for every meeting would be difficult. Mayor Johnson stated the committee would not have quorum requirements. Councilmember Matarrese stated the members should understand that there are expectations to meet twice a month, more or less, and deliver a product within the six-month timeframe. Councilmember Gilmore thanked the City Treasurer and City Auditor for taking charge and being excited; stated that she agrees educating the public is an important function; citizens do not understand fund source restrictions. The City Treasurer stated committee members should be tasked with addressing revenues and expenditures; members would gather information independently; members should have no vested interest in issues being discussed; issues need to be reviewed impartially. Councilmember Gilmore moved approval of moving forward with the Fiscal Sustainability Committee along the lines set out in the staff report; limiting the membership to eleven; and removing the requirement that members be Alameda residents. Mayor Johnson inquired whether a non-resident 25% cap should be included in the motion. Councilmember Gilmore stated that she would rather leave the cap up to the committee; the committee should have the flexibility to get the job done. Vice Mayor Tam seconded the motion. Under discussion, Vice Mayor Tam stated nominated experts would be performing a community service, which would be greatly appreciated. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 12 June 3, 2008 | CityCouncil/2008-06-03.pdf |
CityCouncil/2008-06-17.pdf,12 | CityCouncil | 2008-06-17 | 12 | Mayor/Chair Johnson inquired what would be the new interest rate. Bill Reynolds, Gardner Underwood & Bacon Financial Advisor, responded rates are excepted to produce present value savings in excess of 4%; stated the exact rate would not be known until the sale date; the assumption is that the rate would be in the mid 4% range. Mayor/Chair Johnson inquired whether Mr. Reynolds is confident with the assumption. Mr. Reynolds responded in the affirmative; stated the upgraded rating makes the process very competitive; refinancing would not move forward without a good rate. Mayor/Chair Johnson stated that she was opposed to refinancing before; now she is happy to see that the term would not be extended and there would be a lower interest rate. louncilmember/Authority Member deHaan inquired whether the first year would not have interest or principal payments and the second year would have interest payments only. The City Manager responded interest payments would be made in the first year. Councilmember/Authority deHaan inquired whether the cost of the loan would be amortized, to which Mr. Reynolds responded in the affirmative. Mayor/Chair Johnson inquired what would be the estimated savings, to which the City Manager responded $317,600. Mr. Reynolds stated market data would be available on the date of pricing to show comparables. Councilmember/Authority Member deHaan inquired what percentage would be the breaking point. The City Manager responded 5.5% is set in the resolution. Mayor/Chair Johnson inquired what is the old and new interest rate for each issuance. The City Manager responded the original issue rates ranging from 5.8% to 7.25% would mature in 2015; $2.77 million was issued for Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Alameda Public Financing Authority, Alameda Reuse and 2 Redevelopment Authority, and Community Improvement Commission June 17, 2008 | CityCouncil/2008-06-17.pdf |
CityCouncil/2008-07-01.pdf,12 | CityCouncil | 2008-07-01 | 12 | Councilmember deHaan seconded the motion Bill Smith, Alameda, discussed earthquakes. On the call for the question, the motion carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. Mayor Johnson stated that she is glad an evacuation plan is included. (08-295) Recommendation to accept the Golf Complex Master Plan and consider options for future operation of the Chuck Corica Golf Complex. The Interim General Manager gave a brief review of past actions. Richard Singer, National Golf Foundation (NGF ) Director of Consulting Services, gave a brief presentation. Forrest Richardson, Forrest Richardson and Associates, gave a Power Point presentation. Mayor Johnson inquired whether Mr. Richardson thought that the north course changes would be more reflective of the original design. Mr. Richardson responded the proposed changes are more of a faithful restoration. Mayor Johnson requested more information on the drainage issue. Mr. Richardson stated the canals are choked up and overgrown with invasive vegetation; water comes to the Golf Course from a dozen or more points. Mayor Johnson inquired whether water drains into the bay. Mr. Richardson responded water goes into one of the Golf Course water areas; stated the Public Works Department operates large pumps to help force evacuation to open water. Mayor Johnson inquired whether fertilized water drains into the bay. Mr. Richardson responded the Golf Course acts as a huge filtration basin because of the plants; stated the canal is doing a great job; the fertilizer used on the Golf course is very docile compared to material found in urban runoff; street runoff is more concerning. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 12 July 1, 2008 | CityCouncil/2008-07-01.pdf |
CityCouncil/2008-07-15.pdf,12 | CityCouncil | 2008-07-15 | 12 | subcommittee could write the ballot argument and rebuttal. Mayor Johnson inquired whether the motion stipulated the $12.00 rate and included a Plan B. Councilmember Gilmore stated that the City Manager would present Plan B, which would address where cuts would be made if the ballot measure does not passi she does not want Plan B to be included in the motion because it should be a stand-alone item as opposed to being bundled into the proposed real property transaction tax. On the call of the question, the motion carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. Councilmember Matarrese moved approval of directing the City Attorney to prepare the impartial analysis. Councilmember Gilmore seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. Vice Mayor Tam moved approval of having Councilmembers deHaan and Matarrese prepare the argument in favor and having the Mayor sign on behalf of the Council. The Deputy City Manager stated the Mayor could sign on behalf of all Councilmembers other signatures could be obtained to show broad based support for the measure. Vice Mayor Tam inquired whether the subcommittee could organize a community task force. The City Attorney responded in the negative; stated the subcommittee would be preparing an argument in favor of the measure and a rebuttal if necessary. Councilmember Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. (08-312) Resolution No. 14246, "Calling a Consolidated Municipal Election in the City of Alameda on November 4, 2008, for the Purpose of Submitting to the Electors a Proposal to Amend the City of Alameda Charter by Amending Sections 2-4, 2-6, 2-9, -7(A), 3- 7 ( (B) , 3 - (C), 3-7(F), - 3 - 7 (I), 3-15, 9-1 - (E) , - 3 (D) , 17-10, 22-4, and 28 - 6 (A) Thereof by Deleting Sections 3 - 7 (E) , 3-15.1, 17-11, 23-4, - 23-5, - Art. XXV, and 28-6(B) Thereof and by Adding Section 2- 16 Thereto, to Delete Obsolete and Unclear Language and Conform to General Law and Other Sections of the Charter; and Proposing Said Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 1… | CityCouncil/2008-07-15.pdf |
CityCouncil/2008-08-05.pdf,12 | CityCouncil | 2008-08-05 | 12 | Councilmember deHaan seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 4. [Absent: Councilmember Gilmore - 1. ] Councilmember deHaan noted that drought resistant landscaping at Haight School is outstanding. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA None. COUNCIL REFERRALS None. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS (08-333) Consideration of Mayor's nomination for appointment to the Transportation Commission. Mayor Johnson nominated Jane. Q. Lee. (08-334) Mayor Johnson requested that the Fire and Police Departments provide a report describing the type of calls they respond to which are outside their scope and recommendations for appropriate fees; said report should be presented under Council Referrals at the next City Council meeting stated the Fire Department responds to calls for elevator problems within commercial buildings and people locked out of their houses; she is surprised that fees for such calls were not included when revenue enhancing recommendations were made. (08-335) Councilmember Matarrese stated that he and Vice Mayor Tam participated in a structured bicycle ride around the City on Saturday; the event was presented by Bike Alameda. ( 08 - 336) Mayor Johnson stated that Alameda could be getting three or four new Coast Guard cuttersi current cutters are forty years old. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the Regular Meeting at 10:07 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger City Clerk Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 12 August 5, 2008 | CityCouncil/2008-08-05.pdf |
CityCouncil/2008-08-19.pdf,12 | CityCouncil | 2008-08-19 | 12 | Mayor Johnson stated that she does not have any problem with medical assist calls or lock outs, but she does have a problem with lock ins a lock in should be handled by a locksmith; the Fire Department no longer gets people into locked vehicles because claims were filed for damages she considers a water leak a plumbing issue; the Fire Department repeatedly responds to elevator calls. The Fire Chief stated that elevator calls could be coded differently. Mayor Johnson stated that owners should be discouraged to rely upon the Fire Department for elevator calls; owners should be charge appropriately to encourage proper maintenance of buildings. The Fire Chief stated staff could review what the appropriate fee should be; the cost of collection would need to be reviewed. The City Manager stated an analysis would need to be done; an analysis would take approximately four weeks. The Police Chief stated the Police Department ceased responding to lock outs. Mayor Johnson inquired whether the Fire Department responds to house or car lockouts. The Fire Chief responded in the affirmative stated responses totaled 37 in 2007 Vice Mayor Tam inquired whether there is a fee schedule for false alarms, to which the Fire Chief responded in the affirmative. Vice Mayor Tam inquired whether businesses are charged through direct means, to which the Fire Chief responded in the affirmative. Vice Mayor Tam stated previous discussions involved trying to maintain Fire Department staffing levels at twenty-seven per shift to avoid brown outs; inquired whether the ability to maintain a certain level of staffing would be compromised [for responding to lock ins and lockouts]. The Fire Chief responded in the negative; stated the calls are low priority; staff would be leave the call if a higher priority call was received. Councilmember Matarrese inquired whether overtime would incur. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 12 August 19, 2008 | CityCouncil/2008-08-19.pdf |
CityCouncil/2008-09-16.pdf,12 | CityCouncil | 2008-09-16 | 12 | not need to get permission if the use is permitted. Mayor Johnson opened the public portion of the hearing. Proponents ( In favor of Appeal) : David Giovannoli, Pagono's Hardware; Claire Yeaton-Risley, Alameda; Holly Sellers, Alameda; Patty Jacobs, Greater Alameda Business Association; Richard Burgess, Alameda; Alan Ryan, Economic Development Corporation; Dorothy Freeman, Alameda; Jon Spangler, Alameda; David Kirwin, Alameda; Robb Ratto, Alameda; Patricia Baer, Alameda; Reid Wetherill, Alameda; Iris Watson, Alameda; Arthur Lipow, Alameda; Kate Eckhaus, Alameda; Richard Eckhaus, Alameda; Barbara Mooney, Alameda; Nick Petrulakis, Alameda; Rosemary McNally, Alameda; Philip Jaber, Encinal Hardware; Richard Biggar, Alameda; Opponents (Not in favor of Appeal) : Allan Ryan, Alameda; Robert Mananquil, Trader Joe's; Peter Schamoni, Alameda Realty Center; James Robinson, Fit Lite by 24 Hour Fitness; David Estep, Massage Envy; Steve Hill, Orchard Supply Hardware; Mike Corbit, Harsch Development; Randy Kyte, Harsch Development. Neutral Bill Smith, Alameda. There being no further speakers, Mayor Johnson closed the public portion of the hearing. Vice Mayor Tam stated that the staff report mentions that there is an existing Planned Development Agreement (PDA) that modifies the Alameda Municipal Code by requiring a PDA for an expansion over 5% of the total shopping center area; the analysis shows there would still be approximately 2% of the total square footage if the garden center is included in the calculation; inquired whether said analysis is correct, to which the Supervising Planner responded in the affirmative. Vice Mayor Tam stated that she is having trouble understanding what is considered in the square footage and what is not. The Supervising Planner stated the [garden] floor area is not part of the building but would have merchandise for sale; additional parking would not be required if an existing business wanted to add an unenclosed garden area; additional parking might be required if the building site was increased;… | CityCouncil/2008-09-16.pdf |
CityCouncil/2008-10-07.pdf,12 | CityCouncil | 2008-10-07 | 12 | entering the correct driveway and idling for no more than five minutes further inquired who would enforce Use Permit non- compliance. The Supervising Planner responded twenty-four hour security is on site; the proposed condition puts the responsibility for monitoring on the Applicant and security; security would be responsible for alerting the shopping center management, then management would bring the matter up with the tenant. Councilmember Gilmore inquired who would be responsible for Use Permit non-compliance and what would be the penalties. The Supervising Planner responded the shopping center management ; stated individual Use Permits would need separate conditions; he is not sure what the monitoring mechanism would be; the matter might be complaint driven. Councilmember Gilmore stated the City would have a bigger stick with the Use Permit scenario because revoking a Use Permit would seriously affect business; the proposed condition involves a landlord-tenant relationship; a lessor might have an incentive to keep the lessee in business as long as possible. Vice Mayor Tam inquired how violations would be pinpointed if there are multiple Use Permits. The Supervising Planner responded enforcement would be difficult unless trucks have identification. Vice Mayor Tam inquired how the City would recoup enforcement costs. The Planning and Building Director responded Use Permit violations do not have fees in place; stated Use Permit violations are complaint bases. Councilmember Matarrese stated very few businesses would need Use Permits for twenty-four hour delivery. The Supervising Planner stated most tenants are small businesses and use UPS trucks or vans [ for delivery]. Councilmember Matarrese inquired whether idling is governed by State law. The Supervising Planner responded in the affirmative; stated the law was enacted to address diesel emissions. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 12 October 7, 2008 | CityCouncil/2008-10-07.pdf |
CityCouncil/2008-10-21.pdf,12 | CityCouncil | 2008-10-21 | 12 | Golf Commission. In response to Councilmember deHaan's inquiry regarding figures, Ms. Sullwold stated the Par 3 Course continues to increase in play and decrease in revenue. Mayor Johnson inquired whether increased rates would decrease play. Ms. Sullwold responded higher rates decreased play in the past; stated the Par 3 Course if price sensitive. (08-453 ) Recommendation to authorize the City Manager to negotiate a Master Siting Agreement with AT&T to upgrade their distribution system in order to provide Lightspeed Services in Alameda and to execute all necessary documents to implement the project. The Public Works Coordinator gave a brief presentation. Mayor Johnson inquired whether every site would require a permit. The Public Works Coordinator responded in the affirmative; stated notification would be provided to property owners within 300 feet of a site. Mayor Johnson inquired whether Council has the ability to say no to the Agreement. The Public Works Coordinator responded in the negative; stated the City would have the right to control the way equipment would be installed within the public right-of-way Mayor Johnson inquired whether the franchising roll has been taken over by the State, to which the Public Works Coordinator responded in the affirmative. Councilmember Matarrese stated the staff report indicates that the City would receive a 5% franchise fee; inquired how much the 5% is in dollars. The Public Works Coordinator responded 5% of gross revenue for video services; stated the actual dollar amount would depend on sales. Councilmember Matarrese inquired whether the 5% [franchise fee ] is in the budget. The Public Works Coordinator responded in the negative; stated constructing the system would take approximately eighteen months. Regular Meeting 12 Alameda City Council October 21, 2008 | CityCouncil/2008-10-21.pdf |
CityCouncil/2008-11-06.pdf,12 | CityCouncil | 2008-11-06 | 12 | The Human Resources Director stated the second reading of the Golden Handshake proposal would be presented in two weeks and would open the window that allows employees the opportunity to take advantage of the Golden Handshake. . The City Manager stated the two week period needs to be extended to the December 2, 2008 City Council Meeting because of tonight's adjourned meeting. On the call for the question, the motion carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. Councilmember Gilmore inquired whether Kemper Sport's would not be operating the Mif Albright Course, to which the Recreation and Park Director responded in the affirmative. Councilmember Gilmore stated the land (Golf Course) is all zoned for open space and recreation; there is a dire need for active sport fields; requested that staff provide Council with other possible recreational uses for the Mif Albright Course. Councilmember deHaan inquired whether Kemper Sports would be looking at the Mif Albright Course as a viable operation, to which the Interim Golf Manager responded in the negative. Mayor Johnson stated having a nine hole course is a good, long-term idea and should be considered. The Interim Golf Manager stated that he would look into the matter. Mayor Johnson stated Poppy Ridge Golf Course has three nine hole courses which creates two eighteen hole courses. Councilmember Matarrese thanked ACEA for crafting a proposal that is beneficial to the City; stated there is no profit component, nor is there a component to address deferred maintenance and capital needs for the Golf Course; that he was heartened to hear that the Fiscal Sustainability Committee was reviewing the matter; that he is still not convinced that the City cannot run the Golf Course operation; that he looks forward to the Fiscal Sustainability Committee's recommendations. Mayor Johnson stated that the Interim Golf Manager has done a great job; Council appreciates the dedication in helping to formulate a long-term, sustainable plan to keep golf in Alameda. (08-471) Recommendation to receive a … | CityCouncil/2008-11-06.pdf |
CityCouncil/2008-11-18.pdf,12 | CityCouncil | 2008-11-18 | 12 | Councilmember deHaan inquired what would be the cost for handicap access to the stage. The Redevelopment Manager responded that she does not know; stated the cost would be paid by the applicant. Councilmember deHaan stated hopefully stage access would be permanent at some point; consecutive dates are not addressed. The Redevelopment Manager stated the operator can reject certain dates based on the lease but needs to provide two alternative dates within fifteen days of dates requested. The City Manager stated the issue is addressed in Availability #2. Vice Mayor Tam moved approval of the staff recommendation subject to disclosure on expenses that would be associated with temporarily providing handicap stage access and with direction to have staff provide a status report on fee schedule impacts for community use and availability within six months. Councilmember Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS (08-490) Vice Mayor Tam stated that she attended the East Bay Division for the League of California Cities meeting last Thursday David Stark, East Bay Association of Realtors, gave a housing market update for Alameda and Contra Costa counties; Alameda's home values have declined approximately 18.9%; there has been a substantial increase in the volume of homes sold because of potential bargains; the number of people who can afford the median price home in the Bay Area has increased because of declined prices. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS (08-491) Carol Ogle-Delling, Alameda, requested that Council consider reducing or waiving fines imposed at 1538 Lafayette Street. Mayor Johnson inquired what are the plans for the property; further inquired whether Ms. Ogle-Delling is living at the property. Ms. Ogle-Delling responded that she is staying at the property; stated that she plans to purchase the property or place the property on the open market. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 12 November 18, 2008 | CityCouncil/2008-11-18.pdf |
CityCouncil/2008-12-02.pdf,12 | CityCouncil | 2008-12-02 | 12 | conclusions of the Monitoring Plan for the transportation operations at the Central Avenue and Oak Street intersection. The Supervising Civil Engineer gave a presentation. Mayor Johnson inquired whether parking permits are for day use only, to which the Supervising Civil Engineer responded in the affirmative. Mayor Johnson inquired whether bike locker usage is being tracked, to which the Supervising Civil Engineer responded that he would provide said information. Mayor Johnson stated the information would be useful to see how many people use the bike lockers: inquired how the bike oasis provides more parking. The Supervising Civil Engineer responded the bike oasis does not provide more parking but just provides cover. Mayor Johnson stated collisions have gone down in the area. The Supervising Civil Engineer stated citations have increased approximately 20%. Mayor Johnson stated that she worries that the proposed crosswalk might create a dangerous situation; crosswalks are a problem in the middle of the block on Park Street pedestrians do not always press the light button; inquired whether it is possible to require pedestrians to use the light button. The Supervising Civil Engineer responded making usage mandatory would be difficult; stated one approach would be to use a laser beam, which would automatically trigger the light. Councilmember Gilmore stated that she is not thrilled about having a crosswalk mid block; drivers are not used to the concept of having a crosswalk mid block; inquired whether any thought has been given to ticketing jaywalkers. The Supervising Civil Engineer responded that the Police Department has provided information and warnings, but no citations. Councilmember Gilmore stated that she would prefer to go the citation route before spending money to put in a crosswalk pedestrians would have expectations of being safe because of the crosswalk; the passenger loading zone is 33 feet; inquired how many Regular Meeting 12 Alameda City Council December 2, 2008 | CityCouncil/2008-12-02.pdf |
CityCouncil/2008-12-16.pdf,12 | CityCouncil | 2008-12-16 | 12 | MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL JOINT CITY COUNCIL, ALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (ARRA) AND COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION (CIC) MEETING TUESDAY- - -DECEMBER 16, 2008- - -6:00 P. M. Mayor/Chair Johnson convened the Special Joint Meeting at 6:10 p.m. ROLL CALL - Present : Councilmembers/Board Members/Commissioners deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese, Tam, and Mayor/Chair Johnson - 5. [Note : Councilmember deHaan arrived at 11:09 p.m. ] Absent : None. The Special Joint Meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider : (08-527 CC/ARRA) Conference with Real Property Negotiators ( 54956.1 8) i Property: Alameda Point Negotiating parties City, ARRA and SunCal; Under negotiations Price and terms. (08-528 CC) Conference with Legal Counsel - Existing Litigation (54956.9 ; Name of cases: Chow V. City of Alameda; Gong V. City of Alameda; Velarde V. City of Alameda; Hurst V. City of Alameda. (08-529 CC) Conference with Legal Counsel - Anticipated Litigation; Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 54956.91 Number of cases One. (08-55 CIC) Conference with Real Property Negotiators; Property : 1829 Paru Street, Alameda; Negotiating parties JP Morgan-Chase Bank and CIC; Under negotiations Price and terms. (08-530 ( CC) Conference with Labor Negotiators : Agency Negotiators Human Resources Director; Employee Organizations All Bargaining Units. *** Mayor/Chair Johnson called a recess at 7:45 p.m. to hold the Regular City Council Meeting and reconvened the Closed session at 11:09 p.m. Following the Closed Session, the Special Meeting was reconvened Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Alameda Reuse 1 And Redevelopment Authority, and Community Improvement Commission December 16, 2008 | CityCouncil/2008-12-16.pdf |
CityCouncil/2009-01-06.pdf,12 | CityCouncil | 2009-01-06 | 12 | 25% over the amount of staff desired on duty to deal with vacancies due to vacations, sickness, training, and whatever takes an employee away from the job; the City staffs for 27 people; adding 25% would be six to seven additional positions, which is how the number was reached; what leads to overtime is anything that takes a person away from the workplace; in the City's case, it is primarily vacation and the usage of compensatory time that people have earned, secondly people on injury leave, and then sick leave; the City only has 31 people assigned to a shift on average, which means overtime is used if more than four people are off on any given day; there were a lot of vacancies last year; nine people were hired in the spring which cut the overtime in half; vacancies reduce salary spending and cause overtime to go up; hiring people causes salaries to go up, but lowers overtime. Councilmember Tam stated standard procedure is to send an engine with a paramedic as the first responder then, an ambulance is sent; inquired whether the full complement is sent for every case, such as an indigent, intoxicated person needing a ride to a medical facility. The Fire Chief responded in the affirmative. stated the current Countywide practice set by the Medical Director requires that any type of medical call, regardless of priority or severity, requires an engine and ambulance. Councilmember Tam inquired whether there is any flexibility. The Fire Chief responded currently, there is no flexibility; there are discussions to try to create some flexibility; the Medical Director realizes the lowest priority of calls that might not be true emergencies do not need the same level of response. Councilmember Gilmore inquired whether fire calls go to County dispatch, to which the Fire Chief responded in the affirmative. Councilmember Gilmore inquired whether dispatch determines what needs to be sent out, to which the Fire Chief responded in the affirmative. Councilmember Gilmore inquired whether 18 people are sent to a fire, to which the F… | CityCouncil/2009-01-06.pdf |
CityCouncil/2009-01-20.pdf,12 | CityCouncil | 2009-01-20 | 12 | asking for a GPA because of costs; knowing what the public prefers is important. On the call for the question, the motion carried by the following voice vote: Ayes : Councilmembers Gilmore, Matarrese, Tam - 3. Abstentions: Vice Mayor deHaan - 1. [Absent : Mayor Johnson - 1. ] The City Manager inquired whether Vice Mayor deHaan abstained from voting on everything. Vice Mayor deHaan clarified that he abstained from Resolution No. 14296 and in favor of the remaining resolutions. (09-034) Discussion of Alameda Peace Network's proposal regarding Iraq War. The City Manager gave a brief presentation. Vice Mayor deHaan stated President Obama intends to withdraw troops within sixteen months. Speakers : Carl Halpern, Alameda Peace Network; Pat Flores, Alameda Peace Network; (submitted petition) ; Peter Frank, Alameda Peace Network. Councilmember Gilmore stated that she appreciates the Alameda Peace Network being accommodating and flexible in amending its previous request; previous discussions were about withdrawing troops from Iraq; she does not recall discussing troops in Afghanistan and avoiding new military operations elsewhere; she would be hesitant to support said language; she would never advocate going to war but would not propose telling the President what to do in defense of the country that she is not sure whether the financial impact to the City can be quantified; the State budget crises has more of an affect on the City the planned budget discussions will provide a better understanding of how the City gets and spends money. Councilmember Matarrese stated the new proposal is a good follow up to the 2006 resolution; many things discussed in the 2006 resolution came to fruition; Council will be receiving multiple budget briefings, including a Budget Workshop on February 7; discussions will highlight impacts that are a result of federal action; the price that has been assigned to the conveyance of Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 12 January 20, 2009 | CityCouncil/2009-01-20.pdf |
CityCouncil/2009-02-03.pdf,12 | CityCouncil | 2009-02-03 | 12 | (09-052) Resolution No. 14307, "Endorsing the Street Rehabilitation Projects for the Federal Economic Stimulus Program and Authorizing the City Manager to Approve Plans and Specifications and Call for Bids for the Annual Resurfacing Project, No. 82-01-29. Adopted. The Public Works Director gave a brief presentation. Councilmember Tam stated the City was way ahead in preparation of a list of potential projects; Council has received emails regarding the need to prioritize bus shelter installations; inquired how the matter would fit into Measure B funds. The Public Works Director responded each department was requested to provide a wish list; the Public Works Department looked at items on the unfunded list staff has not been able to receive funding for bus shelters; the first round of economic stimulus funds is for road rehabilitation only. Speaker Michael John Torrey, Alameda. Councilmember Matarrese moved adoption of the resolution. Vice Mayor deHaan seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. The City Manager stated that the Fiscal Sustainability Committee provided a memo regarding the stimulus program for soft story retrofit buildings funding sources will be reviewed in the future. (09-053) - Resolution No. 14308, "Allocating $100,000 in Measure B Funds as the Local Match to Prepare the Estuary Crossing Project Study Report for a Total Cost of $1 Million, and Authorizing the City Manager to Execute All Necessary Documents. Adopted. The Public Works Director gave a brief presentation. Mayor Johnson inquired what the $1 million would cover. The Public Works Director responded the Project Study Report (PSR) for the estuary crossing. Mayor Johnson inquired whether the PSR would be a joint report with the City of Oakland. The Public Works Department responded the City of Oakland sits on the Policy Advisory Committee. Mayor Johnson inquired whether the City of Oakland proposes to pay Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 12 February 3, 2009 | CityCouncil/2009-02-03.pdf |
CityCouncil/2009-02-07.pdf,12 | CityCouncil | 2009-02-07 | 12 | propositions require a 2/3 vote for a specific tax and 50% for a general tax; provided a brief review of Section VIII, Investments. In response to Mayor Johnson's inquiry about whether "or designee" should be removed from Policy A, the City Manager stated the language could be tightened up. The Interim Finance Director provided a brief review of Appropriations Limit [Section IX ] and Fund Balance and Reserves [Section x]. Mayor Johnson inquired whether Equipment Replacement [Section X.B) includes computer systems, to which the Interim Finance Director responded in the negative. Councilmember Tam inquired what computer systems fall under, to which the Interim Finance Director responded ISF. Councilmember Matarrese stated staff should address whether there is creative way to make the whole IT system a capital asset. The Interim Finance Director stated the matter would be added to the issue bin; reviewed Capital Improvement Management [Section XI] and Capital Financing and Debt Management [Section XII]. Councilmember Tam stated the debt ratio [XII.D.5 is 4:1; inquired whether the ratio was pulled from an existing policy. The Interim Finance Director responded investments bankers would say 4:1 is the most conservative ratio; stated 3:1 can be a very healthy ratio; the State recommends 4:1; the ratio could be changed. Councilmember Tam stated that she is only interested in amending the ratio if it helps the City's credit worthiness and bond rating. Mayor Johnson inquired whether "Pay-As-You-Go' XII.A. 4] is clear enough. The Interim Finance Director responded in the negative stated it needs to be defined. Mayor Johnson suggested adding factors for not favoring pay-as-you- go financing questioned whether the policy should be not to favor pay-as-you-go. Councilmember Gilmore stated pay-as-you-go means not incurring debt, which sounds like a good thing. Special Meeting Alameda City Council 12 February 7, 2009 | CityCouncil/2009-02-07.pdf |
CityCouncil/2009-02-17.pdf,12 | CityCouncil | 2009-02-17 | 12 | Mayor Johnson inquired how costs are allocated. The City Attorney responded departments are charged back for participating in the insurance pool; stated the amount is based on the number of employees within each department. Mayor Johnson inquired whether each department is charged back at the end of the year. The City Attorney responded the question is a Finance issue. Mayor Johnson requested that the Interim Finance Director provide an explanation at the next meeting. The City Manager stated the Interim Finance Director would also explain what is contributing to the projected deficit. Mayor Johnson inquired whether money is set aside for medical expenses. The City Attorney responded the $2.1 million loss reserve fund is real money that has been set aside; stated the City processes medical payments through the fund; the workers' compensation budget for 2008-2009 was approximately $3. 1 million; the biggest piece is the loss reserve fund; the annual cost of participation in the risk pool is approximately $600,000 medical payments and settlements run against the loss reserve fund, which is different from Labor Code 4850, another component of Police and Fire workers' compensation costs; carried by the Police and Fire Departments; the City is required by law to report the combination of Labor Code 4850 pay and all medical payments. Mayor Johnson requested that the Interim Finance Director explain the appropriate way to handle allocating workers' compensation charges to departments. Vice Mayor deHaan stated per capita does not seem to work; inquired whether AMP is included, to which the City Attorney responded in the affirmative. Councilmember Matarrese requested that the Interim Finance Director provide information on the root cause of the workers' compensation deficit and proposed preventative action. Vice Mayor deHaan stated the Planning and Building Department has seen a reduction in fees because of the economy ; the issue could be Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 12 February 17, 2009 | CityCouncil/2009-02-17.pdf |
CityCouncil/2009-03-03.pdf,12 | CityCouncil | 2009-03-03 | 12 | of Approval because the approved design required a side yard set back variance; in December 2008, the project went before the Planning Board for Design Review of the entire project the Planning Board approved the project. Councilmember Matarrese stated the ordinance needs to be revisited because the HAB was doing Planning Board work. Ms. Damson stated that one HAB Member felt compelled to revisit the previous month's vote and she changed her vote. The Planning and Building Director stated staff has been working on the ordinance for some time; the ordinance is almost ready; another item on tonight's agenda reflects a change in the Charter that would require a quorum of the full HAB to make a decision rather than a quorum of those present. Mayor Johnson inquired what was the Planning Board's decision. The Planner III responded the Planning Board granted the Applicant the variance for the side yard set back reduction and Design Review approval for the entire project, which included the porch. Councilmember Tam stated the staff report notes that a number of porches on the block have the same design as the one proposed tonight inquired how the designs affect the streetscape in comparison to the proposed project. The Planner III responded 1150 Bay Street is in the middle of a uniform front yard set back of 34 and 37 feet; many neighbors would like to have the set back maintained; the set backs are less in the 1200 block. Councilmember Matarrese inquired whether there is a reason why the porch needs to stick out beyond the roofline of the main house. The Planner III responded the Applicant would like to utilize the front portion by incorporating French doors; stated a porch would allow an opportunity to utilize more of the front yard; the design is appropriate for the house from a functionality standpoint. Mayor Johnson stated having porches on the side of the houses was deliberate and was the intent of the original neighborhood designers having the porch extend is not a necessary part of the project front yard extensio… | CityCouncil/2009-03-03.pdf |
CityCouncil/2009-03-17.pdf,12 | CityCouncil | 2009-03-17 | 12 | The Fire Marshall responded a cracked foundation or accumulated basement water. Mayor Johnson stated "water intrusion" would be a better term. The City Attorney responded some types of water intrusion have nothing to do with owner neglect and would be the City's responsibility. Mayor Johnson stated said circumstance would be an emergency and would not be charged. The City Attorney stated the ordinance should not include anything where the City's action could potentially be considered inverse condemnation. Mayor Johnson inquired why basement flooding would be limited to malfunctioning sump pumps. The City Attorney responded the list [24-10.3 Liability for emergency response costs] represents reoccurring calls; stated the homeowner neglect standard is as the catchall Mayor Johnson inquired whether a leaking washing machine at a business would be covered, to which the Fire Marshall responded in the affirmative. The City Attorney responded said situation would be covered under the property owner neglect clause. Mayor Johnson inquired whether businesses are required to have a sign stating to call a specific number in case of an emergency if there is no manager on site. The Fire Marshall responded that he is not aware of any requirement, but he has seen said signs in laundromats. Mayor Johnson inquired whether the requirement could be done by ordinance. The City Attorney responded enforcement would be difficult; stated the requirement could be a condition of approval for a new business. The Fire Marshall stated the requirement could be addressed in the Fire Code which requires an emergency plan. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 12 March 17, 2009 | CityCouncil/2009-03-17.pdf |
CityCouncil/2009-04-07.pdf,12 | CityCouncil | 2009-04-07 | 12 | MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY - -APRIL 7, 2009--7:27 P.M. Chair Johnson adjourned the Special Meeting at 7:41 p.m. ROLL CALL - Present : Commissioners deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese, Tam, and Chair Johnson - 5. Absent : None. MINUTES (09-14) Minutes of the Special Joint City Council and CIC Meeting held on March 17, 2009. Approved. Commissioner deHaan moved approval of the minutes. Commissioner Tam seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. AGENDA ITEMS None. ADJOURNMEN'T There being no further business, Chair Johnson adjourned the Special Meeting at 7:42 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger Secretary The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act. Special Meeting Community Improvement Commission April 7, 2009 | CityCouncil/2009-04-07.pdf |
CityCouncil/2009-04-21.pdf,12 | CityCouncil | 2009-04-21 | 12 | number than $60,000 to $100,000 be provided for additional transportation studies and 6) outline what the scope of work would deliver. Councilmember Matarrese stated that he would like to repeat a previous request to have a timeline published on the website, or provided in an Off Agenda Report, that outlines events between now and Election Day Councilmember deHaan seconded the motion with the caveat to include what would happen if major changes are made to the initiative. On the call for the question, the motion carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (09-162) Will Richards, Alameda, discussed security measures at Todd Shipyard. (09-163) Gretchen Lipow, Alameda, discussed Alameda Point. (09 - 164 ) Noel Folsom, Alameda, stated that letting the fire burn for nineteen hours at the Old Navy Hospital and Supply Depot was unacceptable. COUNCIL REFERRALS (09-165) Consider the formation of a Sunshine Community Task Force. Councilmember Tam stated the concept is to evaluate resources on whether the City could support a Sunshine Community Task Force; the state of the print media is declining online journalism is an emerging trend; having information more readily available and transparent is needed; the community has been discussing whether there is an adequate amount of time beyond the Brown Act and Freedom of Information Act requirements in terms of noticing agendas and creating an online system to post campaign finance reports. Kate Quick, League of Women Voters of Alameda, stated the League of Women Voters would be happy to participate in the formation of the ordinance. Councilmember Tam stated Berkeley is in the process of developing a Sunshine Ordinance; the Freedom of Information Act Coalition noted that there are eight cities in the area that have a Sunshine Ordinance. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 12 April 21, 2009 | CityCouncil/2009-04-21.pdf |
CityCouncil/2009-05-05.pdf,12 | CityCouncil | 2009-05-05 | 12 | Following Ms. Le's comments, Mayor Johnson stated Asian Health Services provides a valuable service to the community. Councilmember Gilmore moved approval of the staff recommendation. Councilmember Tam seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. (09-186) Public Hearing to consider a recommendation to amend the Fiscal Year 2008-2009 Community Development Block Grant Action Plan as required by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, and authorize the Interim City Manager to negotiate and execute related documents, agreements, and modifications. The Community Development Program Manager gave a Power Point presentation. Proponents (In favor of staff recommendation) : Cyndy Wasko, SSHRB; Liz Varela, Building Futures with Women and Children; Doug Biggs, Alameda Point Collaborative. Councilmember Matarrese moved approval of the staff recommendation. Councilmember Matarrese stated goals should be tracked so that the City does not wait until next year to see how things are going; people should know about the adoption of the substantial amendment to ensure that needed resources are received; staff should report back to the contributing agency on the success or recommended adjustments. Vice Mayor deHaan inquired what is the likelihood of funding coming to the City, to which the Community Development Program Manager responded funding is a done deal. Vice Mayor deHaan inquired whether the Boys and Girls Club and Littlejohn Park have separate funding. The Community Development Program Manager responded in the affirmative; stated both are identified as CDBG-R, which means that a project is shovel ready; CDBG-R Contracts need to be under contract within 120 days after approval from HUD. Vice Mayor deHaan seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. (09-187) - Recommendation to accept the Financial Report for the Third Fiscal Quarter - January, February and March 2009. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 12 May 5, 2009 | CityCouncil/2009-05-05.pdf |
CityCouncil/2009-05-19.pdf,12 | CityCouncil | 2009-05-19 | 12 | responded in the affirmative. The City Attorney stated the Appellant is permitted to continue to operate until the City reaches a final decision. Vice Mayor deHaan inquired whether ongoing efforts have been made to consider an ordinance. The City Attorney responded in the affirmative; stated a moratorium is currently in place on the particular land use in order to permit a study of where appropriate use would be within the City and what type of conditions would be necessary; the moratorium is in place until June of next year; a report will come back to Council. Councilmember Matarrese stated the first assertion states that the Appellant only received eleven days notice on a hearing to show cause; inquired whether the eleven days is in contradiction with State or federal law. The City Attorney responded in the negative. Councilmember Matarrese stated the second assertion states that the Interim Finance Director had a conflict of interest based upon the fact of being a paid employee in the capacity of the hearing officer. The City Attorney stated that she interprets the Haas case very differently than Mr. Higginbotham; the Haas case involved a paid hearing officer; the court discussed the inappropriateness because the hearing officer had interest in the ruling, which is not the case of an employee of the City. Councilmember Matarrese inquired whether the Interim Finance Director's status as the hearing officer is any different than Council's status as the ultimate Appeals Board as employees of the City, to which the City Attorney responded in the negative. Councilmember Gilmore stated that she did not see anything in the record that indicated that the Appellant received any zoning approval from the Planning and Building Department or that the Planning and Building Department had any opportunity to weigh in on the appropriateness for the City. Councilmember Tam stated the transcript notes that the hearing officer explicitly requested what was in the Appellant's mind when stating miscellaneous retail in order to clas… | CityCouncil/2009-05-19.pdf |
CityCouncil/2009-06-02.pdf,12 | CityCouncil | 2009-06-02 | 12 | Councilmember Tam inquired what the City paid for the property. The Public Works Coordinator responded that she did not know; stated the land was purchased in the 1950's as part of a land swap when Harbor Bay was first being filled. Councilmember Tam stated that she would not want to be forced into a sale when market conditions are poor. The Public Works Coordinator stated the land is approximately $10 per square foot and is comparable to remnant parcels that the City has been selling for the last three or four years. Councilmember Matarrese moved introduction of the ordinance with direction that proceeds be allocated to the Open Space Fund for purposes of purchasing open space in the future. Councilmember Tam seconded the motion. Under discussion, Vice Mayor deHaan inquired whether the land would be used for open space. The Public Works Director responded a roadway would be moved to the parameter and the rest of the area would provide the needed safety area. Vice Mayor deHaan stated previous discussions addressed more activity on the Ron Cowan Parkway side. The Public Works Director stated the City is allowing the Port of Oakland to keep the northwest corner driveway open for a year in order to re-grade the area; then the driveway would be closed; reopening the driveway would require a traffic study. On the call for the question, the motion carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. (09-226) ) Introduction of Ordinance Amending the Alameda Municipal Code by Deleting Chapter XX (Flood Damage Prevention) and Adding a New Chapter XX (Flood Plain Management to Meet the Requirements of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Insurance Program and Approve Updated Flood Insurance Rate Maps. Introduced. The Public Works Director gave a brief presentation. Mayor Johnson inquired whether the area could be changed, to which the Public Works Director responded that he would not anticipate any changes. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 12 June 2, 2009 | CityCouncil/2009-06-02.pdf |
CityCouncil/2009-06-16.pdf,12 | CityCouncil | 2009-06-16 | 12 | Councilmember Tam stated that she concurs with Mayor Johnson; Council should not preclude the possibility of earning money; looking into public and private partnerships would be great ; there has been some expectation of moving the Public Works Department back to City Hall and have Planning and Building move to the Carnegie Building. The Interim City Manager stated Planning and Building will not have the ability to pay for refurbishing the building; staff is working on a space plan for the Planning and Building Department, Development Services Department, and Fire Prevention; that she does not think the Carnegie Building will need to be used except for records storage. Speakers Bob Risley, Alameda; Robbie Dileo, Alameda Museum; Chuck Millar, Alameda Museum. Councilmember Matarrese moved approval of 1) reconsidering and redirecting the previous motion; 2) reviewing other uses of the Carnegie Building, including partnering with a non-profit such as the Museum and other public/private partnerships; and 3) receiving a preliminary report back from the Interim City Manager regarding feasibility. Councilmember Gilmore inquired whether Councilmember Matarrese is requesting initial costs to make the building habitable and then figure out uses and who could pay for it, to which Councilmember Matarrese responded in the affirmative. Vice Mayor deHaan seconded the motion. Under discussion, Vice Mayor deHaan stated funding streams need to be reviewed and all options need to be considered. Councilmember Matarrese stated everything needs to be on the table. Councilmember Tam stated getting a paying tenant needs to be underscored. Mayor Johnson stated having a display area would draw people into the building; a multi-use building would be beneficial. Regular Meeting 12 Alameda City Council June 16, 2009 | CityCouncil/2009-06-16.pdf |
CityCouncil/2009-07-07.pdf,12 | CityCouncil | 2009-07-07 | 12 | MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING TUESDAY- - -JULY 7, 2009- - -6:00 P. M. Mayor Johnson convened the Special Meeting at 6:05 p.m. ROLL CALL - Present : Councilmembers deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese, Tam, and Mayor Johnson - 5. Absent : None. The Special Meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider : (09-264) Conference with Legal Counsel - Anticipated Litigation; Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 54956.91 Number of cases Two. (09-265 ) Conference with Real Property Negotiators (54956.8) ; Property : 1855 N. Loop Road and 1 Clubhouse Memorial Drive; Negotiating parties City Manager and Harbor Bay Isle Associates; Under negotiation: Price and terms. Following the Closed Session, the Special Meeting was reconvened and Mayor Johnson announced that regarding Anticipated Litigation, Legal Counsel briefed the City Council on two separate matters of potential litigation and the Council provided direction to Legal Counsel regarding Real Property, the item was not heard. 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 July 7, 2009 | CityCouncil/2009-07-07.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]) );