pages
366 rows where page = 16
This data as json, CSV (advanced)
date (date) 365 ✖
- 2012-06-06 2
- 2005-01-10 1
- 2005-01-24 1
- 2005-01-31 1
- 2005-02-01 1
- 2005-02-28 1
- 2005-03-15 1
- 2005-05-03 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
- 2005-08-16 1
- 2005-08-22 1
- 2005-09-06 1
- 2005-09-20 1
- 2005-09-29 1
- 2005-11-01 1
- 2005-12-06 1
- 2005-12-20 1
- 2006-02-07 1
- 2006-02-21 1
- 2006-03-07 1
- 2006-03-21 1
- 2006-04-04 1
- 2006-04-24 1
- 2006-05-02 1
- 2006-05-16 1
- 2006-06-20 1
- 2006-07-05 1
- 2006-07-24 1
- 2006-09-05 1
- 2006-09-19 1
- 2006-09-25 1
- 2006-10-03 1
- 2006-10-17 1
- 2006-10-23 1
- 2006-11-13 1
- 2006-11-21 1
- 2006-12-05 1
- 2007-01-02 1
- 2007-01-08 1
- 2007-01-16 1
- 2007-02-20 1
- 2007-03-12 1
- 2007-03-20 1
- 2007-03-26 1
- 2007-04-17 1
- 2007-05-15 1
- 2007-05-29 1
- 2007-06-05 1
- 2007-06-19 1
- 2007-07-03 1
- 2007-07-17 1
- 2007-08-07 1
- 2007-08-21 1
- 2007-09-11 1
- 2007-09-24 1
- 2007-10-16 1
- 2007-10-24 1
- 2007-11-06 1
- 2007-11-20 1
- 2007-12-04 1
- 2008-01-02 1
- 2008-01-15 1
- 2008-02-05 1
- 2008-02-19 1
- 2008-03-04 1
- 2008-03-18 1
- 2008-04-15 1
- 2008-04-28 1
- 2008-05-06 1
- 2008-05-20 1
- 2008-06-03 1
- 2008-06-17 1
- 2008-06-23 1
- 2008-07-01 1
- 2008-07-15 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
- 2008-12-02 1
- 2008-12-08 1
- 2009-01-06 1
- 2009-01-20 1
- 2009-02-03 1
- 2009-02-07 1
- 2009-02-17 1
- 2009-03-03 1
- 2009-03-17 1
- 2009-04-21 1
- 2009-05-05 1
- 2009-05-19 1
- 2009-06-02 1
- 2009-06-16 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
- 2009-12-15 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
- 2010-11-03 1
- 2010-11-16 1
- 2010-12-07 1
- 2011-01-04 1
- 2011-02-15 1
- 2011-06-21 1
- 2011-07-19 1
- 2012-02-07 1
- 2012-02-27 1
- 2012-03-12 1
- 2012-03-20 1
- 2012-04-17 1
- 2012-05-08 1
- 2012-05-15 1
- 2012-06-19 1
- 2012-07-17 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
- 2014-04-15 1
- 2014-05-06 1
- 2014-06-17 1
- 2014-07-01 1
- 2014-07-15 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
- 2015-02-17 1
- 2015-03-03 1
- 2015-03-17 1
- 2015-04-07 1
- 2015-04-21 1
- 2015-05-05 1
- 2015-05-19 1
- 2015-06-02 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
- 2015-12-15 1
- 2016-01-05 1
- 2016-01-27 1
- 2016-02-02 1
- 2016-02-16 1
- 2016-02-24 1
- 2016-03-01 1
- 2016-03-15 1
- 2016-04-05 1
- 2016-04-19 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
- 2016-12-06 1
- 2016-12-14 1
- 2016-12-20 1
- 2017-01-03 1
- 2017-01-17 1
- 2017-02-08 1
- 2017-02-21 1
- 2017-02-23 1
- 2017-03-07 1
- 2017-03-21 1
- 2017-04-04 1
- 2017-04-07 1
- 2017-04-12 1
- 2017-04-18 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
- 2017-09-05 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
- 2018-02-06 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
- 2018-04-11 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
- 2018-10-02 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
- 2019-02-19 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
- 2019-06-18 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
- 2019-10-15 1
- 2019-11-19 1
- 2019-12-03 1
- 2019-12-12 1
- 2019-12-17 1
- 2019-12-18 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
- 2020-05-05 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
- 2020-09-01 1
- 2020-09-15 1
- 2020-10-06 1
- 2020-10-20 1
- 2020-11-17 1
- 2020-12-01 1
- 2021-01-05 1
- 2021-01-19 1
- 2021-02-01 1
- 2021-02-02 1
- 2021-02-16 1
- 2021-03-01 1
- 2021-03-02 1
- 2021-03-11 1
- 2021-03-16 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
- 2021-05-08 1
- 2021-05-18 1
- 2021-06-01 1
- 2021-06-15 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
- 2021-09-21 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
- 2022-04-19 1
- 2022-05-03 1
- 2022-05-17 1
Link | body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
CityCouncil/2005-01-31.pdf,16 | CityCouncil | 2005-01-31 | 16 | Adjournment There being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the Special Meeting at 8:11 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 3 January 17, 2006 | CityCouncil/2005-01-31.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-02-01.pdf,16 | CityCouncil | 2005-02-01 | 16 | Agenda for meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act. Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Community 3 Improvement Commission and Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority February 1, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-02-01.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-03-15.pdf,16 | CityCouncil | 2005-03-15 | 16 | MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL JOINT CITY COUNCIL AND COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY - - - MARCH 15, 2005 - - - 7:27 P.M. Mayor/Chair Johnson convened the Special Joint Meeting at 7:30 p.m. ROLL CALL - Present : ouncilmembers/Commissioners Daysog, deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese and Mayor/Chair Johnson - 5. Absent : None. CONSENT CALENDAR louncilmember/Commissioner Matarrese moved approval of the Consent Calendar. Councilmember/Commissioner Gilmore seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. [ Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk preceding the paragraph number. ] ( 5-109CC/*05-012CIC) Recommendation to approve a form of Assignment and Assumption Agreement between University Avenue Housing and Alameda Point Collaborative. Approved. AGENDA ITEMS None. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Mayor/Chair Johnson adjourned the Special Joint Meeting at 7:31 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 March 15, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-03-15.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-05-03.pdf,16 | CityCouncil | 2005-05-03 | 16 | Counci lmember/Commissioner deHaan stated that he is comfortable with delaying other major retail developments to allow South Shore Shopping Center to mature; he supports and looks forward to the renewed Center, but has concerns with funding. Commissioner Matarrese moved adoption of the Resolution Approving and Authorizing Payment of Certain Public Improvements to the Park Street and Otis Drive Intersection [paragraph no. 05-022CIC]. Commissioner deHaan seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. Councilmember Matarrese moved adoption of the Resolution Approving and Authorizing Execution of a Public Improvements Construction Agreement Between the City and Harsch Investment Corporation [paragraph no. 05-195CC]. Councilmember Daysog seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. (05-023CIC) Recommendation to approve an Amended Contract with Architectural Resources Group, Inc. by increasing the Contract amount an additional $44,275 to provide additional pre-planning services for the proposed Alameda Theatre Project. Commissioner Daysog moved approval of the staff recommendation. Commissioner deHaan seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Mayor/Chair Johnson adjourned the Special Meeting at 9:28 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger, City Clerk Secretary, Community Improvement Commission The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act. Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council and 6 Community Improvement Commission May 3, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-05-03.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-05-17.pdf,16 | CityCouncil | 2005-05-17 | 16 | began; he was informed that the fence was installed; that he was not hired to install the fence. Mayor Johnson suggested the matter be continued since there has been some disruption on the site; the arborist could inform the City about ways to protect the tree, which could be used as conditions in the approval and the matter could return to Council; the owner needs to understand the conditions are serious and cannot be disregarded, and there should not be any other activity on the site. Councilmember Matarrese moved approval of continuing the hearing. Councilmember Matarrese stated the arborist's assessment should include whether the damage jeopardizes the tree; the City needs to take a close look and have a binding report. Councilmember Daysog stated that he is interested in determining what occurred at the site: were conditions disregarded, was there an accident or did nothing happen. Councilmember deHaan stated the soil brought onto the site does not look clean; the City should review the source of the soil and determine if there is a problem. Councilmember Matarrese stated the owner should be liable for making the determination; the City should request that the owner conduct a soil test. The City Attorney stated a design review appeal could be forthcoming in four weeks and the two issues could be combined. Mayor Johnson stated the City should not assume there would be an appeal of the design review. Councilmember Matarrese stated the tree issue should be resolved. Mayor Johnson requested the matter return at the next Council meeting. Vice Mayor Gilmore stated the conditions of approval should have teeth, which could be anything from having a bond posted or recording documentation; encouraged the City Attorney to be creative. Councilmember deHaan inquired whether Councilmember Matarrese would amend the motion to include requiring a review of the soil condition. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 16 May 17, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-05-17.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-06-07.pdf,16 | CityCouncil | 2005-06-07 | 16 | MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL JOINT CITY COUNCIL, COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION, AND ALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING TUESDAY- - -JUNE 7, 2005- -7:25 P.M. Mayor/Chair Johnson convened the meeting at 7:59 p.m. ROLL CALL - Present : Councilmembers/Commissioners/Board Members Daysog, deHaan Gilmore, Matarrese, and Mayor/Chair Johnson - 5. Absent : None MINUTES (05-257CC/05-029CIC) Minutes of the Special Joint City Council, Community Improvement Commission, and Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority Meeting of May 17, 2005. Approved. ouncilmember/Commissioner/Board Member deHaan moved approval of minutes with the amendment that the minutes state: "Recommendation to receive and file revised Alameda West Strategic Retail Implementation recommendations. Councilmember/Commissioner/Board Member Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. AGENDA ITEMS ARRA Resolution No. 36 , "Approving and Adopting the Operating Budget and Appropriating Certain Moneys for the Expenditures Provided in Fiscal Year 2005-06. " Adopted (05-030CIC) Resolution No. 05-137, "Approving and Adopting the Operating Budget and Appropriating Certain Moneys for the Expenditures Provided in Fiscal Year 2005-06. " Adopted; and (05-258CC) Resolution No. 13845, "Approving and Adopting the Operating Budget and Appropriating Certain Moneys for the Expenditures Provided in Fiscal Year 2005-06. Adopted. The Acting City Manager/Executive Director stated that this is the first time that the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority (ARRA) Community Improvement Commission (CIC) and City Council budgets have been presented at one time noted it is important to receive the budgets together because there is a considerable amount of interaction between the three agencies; a long-term financial plan for ARRA is provided and a ten-year financial plan for the City would be provided in the near future; additional CIC Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Community 1 Improvement Commission, and Alameda Reuse and Redevelopm… | CityCouncil/2005-06-07.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-06-21.pdf,16 | CityCouncil | 2005-06-21 | 16 | MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING TUESDAY- - -JUNE 21, 2005- -6:00 P.M. Mayor Johnson convened the special meeting at 6:05 p.m. Roll Call - Present : Councilmembers Daysog, deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese and Mayor Johnson - 5. Absent : None. Agenda Items (05-293) Adjournment to closed session to consider : Public Employment; Title City Manager Following the closed session, Mayor Johnson announced that the City Council discussed selection of the City Manager. (05-294) Recommendation to approve Agreement Appointing Debra Kurita as City Manager. Councilmember Matarrese moved approval of the Agreement appointing Debra Kurita. Vice Mayor Gilmore seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. Adjournment There being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the special meeting at 6:29 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger City Clerk The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act. Special Meeting Alameda City Council June 21, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-06-21.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-07-19.pdf,16 | CityCouncil | 2005-07-19 | 16 | The City Attorney stated that she would step down during the agenda item and the next agenda item [paragraph no. 05-365], which have to do with her Contract. Mayor Johnson stated that the Council has a copy of the legal opinion; Council can vote to make it available to the public; there is nothing in the opinion that needs to be confidential. Councilmember Matarrese moved approval of waiving attorney client privilege restrictions on the memos. Vice Mayor Gilmore seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. Mayor Johnson stated the opinion is an interpretation of a Contract provision; last year, she was informed that the City Manager's vehicle allowance had increased; in November, she asked the City Attorney to review whether the City Manager's vehicle allowance had changed; the response she received back was it had not changed; a Councilmember then learned that the vehicle allowance for the City Manager was $372; Councilmembers questioned how the vehicle allowance was increased because the Contract states that the vehicle allowance is $250; Council asked the Human Resources Director to check on the matter; last week, the response back from the Human Resources Director was that a legal opinion was obtained from outside counsel that indicated that the vehicle allowance should be increased because of a change in tax; the reason the matter is on the agenda is because her response to the Acting City Manager was that the amount should stay the same and should remain the $250 in the Contract until the Council agrees to change the amount; that she requested that the Acting City Manager change the amount back to $250 and he stated that the Council should give direction on the matter, which is why she placed the matter on the agenda; the Council should determine what happened and has wondered why the amount is higher than the amount in the Contract; the Council should decide whether the vehicle allowance stays the higher amount or goes back to the Contract amount; there should be a Contract amendment ; t… | CityCouncil/2005-07-19.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-08-16.pdf,16 | CityCouncil | 2005-08-16 | 16 | obstacles in determining how to go forward with the project and save the historic theater at the same time. Mr. Kelly stated the historic theater costs over $9 million for 484 seats; $9 million is enough money to build a 12-plex. Mayor Johnson stated eight years ago, the Council gave direction to staff to develop a project that would save the Alameda Theater and have it used for first run movies. Mr. Conner stated the percentage rent structure was designed to help protect the downside and have everyone share in the upside ; the City shares significantly [in the upside ] more than any other deal; the amount is three to four times what an average percentage rent would be in any commercial theater in a suburban setting. Councilmember Daysog inquired whether the City's share of the percentage rent in net present value terms over 20 to 30 years is $190,000. Mr. Kelly responded an aggressive assumption that the theater will get 100% of the Alameda market would mean the City will have some significant percentage rents; if the theater does very well, the City will receive 15 to 17%, will share in that [profit] and receive what is believed to be a fair rent. Mayor Johnson inquired whether 15 to 17% was based on gross or net, to which Mr. Kelly responded gross, including concessions. Vice Mayor Gilmore stated everyone seems to agree that the historic theater should be restored and preserved; the money being spent to restore the theater could build a 12-plex; money is being put into the historic theater because it almost becomes a public amenity; a public amenity is not expected to make a return; the new Library is not expected to make a return. Councilmember Daysog noted residents voted for the new Library. Vice Mayor Gilmore stated the community has clearly expressed that restoration and preservation of the historic theater is valuable: the high cost of rehabilitating the theater makes a financially neutral project difficult; opinions about the rest of the project differ restoring the theater does not come cheaply. Mayor … | CityCouncil/2005-08-16.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-09-06.pdf,16 | CityCouncil | 2005-09-06 | 16 | to address are : how people would be evacuated, whether helicopters would be available, and what would happen to the water supply; people need to know how to turn off gas lines; stated that cable communicatior would most likely be out during a disaster. Councilmember Matarrese requested a current copy of the City's Emergency Operation Plan and that the matter be placed on an agenda for discussion; stated that questions have been raised regarding the placement of people and the use of public facilities including the schools; that he would rather not wait until the exercise is performed in October; the matter needs to be addressed as soon as possible; recommendations could be made and policy direction could be given on what is in place now. The City Manager stated that the Council would be provided with a copy of the Emergency Operation Plan and that the matter could be placed on an agenda for future discussion; issues that need direction would be identified; sheltering questions could be answered through the City's relationships with other agencies; tonight's intention was to ensure that the audience knows where contributions can be made to the current disaster victims and that the City has a plan in case a disaster occurs. ouncilmember deHaan stated that everyone has a heavy heart right now; the gas surge was a best-case scenario; resources were available to handle the situation; the liquefaction was monumental (particularly at the Naval Air Station) during the earthquake tonight's discussion is timely; noted that he was sorry the discussion had to be within the current circumstances; stated that the comments are worthwhile and appreciated; the Council has responsibilities; stated that he takes the responsibility seriously; he is concerned with communication and support resources in the City; the Fire and Police Departments are on 24-hour shifts, but other departments are not; stated that he looks forward to further discussion. ( 05-437) - Councilmember Daysog requested: 1) an update on the status of the live/wor… | CityCouncil/2005-09-06.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-09-20.pdf,16 | CityCouncil | 2005-09-20 | 16 | MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING TUESDAY - - -SEPTEMBER 20, 2005- -6:20 P.M. Mayor Johnson convened the Special Meeting at 6:25 p.m. ROLL CALL - Present : Councilmembers Daysog, deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese, and Mayor Johnson - 5. Absent : None. The Special Meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider: (05-445) - Conference with Labor Negotiators - Agency Negotiator: Craig Jory; Employee Organizations International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers and Management and Confidential Employees Association. (05-446) Conference with Legal Counsel - Anticipated Litigation. Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 54956.9 Number of cases One. Following the Closed Session, the Special Meeting was reconvened and Mayor Johnson announced that regarding Conference with Labor Negotiators, the Council discussed International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers and gave directions to the agency negotiatori regarding Conference with Legal Counsel, the Council gave direction to the City Attorney. 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 September 20, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-09-20.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-11-01.pdf,16 | CityCouncil | 2005-11-01 | 16 | MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING TUESDAY- - -NOVEMBER 1, 2005 - -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. Absent : None. The Special Meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider: (05-511) - Conference with Labor Negotiators - Agency Negotiators : Craig Jory and Human Resources Director; Employee Organizations : International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers and Management and Confidential Employees Association. (05-512) Conference with Legal Counsel - Existing litigation; Name of case: Citizens for a Megaplex-Free Alameda V. City of Alameda, et al. (05-513) - Conference with Labor Negotiators - Agency Negotiators: Marie Gilmore and Frank Matarrese; Employee : City Attorney. Following the Closed Session, the Special Meeting was reconvened and Mayor Johnson announced that regarding the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers and Management and Confidential Employees Association, the Council gave instructions to labor negotiators; regarding Existing litigation, the Council was briefed by the City Attorney; regarding the City Attorney, the Council gave instruction to the negotiators. 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 November 1, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-11-01.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-12-06.pdf,16 | CityCouncil | 2005-12-06 | 16 | AGENDA ITEM (05-551CC/05-056CIC) Transmittal of City of Alameda Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) for Fiscal Year ended June 30, 2005, Auditor's report on agreed upon procedures on compliance with Vehicle Code section 40200.3 Parking Citation Processing, agreed upon Procedures Report on compliance with the Proposition 111 2004- 05 Appropriations Limit Increment, Police and Fire Retirement System Pension Plans 1079 and 1082 Audit Report for Fiscal Year ended June 30, 2005, Metropolitan Transportation Commission Grant Programs Financial Statements for year ending June 30, 2005, Community Improvement Commission basic component unit financial statements for the year ended June 30, 2005, and Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority basic component unit financial statements for the year ended June 30, 2005. The City Auditor introduced the City's External Auditor, Maria Giannell, Maze & Associates. The External Auditor gave a presentation summarizing the financial statements and management recommendations Mayor/Chair Johnson requested an explanation of the Finds, Forfeits and Miscellaneous Revenues. The External Auditor stated that the items were the aggregation of ten years of data on the statement of revenues, expenditures and changes in the fund balance. Mayor/Chair Johnson stated that there was a small, steady increase from 1996 through 2004 and a large increase in 2005. The External Auditor stated other revenue was received in the Fleet Industrial Supply Center (FISC) fund that was not Finds and Forfeitures. Mayor/Chair Johnson stated that the Community Services and Capital Outlay have declined since 1996. ouncilmember/Commissioner/Authority Member deHaan inquired why general expenditures dropped for Development and Public Works since 2003, to which the External Auditor responded the drop occurred because of budget cuts. Mayor/Chair Johnson stated that Public Safety expenditures Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Community 2 Improvement Commission, and Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority … | CityCouncil/2005-12-06.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-12-20.pdf,16 | CityCouncil | 2005-12-20 | 16 | MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING TUESDAY - -DECEMBER 20, 2005- -5:31 P.M. Mayor Johnson convened the Special Meeting at 6:35 p.m. Roll Call - Present : Councilmembers Daysog, deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese, and Mayor Johnson - 5. Absent : None. The Special Meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider: (05-573) ) Conference with Legal Counsel - Anticipated Litigation Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 54956.9; Number of cases One. ( 05-574) Conference with Labor Negotiators - Agency Negotiators: Marie Gilmore and Frank Matarrese; Employee: City Attorney. Mayor Johnson called a recess to hold the Regular City Council meeting at 7:30 p.m. and reconvened the Closed Session at 9:15 p.m. Following the Closed Session, the Special Meeting was reconvened and Mayor Johnson announced that regarding Conference with Legal Counsel, the Council received a briefing from Legal Counsel; regarding Conference with Labor Negotiators, the Council gave direction to negotiators. Adjournment There being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the Special 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. Special Meeting Alameda City Council December 20, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-12-20.pdf |
CityCouncil/2006-02-07.pdf,16 | CityCouncil | 2006-02-07 | 16 | balance of the fiscal year looked. The Finance Director responded that the year should end with revenues exceeding expenditures based on what is being done today. Councilmember deHaan stated there will always be adjustments. Councilmember Matarrese stated that some of the money allocated in December would be invested in field repair; a turf management plan was discussed earlier in the year; the turf management plan should be accelerated to ensure repairs are not lost after a year of play or a season of rain; the plan should be accelerated to protect the investment. The Acting Recreation and Park Director stated that the turf management plan has been initiated; solid plans should be in place within the next month. Councilmember Matarrese inquired whether the process could be accelerated to have plan in place before investments are made, to which the Acting Recreation and Park Director responded in the affirmative. Mayor Johnson inquired whether most of the $1.6 million would go to contractors. The Public Works Director responded some money would cover costs for design, inspection and contract administration; staff levels cannot cover the physical work; sidewalk inspections are intensive. Mayor Johnson inquired how much of the $1.6 million would toward design and contract management. The Public Works Director responded that design is generally 10% of the construction cost; contract administration and inspections can be 3-5%. Councilmember Matarrese inquired whether the design, construction management and inspections would be handled by contractors, to which the Public Works Director responded the tasks would be handled by existing staff. Councilmember Matarrese inquired why the costs need to be covered if existing staff is used. The Public Works Director responded the Public Works Engineering division functions like an engineering firm; 80% of the engineering Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council and 6 Community Improvement Commission February 7, 2006 | CityCouncil/2006-02-07.pdf |
CityCouncil/2006-02-21.pdf,16 | CityCouncil | 2006-02-21 | 16 | MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING TUESDAY - -FEBRUARY 21, 2006- -6:01 P.M. Mayor Johnson convened the Special Meeting at 6:55 p.m. Roll Call - Present : Councilmembers Daysog, deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese, and Mayor Johnson - 5. Absent : None. The Special Meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider: (06-072) Conference with Labor Negotiators - Agency Negotiators: Marie Gilmore and Frank Matarrese; Employee: City Attorney. Following the Closed Session, the Special Meeting was reconvened and Mayor Johnson announced that the Council discussed the City Attorney employment agreement. Adjournment There being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the Special Meeting at 7:50 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger City Clerk The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act. Special Meeting Alameda City Council February 21, 2006 | CityCouncil/2006-02-21.pdf |
CityCouncil/2006-03-07.pdf,16 | CityCouncil | 2006-03-07 | 16 | Councilmember/Commissioner deHaan seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Mayor/Chair Johnson adjourned the Special Joint Meeting at 7:49 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 2 Community Improvement Commission Meeting March 7, 2006 | CityCouncil/2006-03-07.pdf |
CityCouncil/2006-03-21.pdf,16 | CityCouncil | 2006-03-21 | 16 | million; the $7 million HUD loan was not anticipated when the project began; alternate parking space locations are available which would enable more screens if necessary; the US Bank site would provide 350 parking spaces; he has major financial concerns. The Development Services Director stated the City floated a $46.5 million bond with a net of $40 million; $13 million was to repay Marina Village for the investment made in infrastructure; $2.2 million was to repay a loan from the West End project; approximately $4 million of the Streetscape Project was uncommitted; projects identified for the Bond money included the Alameda Theater, Bridgeside Shopping Center, and parking structure; $7.5 million was for the Alameda Theater and $10.3 million was for the parking structure; the 2002 parking study assumed that the average space would cost approximately $18,000 per parking stall; the cost did not include relocation, demolition, or property acquisition; current per space construction costs are $23,700; the $32,000 cost per space includes acquisition, relocation, design, etc. ; Watsonville just finished a 460 parking space garage which was bid at $20,600 per space eighteen months agoi concrete costs have accelerated; Santa Rosa recently bid a parking garage at $30,000 per stall for construction; the elevator requirements of the new theater serve the historic theater also; an elevator is required for a public assembly facility the previously proposed parking structure included parking on the top deck; each level has increased in height to accommodate equipment and air space needs a $3 million grant was submitted to the State under Proposition 30 about a month and a half ago for additional historic theater preservation activity. Mayor/Chair Johnson stated real costs would not be know until construction bids are received; the City experienced bids coming in over budget for the New Library; the Webster Street project was overbid and the bids were rejected; concurred with Vice Mayor/Commissioner Gilmore regarding not restor… | CityCouncil/2006-03-21.pdf |
CityCouncil/2006-04-04.pdf,16 | CityCouncil | 2006-04-04 | 16 | City Attorney; regarding Citizens for a Megaplex-Free Alameda V. City of Alameda, Community Improvement Commission, Planning Board, and City Council, the Council obtained briefing. Adjournment There being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the Special Meeting at 7:40 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger City Clerk The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act. Special Meeting Alameda City Council 2 April 4, 2006 | CityCouncil/2006-04-04.pdf |
CityCouncil/2006-05-02.pdf,16 | CityCouncil | 2006-05-02 | 16 | MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL JOINT CITY COUNCIL, ALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, AND COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY- - -MAY 2, 2006 - -7:31 P.M. Mayor/Chair Johnson convened the Special Joint Meeting at 9:46 p.m. ROLL CALL - Present : Councilmembers / Board Members / Commissioners Daysog, deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese and Mayor/Chair Johnson - 5. Absent : None. MINUTES (06-242CC/06-014CIC) Minutes of the Special Community Improvement Commission (CIC) Meeting, and the Special Joint City Council, Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority, CIC and Housing Authority Board of Commissioners Meeting held on April 18, 2006. Approved. Councilmember/Board ember/Commissioner Matarrese moved approval of the minutes. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan seconded the motion which carried by the following voice vote : Ayes Councilmembers/Board Member/Commissioners Daysog, deHaan, Matarrese and Mayor/Chair Johnson - 4. Abstentions: Vice Mayor/Board Member/Commissioner Gilmore - 1. AGENDA ITEM (06-243CC/06-015CIC) Recommendation to accept the Fiscal Year 2006 third-Quarter Financial Report and approve Budget Adjustments. The Finance Director provided a brief presentation. Vice Mayor/Board Member/Commissioner Gilmore inquired what was the booking fee reimbursement which results in a $200,000 reduction. The Finance Director responded that the State appropriates a reimbursement for fees that the City pays to the County for booking prisoners; the State took the reimbursement fee out of the General Fund budget during Fiscal Year 2006; the reimbursement fee will be included in the Fiscal year 2007 budget. Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Alameda 1 Reuse and Redevelopment Authority, and Community Improvement Commission May 2, 2006 | CityCouncil/2006-05-02.pdf |
CityCouncil/2006-05-16.pdf,16 | CityCouncil | 2006-05-16 | 16 | The Development Services Director stated the amendment would cover the balance of the project the City was requested to retain the architect through construction by the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) and Section 106 processi the architect would be on board to verify construction administration; the money would not be spent until there is activity. Commissioner Matarrese stated he sees no problem with the staff recommendation since the money would not be spent until services are needed. Commissioner deHaan inquired how the $27,200 was determined. The Development Services Director responded the amount was already in the Contract; stated the money was used for the final response to the SHPO changes the Contract was exhausted; the amount would carry through the range of services needed from the architect. Commissioner deHaan stated bids are back and are being evaluated inquired whether the extra service is needed for the review process. The Development Services Director responded in the negative; stated the service would be needed if the bid is awarded for the parking structure; money is not spent on services until a project is approved by the Council. Commissioner deHaan inquired when the review process would be completed. The Development Services Director responded options should be presented by June 6. Commissioner deHaan inquired when the physical massing model would be available for the public, to which the Development Services Director responded June 20. Commissioner deHaan stated he would prefer to hold off on the matter until after the June 20 discussion. Commissioner Matarrese stated he does not see any reason to hold off on the matter; the money would not being spent; preparatory action can be taken now; the Council should move forward with the staff recommendation. Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Alameda 2 Reuse and Redevelopment Authority, Community Improvement Commission, and Housing Authority Board of Commissioners May 16, 2006 | CityCouncil/2006-05-16.pdf |
CityCouncil/2006-06-20.pdf,16 | CityCouncil | 2006-06-20 | 16 | the City is offering less than inflation and asking for takeaways the cost for the average Alameda house has increased by 31%; gas has increased 152%; MCEA is looking to stay even with inflation. Beckie McWilliams, MCEA Vice President stated a coalition of all miscellaneous bargaining groups was formed to explore the possibility of enhancing the current PERS retirement; the PERS Coalition requested a meeting with the City in May 2005; the Interim City Manager/Executive Director met with the group to ascertain what the Coalition was interested in achieving subsequently, the PERS Coalition made several requests to meet with the City; the City has ignored the requests only five out of thirty-one northern California cities do not offer an enhanced PERS package. employer rates have decreased with the recent implementation of new smoothing methodology by PERS; the Coalition feels the time is appropriate for the City to consider moving forward with an enhanced PERS package as a tool for retention and recruitment an enhanced PERS package would serve to entice qualified, high caliber City employees. Christopher Buckley, Alameda, stated the Customer Service Improvement Team's main objective is to work with the Planning and Building Department to help promote good customer service in the permit processi the team is concerned that the Planning and Building Department is adequately staffed to ensure proper customer service; the team senses that staff has been increasingly challenged permit activity has increased 40% and staff has decreased; increased fees should pay for additional staff; the Planning and Building Department has two unfunded vacant positions; the team urges funding the two positions. The City Manager/Executive Director provided a brief presentation on the Fiscal Year 2006-2007 and 2007-2008 budget. Mayor/Chai Johnson inquired whether there would be a crossing guard at Chipman School. The City Manager/Executive Director responded all School District requests would be reviewed the key area is the new Ruby Bridge… | CityCouncil/2006-06-20.pdf |
CityCouncil/2006-07-05.pdf,16 | CityCouncil | 2006-07-05 | 16 | Commissioner Daysog stated the project was put on hold because of the City's policy decisions regarding retail. Commissioner Matarrese stated the bid was put out , but the Contract was not executed; the City is now considering awarding an $840,000 Contract without a bidding process. Commissioner Gilmore inquired whether the price and scope are the same as in 1999, to which the Redevelopment Manager responded the price is the same but the scope was reduced in 1999. Commissioner deHaan stated the matter should return at another meeting the original Contract and background should be provided. The Development Services Director stated staff could come back to the Commission with additional information; it is important to not lose embedded data; the engineers constantly work with the City; continuity should be discussed before changes are made. Commissioner Matarrese stated the explanation provided by the Development Services Director was what he was seeking. Commissioner Gilmore stated the staff report does not address continuity or amount of the Contract. Chair Johnson inquired whether waiting two weeks causes a detriment or whether moving forward tonight would be better. The Development Services Director responded that she would be happy to provide additional information to the Commission. Commissioner Matarrese inquired whether the cost of switching to another firm exceeds the amount of savings. The Development Services Director responded in the affirmative; stated the staff recommendation is the best and only way to go. Chair Johnson stated the Commission should move forward with the staff recommendation. Commissioner Daysog moved approval of the staff recommendation Commissioner Daysog inquired whether knocking down the walls of the Tube would be analyzed. The Redevelopment Manager responded Public Works provided a report to the Commission on the matter. Special Meeting Community Improvement Commission 3 July 5, 2006 | CityCouncil/2006-07-05.pdf |
CityCouncil/2006-09-05.pdf,16 | CityCouncil | 2006-09-05 | 16 | Mayor Johnson stated the HAB has authority to make the finding that the project, as proposed, would adversely affect the historic significance of the dwelling; further stated there has to be a commitment that what is built maintains the historic significance as the tradeoff to allow demolition. Councilmember deHaan stated the buildings were constructed in the 1800's; the property is important even though the buildings are not on the historic list. Councilmember Matarrese stated the intention of the motion is to have the HAB look at alternative plans to address the issue of mass and the appearance from the front; that he does not want the direction construed as a restoration critique; the Council wants the project to appear that it belongs, people to know the buildings are Victorians by looking at the buildings, and does not want the buildings turned into something else; the HAB has to focus down with input from AAPS, the architect and owner. Councilmember Daysog inquired whether the HAB reviewed the grading issue, to which the Planning and Building Director responded in the affirmative. Councilmember deHaan restated that he seconded the motion. On the call for the question, the motion carried by the following voice vote Ayes Councilmembers Daysog, deHaan, Matarrese and Mayor Johnson - 4. Noes: Vice Mayor Gilmore - 1. (06-445) Public Hearing to consider Adoption of Resolution Amending Master Fee Resolution No. 12191 to Revise and Streamline the Planning and Building, Public Works and Fire Departments Fee Schedules. Continued. The City Manager suggested that the matter be continued for 30 days. Councilmember Matarrese moved approval of continuing the matter for 30 days. Vice Mayor Gilmore seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. (06-446 - ) 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 In… | CityCouncil/2006-09-05.pdf |
CityCouncil/2006-09-19.pdf,16 | CityCouncil | 2006-09-19 | 16 | electric blowers; to which Ms. Colburn responded all leaf blowers would be included. Mayor Johnson inquired whether other cities have adopted ordinances banning leaf blowers. Ms. Colburn responded between twenty and forty California cities have banned leaf blowers. Mayor Johnson inquired which Bay Area cities have banned leaf blowers, to which Ms. Colburn responded Palo Alto and Berkeley. Mayor Johnson inquired whether the City of Berkeley received complaints from gardeners. Ms. Colburn responded gardening may take a little longer and gardeners may charge the homeowner more, but the matter has not become a big issue. Mayor Johnson suggested that staff review what other cities have done. The City Manager responded that staff would provide an Off Agenda Report. Councilmember deHaan stated leaf blowers often blow debris into the roadway or a neighbor's yard; the City is impacted because of additional clean up. (06-477) Deborah James, Alameda, discussed traffic, speeding and parking at bus stops. Mayor Johnson stated the City Manager would pass concerns onto the Police Chief. Councilmember deHaan stated recent emails were received regarding speeding cars. The City Manager stated the Police Chief met with the people in the neighborhood. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS (06-478 ) Consideration of Mayor's nominations for the Economic Development Commission, Social Service Human Relations Board and Climate Protection Campaign Task Force. Mayor Johnson nominated Robert A. Bonta for appointment to the Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 16 September 19, 2006 | CityCouncil/2006-09-19.pdf |
CityCouncil/2006-10-03.pdf,16 | CityCouncil | 2006-10-03 | 16 | affordable rental housing on 2.51 acres at the former FISC site and negotiate an Owner Participation Agreement and other related documents between the Housing Authority, CIC and RCD; (06-061A CIC) Recommendation to authorize the Executive Director to negotiate an Owner Participation Agreement and other related documents with Resources for Community Development and the Housing Authority of the City of Alameda; (06-489 CC) Recommendation to approve the use of up to $1.41 million of City HOME Funds and $100,000 of Affordable Housing Unit Fees (AHUF) to pay a portion of the costs of development of 39 units of Affordable Rental Housing within the former FISC site and authorize the City Manager to executed related documents; and 06-061B CIC) Resolution No. 06-145, "Approving the Use of Housing Funds to Pay a Portion of the Costs of Development of a 39 Unit Affordable Rental Project within the FISC/East Housing Area.' Adopted. The Base Reuse and Community Development Division Manager gave a Power Point presentation. Councilmember/Commissioner/Board Member deHaan requested an explanation on the cleanup requirements; inquired who would pay for clean up. The Base Reuse and Community Development Division Manager responded a benzene plume underlies the 39 unit site; stated the Navy is responsible for plume remediation, which will begin in approximately 12 months. the City has been working with the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) on a remediation measure that would allow the construction of residential units prior to the Navy's remediation; the remedial action workplan was signed by DTSC in Sacramento today; DTSC approved the installation of a sub-slab depressurization system; a multi-layer vapor barrier system underlies the buildings. Councilmember/Commissioner/Board Member deHaan inquired how open space would be controlled. The Base Reuse and Community Development Division Manager responded potential indoor air gases are the only risks identified by DTSC ; stated non-enclosed areas produce no human health and … | CityCouncil/2006-10-03.pdf |
CityCouncil/2006-10-17.pdf,16 | CityCouncil | 2006-10-17 | 16 | degraded at Atlantic Avenue and Webster Street but nothing can be done because of Policy No 7. The City Engineer stated the community would have the opportunity to review the impact levels through the environmental review processi currently the General Plan stops at level of service D; anything below Level D is not allowable; decisions could be made regarding acceptable minutes of delay and service levels through the review processi level of service F might not be acceptable and could be discussed through the environmental review process. Vice Mayor Gilmore stated the staff analysis notes that Policy No. 4 is consistent with the current General Plan's Transportation Element policies; she does not recall an analysis on the overall City network when environmental impact reviews (EIR) are done; inquired whether Transportation Policy No. 4 is followed when EIR's are done currently. The Civil Engineer responded developers often times lay out the network, such as pedestrian and bicycle corridors and transit routes, during the EIR process. Vice Mayor Gilmore stated she thinks about streets and roads throughout the City, not just in the adjacent neighborhood, when she reads the term "overall City network;" the wording might need to be changed if her interpretation is wrong. John Knox White, Transportation Commission Chair, stated that Vice Mayor Gilmore's interpretation is correct; an example would be the Alameda Landing EIR, which will be coming to Council: specifically, the EIR addresses bike parking and pedestrian issues within the project, not throughout the City; the Transportation Commission has requested that the scope be broadened, which is the exact intent of Transportation Policy No. 4; streets next to the project are not being reviewed now. Mayor Johnson stated "TMP" means Transportation Master Plan on Policy No. 6; inquired what "TDM" means. The Transportation Commission Chair responded "TDM" means Transportation Demand Management stated an example would be the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority (ARRA)… | CityCouncil/2006-10-17.pdf |
CityCouncil/2006-11-21.pdf,16 | CityCouncil | 2006-11-21 | 16 | the concept of Clement Avenue extension has been around for 45 years; Clement Avenue extension was clearly in place when Mr. Wang bought the property; she has had it with the resistance to implement the Clement Avenue extension; the neighborhood and future West End project need the Clement Avenue extension in order to get traffic to the bridges on the East End; the process is backwards. the Planning and Building Department has not reviewed the project, which is the normal processi the project should be under the Planning and Building Department, not Development Services the City can ask developers for concessions the NWSP is not approved yet. Jean Sweeney, NWSP Committee Member, outlined the history of street closures for Alaska Packers; stated history should not be repeated; a road needs to be in place before the development is considered traffic would be generated and Buena Vista residents would come forward if the road is not in place. Jay Ingram, Alameda, submitted a letter from Rosemary McNally and a copy of his comments; stated the process is backwards; urged the Council/Commission not to approve the ENA and to slow down and get the community involved with plans viewed by the Planning and Building Department, Planning Board and other commissions. Valerie Ruma, Alameda, submitted comments; urged the Council/Commission not to approve the ENA because the Concept Plan should comply with the NWSP, which has not been approved; stated an ENA is a tentative agreement to a certain schedule to proceed ; inquired how a schedule could be agreed upon when there is no concrete idea of what is being planned further stated the Conceptual Plan is nothing more than a creative meandering urged keeping the community involved and not approving the ENA; stated the plan should go through the regular process and be submitted to the Planning and Building Department. David Kirwin, Alameda, submitted comments; stated rolling into an ENA without public and community involvement is of concern; that he does not understand the necessity … | CityCouncil/2006-11-21.pdf |
CityCouncil/2006-12-05.pdf,16 | CityCouncil | 2006-12-05 | 16 | return; there is an opportunity to share in the upside and recoup the project value. louncilmember/Authority Member/Commissioner deHaan inquired how much money would be generated with the Bayport profit share and whether all of the money would go back into the project. The Base Reuse and Community Development Manager responded the Bayport profit participation is the net once all obligations have been paid down; a $30 million profit participation is anticipated; $25 million would be used to pay off obligations. Councilmember/Authority Member/Commissioner Daysog inquired whether the City had no revenue stream and had to work with Catellus as a partner to provide the funding. The Base Reuse and Community Development Manager responded in the affirmative stated the City has a backbone infrastructure obligation; other costs escalated and reflect the ultimate project costs. Councilmember/Authority Member/Commissioner Daysog stated Council thought that the City would barely break even because the Bayport homes were to sell for $400,000 on average. the homes are selling between $700,000 and $900,000. The Base Reuse and Community Development Manager stated the strength of the residential market is what made the project financially viable for the CIC; the small amount of profit participation would be put toward Alameda Landing. louncilmember/Authority Member/Commissioner deHaan requested an explanation of the wharf rehabilitation plan and the City's share. The Base Reuse and Community Development Manager responded the City is contributing $40.5 million overall for the project; stated Catellus is responsible for all wharf renovation costs which are included in the $76.3 million figure; the wharf component is approximately $25 million. Councilmember/Authority Member/Commissioner deHaan inquired who would be responsible for maintenance once the project is built out. The Base Reuse and Community Development Manager responded the City would maintain the pubic portions of the wharf through the Municipal Services District; stated … | CityCouncil/2006-12-05.pdf |
CityCouncil/2007-01-02.pdf,16 | CityCouncil | 2007-01-02 | 16 | Councilmember Matarrese inquired whether spending the money on staff is not restricted by law or by Council vote. Mayor Johnson stated information on the question would be provided to Council; she has no problem on where the money comes from; the One-Stop Permit Center has support because the permit process is difficult for the public; the One-Stop Permit Center would be a benefit to homeowners and small property she feels that the Carnegie Building should be a public building; other potential uses should be considered; the Museum has noted an interest but does not have the money City uses should also be considered; it is a shame to have the building empty after the City spent $4 million in improvements several years ago; inquired whether the matter was urgent. The City Manager responded the timeframe would be to complete the analysis; Council could appropriate less money to get through the study. Councilmember deHaan stated opportunities were discussed regarding the relocation of City Hall West and efforts to centralize operations a couple of years ago; it is well know that One-Stop Permit Centers work in municipalities; location is concerning; it would be worthwhile to put some money to look at the feasibility of using the Carnegie Building for some other purpose, if not the One- Stop Permit Center; two tasks can be accomplished by seeing what the facility can handle and seeing if the One-Stop Permit Center should be at the Carnegie Building; the ultimate goal should be to centralize operations and look at the opportunity to downsize City Hall West. Mayor Johnson opened the public portion of the hearing. Proponents (In favor of feasibility study) : Christopher Buckley, Alameda Architectural Preservation Society (AAPS ) ; Jon Spangler, Alameda; Ross Dileo; Alameda. Opponents (Not in favor of feasibility study) : None. There being no further speakers, Mayor Johnson closed the public portion of the hearing. Mayor Johnson stated the public has been excluded from the building for eight years; many people have not be… | CityCouncil/2007-01-02.pdf |
CityCouncil/2007-01-16.pdf,16 | CityCouncil | 2007-01-16 | 16 | Councilmember Matarrese stated the first question is whether there should be big box at all; a retail impact fee would help answer the question; he does not approve of using General Fund Reserves for a study. Councilmember deHaan stated alternate funding sources should be reviewed; the June 2006 study replicates retail for the Towne Center ; leakage needs to be understood and impacts analyzed; it is unknown how the proposed Borders would impact Books, Inc. Councilmember Matarrese moved approval to direct staff to identify alternate funds and bargain the price down at the same time. Councilmember Gilmore agreed that General Fund Reserves should not be used for the study stated the study should not duplicate previous studies; all studies should be pulled together for a complete picture. Mayor Johnson stated the City has a City-wide Retail Strategic Plan. Councilmember Gilmore stated the Economic Development Commission was requested to update said plan. Mayor Johnson questioned whether any additional information would come out of the study. Councilmember Gilmore questioned whether the study would provide any new information; stated that she only wants to do a new study if it is needed. Vice Mayor Tam stated she had an opportunity to review the 2004 Citywide Retail policy; the County's examination of the Community Impact analysis adds value with respect to impacts on workers, health benefits, City services, and nearby merchants; it is hard for a financially struggling City to justify spending reserve funds for the study; stated she supports Councilmember Matarrese' motion. Councilmember Matarrese amended the motion to direct staff to convene the Task Force and use existing studies to formulate conclusions and recommendations that may include an additional study if needed. Councilmember deHaan stated the City's retail leakage requirements need to be in proportion to big boxes; the public should be involved in discussions. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 16 January 16, 2007 | CityCouncil/2007-01-16.pdf |
CityCouncil/2007-02-20.pdf,16 | CityCouncil | 2007-02-20 | 16 | time; stated the Contractor is hoping for completion at the end of this year; the first couple of months of 2008 is more realistic. ADJOURNMEN'T There being no further business, Chair Johnson adjourned the Special Meeting at 8:30 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 4 February 20, 2007 | CityCouncil/2007-02-20.pdf |
CityCouncil/2007-03-20.pdf,16 | CityCouncil | 2007-03-20 | 16 | MINUTES OF THE COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY- - -MARCH 20, 2007- - 7:27 P.M. Chair Johnson convened the Special Meeting at 7:49 p.m. ROLL CALL - Present : Commissioners deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese, Tam, and Chair Johnson - 5. Absent : None. MINUTES (07-006) Minutes of the Community Improvement Commission (CIC) and Special Joint City Council, Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority (ARRA) and CIC Meetings held on February 20, 2007. Approved. Commissioner deHaan moved approval of the minutes. Commissioner Tam seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY (07-007) Report on Alameda Theater, Cineplex, and Parking Structure Project Construction update. The Redevelopment Manager gave a brief presentation. Chair Johnson inquired whether there would be an opportunity to add items back, to which the Redevelopment Manager responded in the affirmative. Commissioner Matarrese inquired whether pictures [of the north side garage design] would be provided in April, to which the Redevelopment Manager responded in the affirmative. The Redevelopment Manager continued the presentation. Chair Johnson inquired whether the Cineplex construction schedule would be provided in the next couple of months. The Redevelopment Manager responded in the affirmative; stated twelve months is a realistic schedule; Council would be informed of any changes. Commissioner deHaan inquired whether options and timelines have been researched for the northern side of the parking garage. Special Meeting Community Improvement Commission 1 March 20, 2007 | CityCouncil/2007-03-20.pdf |
CityCouncil/2007-04-17.pdf,16 | CityCouncil | 2007-04-17 | 16 | Councilmember Gilmore stated the houses that front Peach Street have a different orientation to the sun; kitchens would have blocked sunlight if a two-story home was build next to the houses that are perpendicular on Madison Street, San Jose Avenue, and Adams Street; Peach Street homes do not have the same concern. Vice Mayor Tam stated she was addressing the area beyond Peach Street questioned why Fillmore Avenue and Calhoun Avenue are not included. Mayor Johnson stated neighbors initiated the matteri other neighborhoods can do the same thing the responsibility needs to be placed on individual neighborhoods. The Planning and Building Director stated the twenty-foot height limit would be part of the analysis; neighboring areas could be included. Mayor Johnson stated only neighborhoods that want to be included should be included. Councilmember deHaan inquired whether the neighborhood is a track area that was developed with a certain style, to which the Planning and Building Director responded in the affirmative. Councilmember deHaan stated the Historical Advisory Board might want to review the matter. Councilmember Gilmore stated the issue is not about preventing people from adding a second story to a single-story house; second stories can be added but there are some limitations. On the call for the question, the motion carried by unanimous vice vote - 5. (07-184) - Resolution No. 14084, "Expressing Support for Full Funding for Transit Operations in the State's Fiscal Year 2007- 2008 Budget. " Adopted. The Public Works Director gave a brief presentation. Vice Mayor Tam moved adoption of the resolution. Councilmember Gilmore seconded the motion. Under discussion, Councilmember Matarrese stated more and more money will be spent on transit systems he did not vote for the infrastructure bond to be used for operation. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 16 April 17, 2007 | CityCouncil/2007-04-17.pdf |
CityCouncil/2007-05-15.pdf,16 | CityCouncil | 2007-05-15 | 16 | Metropolitan Transportation Commission grant is a big joke if it does not consider electric carts; new developments need to address paths for electric carts; the idea is not revolutionary and works further stated special paths can be developed for electric carts storage can be established at transit hubs, such as the ferry and bus terminals. Mayor Johnson noted Palm Desert legalized driving golf carts on the streets. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS (07-241) - Mayor Johnson requested that electric car charging systems in new homes be considered as part of the green building ordinance. (07-242) Mayor Johnson stated the Harbor Island Task Force recommended a condominium conversion ordinance; requested an update on the status. Councilmember deHaan stated the issue was raised as a home ownership effort; the City was to come up with a model. Mayor Johnson stated Council gave direction to move forward on the matter. Councilmember Gilmore stated Council was concerned about the economic feasibility for an owner to convert. (07-243 - ) Councilmember deHaan requested that the Tube lighting system be placed on the Public Works project list stated he appreciates the cleanup of the entrance on the Oakland side. Councilmember Gilmore stated the lighting has been removed on one side. The City Manager stated the lighting removal is part of the improvement; the Public Works Director would receive an update from CalTrans. (07-244) Councilmember deHaan stated control boxes are covered with graffiti throughout Alameda: he hopes that the Police Department makes an effort to find the responsible individual; the Central Avenue telephone company switching station and the Atlantic Avenue building near the old railroad housing are disasters; he would be happy to provide pictures. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 16 May 15, 2007 | CityCouncil/2007-05-15.pdf |
CityCouncil/2007-06-05.pdf,16 | CityCouncil | 2007-06-05 | 16 | described and includes accumulative impacts for any future project; an action on the mitigated negative declaration does not pre- suppose a same or different action on the EIR. Councilmember deHaan stated that an additional work request was made in August for Target; the City oversees the contracts for the Target and Safeway gas station studies Target was scheduled to come back to Council this month; inquired whether there has been a change. The Planning Services Manager responded the administrative draft has not been received; stated a huge stack of comments were received regarding the EIR; staff does not expect to get the preliminary draft responses back for two or three weeks; plans are to go to the Planning Board in July or early August queuing was a concern; stated fewer trips would be generated by reducing the number of pumps from eighteen to twelve; staff anticipated that the community might want to downsize the number of pumpsi an analysis was performed to see whether downsizing would result in longer lines; OmniMeans Traffic Engineers provided the research and field testing which determined that downsizing the project would not result in longer ques. Councilmember deHaan stated the project is referred to as a discount refueling station; inquired whether there is a difference between refueling stations and gas stations. Mr. Ferko responded the names change, but roughly the stations are the same. Councilmember deHaan inquired whether the project would be considered a high volume, discount refueling station, to which Mr. Ferko responded in the negative. Councilmember deHaan inquired what is the anticipated pumping volume. Mr. Ferko responded that the fuel pump estimates is something that the client calculates based upon the market analysis. Councilmember deHaan stated the previous gas station was a neighborhood gas station; cars were repaired at the station; fuel costs were not the cheapest in town; the station was full-service. Mr. Ferko stated the proposed gas station would not offer full service; the sta… | CityCouncil/2007-06-05.pdf |
CityCouncil/2007-06-19.pdf,16 | CityCouncil | 2007-06-19 | 16 | like the issue pursued in the next budget cycle. Mayor/Chair Johnson inquired how many nights per week the Main Library is open. The Library Director responded two nights; stated each branch is open two nights a week; Thursday and Friday are the only nights a library is not open. Councilmember/Boaro Member/Commissioner deHaan inquired when the Main Library closes. The Library Director responded 9:00 p.m. on Monday and Wednesday stated more full-time staff would be needed for additional hours; statistics are being reviewed to determine the busiest times; staff is reviewing the possibility of opening a half hour later so that the Main Library could be open later in the evening. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Gilmore stated branch libraries perform different functions than the Main Library people like to use the Main Library because of the computersi suggested increasing the Main Library's evening hours and reducing the branch library hours. The Library Director stated staff is reviewing statistics for all three locations. Mayor/Chair Johnson stated branch libraries are used differently; it is important to have the Main Library open as many evenings as possible. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan inquired whether Alameda Power and Telecom (AP&T) has already reduced staff by eight. The AP&T General Manager responded one layoff occurred this year; stated the remainder of the positions would be eliminated at the end of the current fiscal year. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan inquired whether further reductions are anticipated. The AP&T General Manager responded not currently; stated stabilization is the main focus. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan inquired how many Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Alameda 5 Reuse and Redevelopment Authority, and Community Improvement Commission June 19, 2007 | CityCouncil/2007-06-19.pdf |
CityCouncil/2007-07-03.pdf,16 | CityCouncil | 2007-07-03 | 16 | minimum wage and health benefits offered by retail companies that come into Alameda; the matter needs to be reviewed. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the Regular Meeting at 10:22 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger City Clerk The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act. Regular Meeting 16 Alameda City Council July 3, 2007 | CityCouncil/2007-07-03.pdf |
CityCouncil/2007-07-17.pdf,16 | CityCouncil | 2007-07-17 | 16 | not be honored; the Planning Board members tried to take away the powers of the Council to set policy the Planning Board's job is to apply policy, not make policy; the Appellants seek guidance from Council on how to proceed to create a forum that is educational and meaningful to all of Alameda. Mayor Johnson requested that Council be provided an update on the matter. Councilmember Matarrese stated that staff should review the motion passed by Council; the motion was to uphold the Planning Board decision to have an ad hoc committee provide the Planning Board with a meeting format with conditions that included the Housing Element and transportation; he does not recall a limitation to one forum; he recalls a consensus that Woody Miner would be an appropriate person to give a history of Measure A; requested verification of Council direction. Mayor Johnson stated that the Appellants felt different points of view would not be represented; a meaningful forum cannot exclude viewpoints. Councilmember deHaan stated the Housing Element is an important segment subsequently, transportation issues were discussed; Council needs to understand what direction was given. Councilmember Gilmore concurred with Councilmember Matarrese regarding verifying Council direction. Councilmember deHaan stated Council wanted to have a well- balanced meeting with more history and background; hopefully, the issue is not a stalemate at this time. Vice Mayor Tam stated that she is looking forward to the reports from the facilitator and the Planning and Building Director; she reviewed the video tapes of the Ad Hoc Committee meetings she is optimistic that there is more common ground than differences. ( (07-351) Robert Todd, Alameda, stated that he attended the Ad Hoc Committee meetings and discussed his opinion of said meetings. (07-352) Bill Smith, Alameda, discussed property and transit. (07-353) Former Councilmember Barbara Kerr, Alameda, submitted Regular Meeting 16 Alameda City Council July 17, 2007 | CityCouncil/2007-07-17.pdf |
CityCouncil/2007-08-07.pdf,16 | CityCouncil | 2007-08-07 | 16 | ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the Regular Meeting at 9:53 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger City Clerk The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act. Regular Meeting 16 Alameda City Council August 7, 2007 | CityCouncil/2007-08-07.pdf |
CityCouncil/2007-08-21.pdf,16 | CityCouncil | 2007-08-21 | 16 | Vice Mayor Tam stated that she requested staff to come back with guidelines and parameters for forming a Charter Review Committee. The City Attorney stated a memo is being drafted and could be provided as a staff report for the next agenda. (07-411) Councilmember Matarrese requested clarification on the Strategic Planning and Prioritization Project; stated he is unclear on the consultant's scope of work and cost; requested a report from the City Manager; Council should review and discuss the report before the first workshop, which is tentatively scheduled for September 11; he would like the matter placed on the September 4 Council meeting agenda. The City Manager stated the matter would be placed on the Council agenda prior to the workshop. (07-412 ) louncilmember Matarrese stated that he attended a State Senate Committee hearing on water transportation; the Ferry Services Manager also attended; handouts were provided the Ferry Services Manager will be providing a report to Council on deliberations of the meeting the ferries would not be damaged by a big earthquake; he would like to revisit the discussion held a year ago regarding funds that are accessible to the Water Transportation Authority, but not the City. The City Manager stated staff is in the process of providing a report on the matter. ADJOURNMENT (07 - 413 ) There being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the Regular Meeting at 11:43 p.m. in a moment of silence for Vice Mayor Tam's father, Thay Tam. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger City Clerk The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act. Regular Meeting 16 Alameda City Council August 21, 2007 | CityCouncil/2007-08-21.pdf |
CityCouncil/2007-09-11.pdf,16 | CityCouncil | 2007-09-11 | 16 | City of Alameda Priority Setting Workshop September 11, 2007 CITY OF the 1 Environmental Scan An environmental scan provides data about factors that may affect the City of Alameda in the future. Although not a complete picture of the City of Alameda, these factors help provide a context for priority setting. 2 1 | CityCouncil/2007-09-11.pdf |
CityCouncil/2007-10-16.pdf,16 | CityCouncil | 2007-10-16 | 16 | Acquisition Corporation ( Successor by Merger to Catellus Development Corporation) for the Sale and Development of Certain Real Property at the FISC; (07-495C CC) Introduction of Ordinance Approving a First Amendment to Development Agreement DA-06-003 By and Between the City of Alameda and Palmtree Acquisition Corporation (Successor by Merger to Catellus Development Corporation. Continued to November 6, 2007. ADJOURNMEN'T There being no further business, Mayor/Chair Johnson adjourned the Special Joint Meeting at 7:47 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 3 Community Improvement Commission October 16, 2007 | CityCouncil/2007-10-16.pdf |
CityCouncil/2007-11-06.pdf,16 | CityCouncil | 2007-11-06 | 16 | focus. Councilmember Matarrese stated the matter should be addressed by the Planning Board; the Council should receive copies of the design, but the Planning Board should finish its job; the matter can be called for review if Councilmembers object to the outcome. Mayor Johnson concurred; stated the Council should receive copies, but should not discuss something that is still at the Planning Board level. Councilmember Gilmore inquired whether design review has been done. The Planning Services Manager responded in the affirmative; stated design review was approved with the condition that the two buildings mentioned be further refined; height was a specific issue. Councilmember deHaan stated that he would address the matter under Council Communications. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (07-530) Michael John Torrey, Alameda, provided a newspaper article; discussed emergency alerts. (07-531) Bill Smith, Alameda, discussed raising the standards for earthquakes. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS (07-532) Councilmember Matarrese stated that he has received complaints regarding not having public restroom access at Alameda Power & Telecom; requested staff to review the matter. (07-533) Councilmember Matarrese requested an update on the elevator at Independence Plaza. The Assistant City Manager stated an Off Agenda Report was distributed today. (07-534) Councilmember deHaan stated the public should be permitted to use the restroom facility on the second floor at AP&T. (07-535) Councilmember deHaan stated that he comments on size and mass of structures at Alameda Landing. Mayor Johnson stated that she wanted to make sure that Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 16 November 6, 2007 | CityCouncil/2007-11-06.pdf |
CityCouncil/2007-11-20.pdf,16 | CityCouncil | 2007-11-20 | 16 | what is being incurred currently; maintaining the building will be a budget line item of a couple hundred thousand dollars per year; the question is how to relieve other burdens at Alameda Point and move forward. Councilmember Matarrese stated that he has a couple of concerns; philosophically. he does not believe Andrew Carnegie envisioned giving the City an office building; the Carnegie should not be used as an office building; form a practical point, there are too many unanswered questions regarding the building use and consolidating City services from City Hall West without reviewing all options; he inquired about an Oak Street property at one point ; there were rumors about the property being for sale; he never received an answer; looking at said property should be reviewed; the Recreation building is not fully utilized; said issues should be reviewed first; his other questions are regarding financing; the project costs are almost double what was initially anticipated; questioned whether the building would always have to be used for Planning and Building if permit revenues are used to finance the debt; questioned whether tax increment can be used to pay debt service; further stated the funding source, as well as the Master Plan, should be determined first; there is an option to complete the work regardless of use, particularly if tax increment can be used; the elevator has to be completed regardless of use; phasing would allow expensive items to be completed; the lighting information is interesting; there should be further study; the building is to important to rush to a decision at this point. Vice Mayor Tam stated that she appreciates the presentation addressing public access and the use types that have been considered; staff and the architects exercised a fair and balanced due diligence process working with the museum; deterioration will continue the longer the building remains unoccupied and not renovated the building is a vital historical asset that needs to be preserved; the timing and available funding… | CityCouncil/2007-11-20.pdf |
CityCouncil/2007-12-04.pdf,16 | CityCouncil | 2007-12-04 | 16 | existing path for fire safety as well as ADA access. ADA access would be provided using an elevator system in the new theater; the second floor was always assumed to be part of the second phase; the balance of the second story improvements are the responsibility of the developer. Robb Ratto, Park Street Business Association (PSBA) stated that he supports the staff recommendation; he is concerned with safety issues; PSBA urges Council to accept the staff recommendation. Chair Johnson stated the enclosure should be done now since money is available. Commissioner deHaan inquired whether a canopy would be used or a full enclosure, to which the Development Services Director responded a full enclosure. Commissioner Gilmore stated the enclosure should be done now because the contractors are on site and there would be minimal disruptions. Commissioner Matarrese stated that staff and the developer did an excellent job; he supports the staff recommendation. Commissioner Matarrese moved approval of the staff recommendation. Commissioner Gilmore seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. (07-052 CIC) Recommendation to approve a $300,000 loan to Alameda Entertainment Associates, L. P. for rehabilitation and restoration of the mezzanine balcony in the Historic Alameda Theater and for augmentation of the Cineplex construction contingency budget. The Development Services Manager gave a brief presentation. Commissioner Tam stated that the use of $691,000 Merged Area Bond is fairly restricted. The Development Services Manager stated that the 2003 Merged Area Bond anticipated financing a number of projects; $4 million was unspecified; using the Bond for the Library was not anticipate; $2 million was pledged to the Library to finish construction; State funding for the library is closed out; the unused money was intended to come back to the CIC for other projects. Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Alameda Reuse 2 and Redevelopment Authority and Community Improvement Commission December 4, 2007 | CityCouncil/2007-12-04.pdf |
CityCouncil/2008-01-02.pdf,16 | CityCouncil | 2008-01-02 | 16 | COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS (08-014) - Consideration of Mayor's nominations for appointment to the Youth Commission. Mayor Johnson nominated Lamant Carter, Vincent Margado and Bhaani Singh. (08-015 ) Councilmember deHaan thanked Public Works for removing tires from the San Leandro Bay ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the Regular Meeting at 11:11 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger City Clerk The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act. Regular Meeting 16 Alameda City Council January 2, 2008 | CityCouncil/2008-01-02.pdf |
CityCouncil/2008-01-15.pdf,16 | CityCouncil | 2008-01-15 | 16 | Mr. Bruzzone responded he would not recommend said scenario; stated people would be waiting on the bus during a layover; the idea is not practical. Councilmember Matarrese stated that the bus runs in a circle; one of the defined ends is the Fruitvale Bart Station. Mr. Bruzzone stated that no one is on the bus; people hate being delayed in route; drivers would have an issue. Councilmember Matarrese stated that he is willing to give up the two minutes to get down to Shoreline Drive and look into adding another bus to fill the gap. Mayor Johnson inquired whether notice has been provided to Shoreline Drive residents, to which the Program Specialist II responded barricades were posted. Councilmember Gilmore stated the proposed route changes take four minutes off the current run time and brings the route back on schedule; two minutes would be added by going down Shoreline Drive and making the other changes. Mr. Bruzzone stated that the matter could come back if proposed changes do not work. The Program Specialist II stated the Transportation Commission recommended improving the Shoreline Drive bus stops before moving to Shoreline Drive; said bus stops are on sand. Councilmember Gilmore inquired whether the $162,000 needed for bus stop improvements along Shoreline Drive and is not in the budget, to which the Program Specialist II responded in the affirmative. Councilmember Gilmore inquired how much money was budgeted for Otis Drive, to which the Program Specialist II responded $50,000. Councilmember Matarrese inquired whether money for the bus stop concrete pads could be taken from different congestion management funds. Mayor Johnson responded staff could explore said idea. Councilmember Gilmore stated perhaps the Transportation Commission did not push for the Shoreline Drive stop because the City did not have $162,00 for improvements; AC Transit is willing to explore Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 16 January 15, 2008 | CityCouncil/2008-01-15.pdf |
CityCouncil/2008-02-05.pdf,16 | CityCouncil | 2008-02-05 | 16 | Counci lmember/Commissioner Matarrese inquired why reuse is not being considered. The Housing Authority Executive Director responded that three and four bedroom units are not in demand. Councilmember/Commissioner Matarrese inquired whether the list shows larger units would not be in demand in the future. The Housing Authority Executive Director responded in the affirmative stated the waiting list is comprised of smaller families. louncilmember/Commissioner deHaan inquired whether the Housing Authority Executive Director had an opportunity to tour the units. The Housing Authority Executive Director responded in the affirmative; stated that the Project Manager rehabilitated similar units at Treasure Island; the recommendation is to tear down the existing units. Mayor/Chair inquired what happened to the Treasure Island units, to which the Housing Authority Executive Director responded the units are used by the homeless. Mayor/Chair Johnson inquired how many of the units are three and four bedroom. The Housing Authority Executive Director responded most units are four-plexes and six-plexes. Councilmember/Commissioner Matarrese stated that he is in favor of moving ahead with the Notice of Interest; tearing down useable units seems wasteful even if the units are too large showing interest in a public conveyance for a portion of the park seems incomplete; the Coast Guard will not be there forever; inquired whether the City can take conveyance of the play area and allow the Coast Guard to use it along with adjacent buildings until the Coast Guard leaves. The City Manager stated the Coast Guard has identified the section as a Fed-to-Fed transfer it is not available. Councilmember/Commissioner deHaan stated that the past intent was to gain housing control of the entire site through an Economic Development Conveyance (EDC) in order to avoid going through a screening process. Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council and Housing 4 Authority Board of Commissioners February 5, 2008 | CityCouncil/2008-02-05.pdf |
CityCouncil/2008-02-19.pdf,16 | CityCouncil | 2008-02-19 | 16 | Commissioner Tam seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. AGENDA ITEMS (08-072 CC/08-12 CIC) Recommendation to accept the Quarterly Financial Report for the period ending December 31, 2007. The Finance Director gave a Power Point presentation. Mayor/Chair Johnson inquired whether retiree medical costs are 2% [of the budget) i stated the City is not fully funding the benefit now. The Finance Director responded the 2% represents the current payment for retirees. Mayor/Chair Johnson stated the amount could be much larger once true obligations are addressed. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan inquired whether the overall operational budget is $236 million, to which the Finance Director responded in the affirmative. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Gilmore stated the $4 million [in lost revenue] is for the current fiscal year ending in June; the economic forecast through 2009 continues on the same path; the $4 million gap needs to be closed by the end of June; there will be some type of gap in the next two-year budget cycle. The Finance Director stated the first year is predicted to have some type of gap. Vice Mayor/Boar Member/Commissioner Tam commended staff for being ahead of the curve and reviewing ways to reduce expenditures by $3 million in anticipation of the $4 million deficit; $1.4 million was spent on the Beltline litigation; the money was moved from the General Fund to the Risk Management fund; inquired whether the Risk Management fund comes out of the reserves. The Finance Director responded Risk Management is funded by allocations from various funds, including the General Fund, which is the biggest contributor. Vice Mayor/Board Member/Commissioner Tam stated the City cannot Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Alameda Reuse 4 and Redevelopment Authority, and Community Improvement Commission February 19, 2008 | CityCouncil/2008-02-19.pdf |
CityCouncil/2008-03-04.pdf,16 | CityCouncil | 2008-03-04 | 16 | The Assistant City Manager stated staff has been talking with School District staff to see if there are creative ways to have BWIP housing funds more immediately available for School District use. Vice Mayor Tam stated that the money has to be used for housing or capital improvement; restrictions preclude the City from automatically shifting the funds directly to the School District for operation costs. The Assistant City Manager stated affordable housing funds need to be used for affordable housing staff is exploring ways to get the funds in use for said purpose. Councilmember Matarrese inquired whether the City can post the accounting of funds and use restrictions on the website and provide some impetus to get the project started. The Assistant City Manager responded staff has prepared a number of question and answer sheets over the last two years; stated information can be centralized on the website. Mayor Johnson stated that consolidating redevelopment information is a good idea; examples of redevelopment projects should be provided also. Vice Mayor Tam stated the School District is meeting tonight ; the School District is looking at severe cuts; an emergency parcel tax will be considered; she would like to see the community and Council support the School District's actions. (08-108) Vice Mayor Tam stated that she and the Deputy City Manager attended the League of California Cities East Bay Division meeting; Carl Guardino, Executive Director for the Silicon Valley Leadership Group, was the keynote speaker; Mr. Guardino brought up some intriguing ideas regarding developing public and private partnerships for things such as affordable housing and retention of teachers; Silicon Valley companies pay a stipend to have teachers come and work at their company during the summer breaks; she would be happy to talk with any community member interested in a briefing. (08-109) - Mayor Johnson requested a briefing on the East Bay Interoperability Program; stated all jurisdictions have not paid assessments for last year; th… | CityCouncil/2008-03-04.pdf |
CityCouncil/2008-03-18.pdf,16 | CityCouncil | 2008-03-18 | 16 | The Applicant responded the vacancy rate is approximately 3% stated small office use is in demand. Mayor Johnson stated that having office space at the shopping center would relieve the pressure of expanding business and office space into residential areas; the proposal makes sense. Councilmember deHaan stated that he concurs with Mayor Johnson; inquired whether there has been any discussion regarding additional landscaping. The Applicant responded landscaping could be put around the future pad. Councilmember deHaan stated substantial trees are important in large parking areas. The Applicant stated that he understands the importance of trees. Councilmember deHaan moved adoption of the resolution. Councilmember Gilmore inquired whether Council is approving [both 25% office use and additional square footage]. Councilmember deHaan responded both; stated one [25% office use] corrects the existing situation. Bill Smith, Alameda, discussed traffic. Councilmember deHaan amended the motion to include the caveat of having the Planning Board review the landscaping. Vice Mayor Tam stated approximately 17% of the space is leased for office space; the Applicant is requesting 25% office space in addition to increasing the square footage by 6,300 square feet ; increasing the square footage by 6,300 square feet would make the total 130,000 square feet 25% of 130,000 square feet is 32,500 square feet. The Planning Services Manager stated the total build out would be 130,729 square feet; no more than 25%, or 31,070 square feet, of the shopping center would be devoted to office space. Vice Mayor Tam inquired whether the 25% allowable office space is before 6,300 square feet is added or if 25% of the entire space would be allowed for office use. The Planning Services Manager responded 25% of the current built Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 16 March 18, 2008 | CityCouncil/2008-03-18.pdf |
CityCouncil/2008-04-15.pdf,16 | CityCouncil | 2008-04-15 | 16 | MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING TUESDAY- - -APRIL 15, 2008- - -6:30 P.M. Mayor Johnson convened the Special Meeting at 6:40 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: (08-145) Conference with Labor Negotiators; Agency Negotiators : Craig Jory and Human Resources Director; Employee Organizations All Public Safety Bargaining Units. (08-146) Conference with Legal Counsel - Anticipated Litigation; Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 54956.9 Number of cases: One. Following the Closed Session, the Special Meeting was reconvened and Mayor Johnson announced that regarding Labor, Council received a briefing on the status of negotiations; regarding Legal, the item was not heard. Adjournment There being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the Special Meeting at 7:40 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger City Clerk The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act. Special Meeting Alameda City Council April 15, 2008 | CityCouncil/2008-04-15.pdf |
CityCouncil/2008-05-06.pdf,16 | CityCouncil | 2008-05-06 | 16 | The Supervising Planner gave a brief presentation. Councilmember Gilmore inquired how much the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design [LEED] criteria adds to the construction cost, to which the Supervising Planner responded the ordinance would mandate the minimum level. Councilmember Matarrese inquired how the $3 million figure was arrived. The Supervising Planner responded the model ordinance was used from Stopwaste. Mayor Johnson inquired whether the proposed ordinance would apply to the buildings at the former Base, to which the Supervising Planner responded in the affirmative. Councilmember Matarrese inquired whether exceptions would be made for housing developments that have a single builder with individual homes that do not exceed the $3 million. The Supervising Planner responded the Shensei Gardens Apartments and Bayport would fall under the proposed ordinance. Councilmember Matarrese inquired whether the six unit affordable housing project on Buena Vista Avenue would be looked at as a whole. The Supervising Planner responded in the negative; stated each unit has a separate permit. In response to ouncilmember deHaan's inquiry about the 75% waste diversion goal, the Environmental Services Manager stated the 75% reduction goal is already in place for the City as a whole. Vice Mayor Tam stated that the City is not that far from the proposed 75% goal. The Environmental Services Manager stated the City's diversion rate is 68%. Mayor Johnson stated some cities have not adopted food waste recycling; Alameda is leading the pack in recycling. Vice Mayor Tam moved adoption of the resolution and introduction of the ordinance. Regular Meeting 16 Alameda City Council May 6, 2008 | CityCouncil/2008-05-06.pdf |
CityCouncil/2008-05-20.pdf,16 | CityCouncil | 2008-05-20 | 16 | conducted of the last five years; a one time adjustment of $300,000 is being made this year; the audit was done because the formulas for each entity differ; numbers are different if they are pre-1994, post-1994 - and from separate negotiated agreements ; 90% of entities were not doing the calculations correctly the right formula will be used in the future; the same person will work with AUSD to correct its reporting. Commissioner deHaan requested a final report on the matter. Chair Johnson stated the extreme diversity of the Development Services Department's projects is amazing; the Department does not have a very large staff. Commissioner Gilmore stated the budget is complex; thanked the Development Services and Finance Departments; stated the Commission is in charge of the budget if the Commissioners do not know where the money is going and where revenues are coming from they would be in trouble. The Development Services Director thanked Finance for being accommodating in the creation of the cash flow spreadsheet. Commissioner Matarrese stated the budget presentation was very clear, which is particularity important when the budget news is not good. ADJOURNMENT (08-227CC/08-31CIC) At the request of Councilmember/Commissione: deHaan, Mayor/Chair Johnson adjourned the Special Joint Meeting at 10:55 p.m. in a moment of silence in honor of the recent natural disaster victims. 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, Alameda Reuse 2 and Redevelopment Authority, and Community Improvement Commission May 20, 2008 | CityCouncil/2008-05-20.pdf |
CityCouncil/2008-06-03.pdf,16 | CityCouncil | 2008-06-03 | 16 | advertising and hosts different activities; a part-time person keeps the membership informed, maintains a database, and handles activities. Chair Johnson inquired whether GABA has membership dues. The Development Services Director responded that GABA does not have a Business Improvement Area (BIA) ; stated that she does not know about dues; members sponsor different projects. Chair Johnson stated it is important to know how much GABA contributes to expenses. Commissioner Matarrese stated the City's investment in the Associations yields a return to the City in sales and business tax; the staff report notes that there is no impact on the General Fund and the Contract amounts are budgeted from tax increment funds; inquired whether funds come from the CIC budget, to which the Development Services Director responded in the affirmative. Commissioner Matarrese inquired what is the impact on the CIC budget further inquired whether GABA businesses qualify since they are not in the redevelopment area. The Development Services Director responded GABA qualifies; stated funds are part of the 10% of the CIC budget that pays for general activities, staff, and basic overhead costs; there are very few miscellaneous activities that are being funded this year. Commissioner Matarrese inquired whether the matter should be discussed tonight since the budget has not been adopted. The Development Services Director responded staff is requesting authorization to do the Contracts; stated the Contracts would not be executed until the budget is adopted. Commissioner Tam concurred with Commissioner Matarrese; stated the budget sessions have been very painful; a 3% increase is not very much, but some employee contracts are not going to be increased next year; the proposed PSBA budget amount is $111, 446; PSBA is proposing to levy assessments totaling $88,000; inquired whether PSBA's entire budget would be the combination of $111, , 446 and $88,000. The Development Services Director responded in the negative; stated the budget includes fundrais… | CityCouncil/2008-06-03.pdf |
CityCouncil/2008-06-17.pdf,16 | CityCouncil | 2008-06-17 | 16 | The Fire Chief responded the fee is close to the cost. Mayor Johnson inquired whether the City charges above what insurance pays. The Fire Chief responded in the affirmative; stated generally, insurance pays approximately 80%; the patient is billed the remaining 20%. Mayor Johnson inquired what is the recovery rate for private ambulances, to which the Fire Chief responded that he did not know. Councilmember Matarrese inquired how much of the $300,000 would be accountable to inspection fees. The Fire Chief responded the EMS portion is approximately $280,000; stated inspection fees are estimated at approximately $65,000. The City Manager stated $20,000 would be related to the new fees. Councilmember Matarrese inquired whether there would be a $15,000 shortage, to which the Fire Chief responded in the affirmative. Councilmember Matarrese stated that he cannot see raising fees 80%. The Fire Chief stated false alarm fees were not included and are estimated at $20,000; $300,000 could be achieved in new revenue if false alarm fees were included. Mayor Johnson stated false alarm fees should be included; inquired what is sent out for a fire alarm, to which the Fire Chief responded three engines, one truck, and a Chief Officer. Mayor Johnson inquired whether one free false alarm is allowed per quarter, to which the Fire Chief responded in the affirmative. Mayor Johnson stated one free false alarm should be allowed every six months, not every quarter. The City Manager stated that the Fire Department responded to 454 false alarms in 2007. Mayor Johnson stated second false alarms fees should be raised to $125; $200 should be charged for the third false alarm, and $250 for the fourth false alarm. Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Alameda Public Financing Authority, Alameda Reuse and 6 Redevelopment Authority, and Community Improvement Commission June 17, 2008 | CityCouncil/2008-06-17.pdf |
CityCouncil/2008-07-01.pdf,16 | CityCouncil | 2008-07-01 | 16 | Alameda; Joe VanWinkle, Alameda; Barbara Wood, Alameda; Jim Strehlow, Alameda. There being no further speakers, Mayor Johnson closed the public portion of the meeting. (08-296) - Vice Mayor Tam moved approval of continuing the meeting past midnight. Councilmember Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. *** Mayor Johnson inquired what Ms. Sullwold does not like about the Master Plan. Ms. Sullwold responded something would be lost by giving up the south course; stated redesigning the north course is not a reasonable choice. Mayor Johnson stated she understood that the Golf Course would be restored to more of the original design. Ms. Sullwold stated that the feel would be restored, but the Golf Course would be completely redesigned; she does not see how the expense could be justified. Mayor Johnson inquired whether Ms. Sullwold does not recommend the Master Plan because the Plan is not economically feasible. Ms. Sullwold responded in the affirmative; stated the operational review and Master Plan should be used as guidelines. Mayor Johnson stated the RFP should be left open and be flexible. Vice Mayor Tam stated the City would not be controlling its destiny by having bidders come up with ideas; community consensus is needed; inquired whether the Golf Commission's current vision is to maintain the facility as a recreational golf facility that is very specific to Alameda without turning it into a national class tournament play facility. Ms. Sullwold responded that she does not think that the Golf Course has the capacity or amenities to attract national class play. Mayor Johnson inquired what the next step would be if there was no response to the RFP . Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 16 July 1, 2008 | CityCouncil/2008-07-01.pdf |
CityCouncil/2008-07-15.pdf,16 | CityCouncil | 2008-07-15 | 16 | Mayor Johnson stated that the Eco-pass survey should be reviewed before other options are considered. The City Manager stated the green building and landscaping ordinance would be presented at the next Council meeting. Mayor Johnson inquired when the Styrofoam ban goes into effect, to which the City Manager responded the ban went into effect on July 1st Mayor Johnson stated that the City of Oakland is going through litigation regarding plastic bags; Alameda can move forward on the matter when the coast is clear. Councilmember Matarrese inquired what policy is in place regarding employee use of City vehicles. The City Manager responded a number of administrative procedures are in place; information would be provided to Council. Councilmember Matarrese stated that he wants to know what steps are taken when employees drive a City vehicle, such as determining whether the trip is necessary or carpooling is available to reduce costs and carbon footprint. Vice Mayor Tam stated a complaint was received from an employee regarding being required to use an electric vehicle: inquired whether there was a procedure requiring that the employee had to use the electric vehicle. The City Manager responded the electric vehicle was assigned to the function of the job. Mayor Johnson inquired whether electric vehicles are stationed throughout the City. The City Manager responded various departments have been assigned electric vehicles stated some are used for carpooling, others are assigned to individuals; the electric vehicles have charging issues; two electric vehicles are fast charging. Councilmember deHaan requested an evaluation of electric vehicles to see whether the vehicles' purpose is being fulfilled; stated future decisions will need to be made. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 16 July 15, 2008 | CityCouncil/2008-07-15.pdf |
CityCouncil/2008-08-05.pdf,16 | CityCouncil | 2008-08-05 | 16 | The Development Services Director responded the amount would depend on the number of units; stated an appraisal was done in the last six months lump sum lease payments, which total approximately $1 million, would be paid by Warmington; there would be a [funding] gap depending on the number of units. Councilmember/Commissioner deHaan inquired whether the houses that would be constructed would be market rate if the [affordable] houses are moved out of the development, to which the Development Services Director responded in the affirmative. Councilmember/Commissioner deHaan inquired whether the money that the developer would make [off of additional market rate houses) would be a wash with the money that would go into the Island High site. The Development Services Director responded it would depend upon the number of units; stated the more units that are put on the Island High site, the less cost per unit. Councilmember/Commissioner deHaan inquired what percentage set aside would have to be for sale and what percentage would have to be rental units, to which the Development Services Director responded specific percentages of for sale units and rental units are not required. louncilmember/Commissioner Matarrese inquired whether the decision tonight is not how many units or how much units would cost, rather the Council/Commission is simply deciding whether all 10 units would be at the project site, whether the developer could consider other sites for five units and whether nine units would be required if five units are off site. The Development Services Director responded in the affirmative; stated if the units are constructed at the Island High site, there is an outside limit of 36 units. Councilmember/Commissioner Matarrese inquired where the number [36 units] came from. The Development Services Director responded the number uses the Guyton exception to get as many units as possible. stated a Measure A compliant project would be between 16 and 18 units. louncilmember/Commissioner Matarrese stated Warmington needs to … | CityCouncil/2008-08-05.pdf |
CityCouncil/2008-08-19.pdf,16 | CityCouncil | 2008-08-19 | 16 | information on the fund balance to Council mid September. Councilmember deHaan discussed the Council Referral process; stated the City Manager is to advise Council on the cost for staff to address the issue and whether priorities would be displaced. Councilmember Matarrese inquired whether the recommendatior from the Fiscal Sustainability Committee would come to Council in October, to which the City Manager responded in the affirmative. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS ( 08-361) - Consideration of Mayor's nominations for appointment to the Youth Advisory Commission. Continued. (08-362) Councilmember deHaan requested that Council consideration of support for Proposition 11 be placed on the next agenda. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the Regular Meeting at 11:27 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 16 August 19, 2008 | CityCouncil/2008-08-19.pdf |
CityCouncil/2008-09-16.pdf,16 | CityCouncil | 2008-09-16 | 16 | Area Devoted to Non-taxable Merchandise. Introduced. The Planning Services Manager gave a brief presentation. Councilmember Matarrese inquired how the proposed ordinance would affect the existing Development Agreements. The Planning Services Manager responded one Development Agreement is with Harbor Bay Business Park and protects changes in zoning requirements; the other Development Agreement is with Alameda Landing. Councilmember Gilmore inquired whether Bridgeside Shopping Center, the Northern Waterfront, and Alameda Point would be affected by the proposed ordinance. The Planning Services Manager responded all areas would be subject to the proposed ordinance; stated MX zoning would require Master Plans to be developed; Master Plans are mini ordinances for an area. Mayor Johnson requested clarification on where the proposed ordinance would apply. The Planning Services Manager stated the proposed ordinance would apply to everywhere in the City with the exception of the area covered by the Alameda Landing Development Agreement and Harbor Bay Development Agreement. Mayor Johnson opened the public portion of the hearing. Proponents (In favor of Ordinance) : Mike Henneberry, UFCW Local 5; John Nunes, UFCW Local 5; David Kirwin, Alameda; Phil Tucker, California Healthy Communities Network; Mark Wolfe, California Healthy Communities Network; Karen Bey, Alameda; Jon Spangler, Alameda. There being no further speakers, Mayor Johnson closed the public portion of the hearing. Councilmember deHaan stated the second paragraph on Page 2 of the staff report states that "Existing projects with approved Development Agreements that specifically limit the City's ability to impose new regulations, such as Alameda Landing and Harbor Bay Business Park, may be exempt from the prohibition"; inquired why "may be" is used. The City Attorney responded the prohibition would depend on the Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 16 September 16, 2008 | CityCouncil/2008-09-16.pdf |
CityCouncil/2008-10-07.pdf,16 | CityCouncil | 2008-10-07 | 16 | Under discussion, Councilmember deHaan stated the motion would accept the EIR which would give Alameda Towne Centre an extra 49,000 square feet. Councilmember Matarrese stated the motion certifies the EIR and potential impacts of the 49,000 square feet, and is not an entitlement. Vice Mayor Tam stated the motion discloses impacts in accordance with CEQA. The Assistant City Attorney inquired whether the motion is to adopt the resolution denying the appeal of the August 11 Planning Board decision to certify the adequacy of the Alameda Towne Centre Project Environmental Impact Report, to which Vice Mayor Tam responded in the affirmative. Councilmember deHaan clarified that Harsch could go back to the Planning Board and ask for the additional 49,000 square feet if the EIR is accepted tonight and could ask to build a parking structure. Mayor Johnson stated that the EIR discloses impacts and deals with mitigation. On the call for the question, the motion carried by the following voice vote: Ayes : Councilmembers Gilmore, Matarrese, Tam, and Mayor Johnson - 4. Noes: Councilmember deHaan - 1. Councilmember Matarrese requested traffic counts once Kohl's, the gas station, and OSH are occupied. Councilmember deHaan stated a baseline should be done now. Vice Mayor Tam stated that having Council and the community request data and monitoring is appropriate; an EIR looks at a baseline snap shot in time and action alternatives; two years from now a new Council may have a new baseline and may request to use the 2010 baseline; baselines will have constant movement; receiving information is good; it is important to have the integrity of the EIR preserved. Councilmember Matarrese stated the EIR is a projection; the number of cars that run over the tubes in the street is more relevant. Councilmember deHaan stated it is important to know where traffic patterns are throughout the City. Counci Matarrese stated some of the Broadway truck traffic Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 16 October 7, 2008 | CityCouncil/2008-10-07.pdf |
CityCouncil/2008-10-21.pdf,16 | CityCouncil | 2008-10-21 | 16 | The AP&T General Manager responded 11%; stated AP&T is number one in the State. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Johnson announced that the November 4, 2008 Regular City Council Meeting will be adjourned to November 6, 2008 due to the November 4, 2008 General Municipal Election. There being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the Regular Meeting at 1 :45 a.m. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger City Clerk The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act. Regular Meeting 16 Alameda City Council October 21, 2008 | CityCouncil/2008-10-21.pdf |
CityCouncil/2008-11-06.pdf,16 | CityCouncil | 2008-11-06 | 16 | Mayor Johnson suggested that the City Treasurer and City Auditor discuss the matter and provide recommendations on how to achieve the goal. Councilmember Matarrese stated pieces need to be put together in order for people to understand the connection between response time and current and future costs. Mayor Johnson requested that the Fiscal Sustainability Committee review the Public Safety Memorandums of Understanding and provide input on the best way to proceed. The City Manager suggested that the matter be placed on an agenda. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS (08-476) Consideration of Mayor's nomination for appointment to the Historical Advisory Board (Architect Seat) Mayor Johnson nominated Dennis M. Owens. (08-477) ouncilmember Gilmore stated that she and Vice Mayor Tam attended the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) Fall General Assembly; the big topic was regional water land use planning the State of California has contracts for eight and a half times the water supply on hand; newer housing developments use more water because of landscaping. (08-478) Vice Mayor Tam stated incoming Senate President pro Tempore-elec Darrell Steinberg was present [at the Fall General Assembly] and provided an accurate depiction of how the legislature came up with drafting SB 375, which is legislation that tries to integrate land use that uses a stick and carrot approach, reduces greenhouse gas emissions, and looks at resource conservation transit oriented development projects would be exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) in the future; no Environmental Impact Report (EIR) would be required if all parameters are met. (08-479) Councilmember Gilmore stated that she attended the Water Emergency Transit Authority (WETA) meeting last week; WETA expects the first ferry boat to sail in December, but the engineer thinks it could be as early as some time this month; the first new ferry terminal will be in South San Francisco and will be operational in 2010; SB 1093 and SB 976 require a transition plan outlining how … | CityCouncil/2008-11-06.pdf |
CityCouncil/2008-11-18.pdf,16 | CityCouncil | 2008-11-18 | 16 | public portion of the meeting. louncilmember/Authority Member deHaan stated that he wholeheartedly supports selling the system; employees have been exceptional a lot of people think that the system should not be sold, but he disagrees; the industry is more competitive than expected; that he commends everyone for putting the matter into prospective. Councilmember/Authority Member Gilmore complimented the AP&T General Manager and employees; stated that she is in support of the sale, but the issue is bitter sweet; the proposed sale is the fiscally responsible thing to do; customer service has been personable, attentive, and timely; the service has been great for the community. Councilmember/Authority Member Matarrese thanked the AP&T General Manager and employees for all the work and great service; stated there is no other choice than to sell the system; the note exceeds the value of the system; AP&T is unable to compete in the telecom market. Mayor/Chair Johnson thanked the Public Utilities Board for the hard work and exceptional advice. Vice Mayor/Councilmember Tam stated the environment was different ten years ago when the community voted to enter the telecom business; fifteen thousand residents subscribe to the system; thanked subscribers for support stated the City Council will work with the Public Utilities Board to provide opportunities to increase competition in order to provide competitive rates for Alameda residents; thanked the City Manager/Executive Director, City Attorney/Legal Counsel, and AP&T General Manager for the intense effort to get the best deal; stated that she is in favor of the sale. Mayor/Chair Johnson stated that she appreciates the AP&T General Manager's comments regarding current and future re-organization to ensure that AP&T is operating in the most efficient way ; that she appreciates the pro-active approach. Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council and Alameda Public 3 Financing Authority Meeting November 18, 2008 | CityCouncil/2008-11-18.pdf |
CityCouncil/2008-12-02.pdf,16 | CityCouncil | 2008-12-02 | 16 | Mayor Johnson stated the block is short. Councilmember Gilmore stated having the bulb out on the theater side is important; the area gets very congested when blockbuster movies are featured. Kyle Conner, Theater Operator, stated cueing has been adjusted; the bulb out is very important and should be done; the walkway should be pedestrian friendly. Councilmember Gilmore inquired whether the Operator is okay with the passenger loading spaces. The Operator responded in the affirmative; stated people have a tendency to stop or do a slow roll by to see what is playing. Mayor Johnson opened the public portion of the meeting. Speakers: Lucy Gigli, Bike Alameda; Robb Ratto, PSBA. There being no further speakers, Mayor Johnson closed the public portion of the meeting. Councilmember Gilmore inquired how Ms. Gigli feels about the bike oasis. Ms. Gigli responded that she did not hear about the bike oasis until yesterday; stated that she is not in a position to evaluate the issue. Councilmember deHaan inquired how many people are purchasing monthly parking permits, to which Mr. Ratto responded very few. Councilmember deHaan stated people have to go to the top of the structure; permit users should not be limited to the top level during the week when the structure is not heavily used. Mayor Johnson stated protecting the marquee is important. The Supervising Civil Engineer stated the design ensures protection. Councilmember deHaan inquired whether the sidewalk area for Angela's would be the same as others. The Development Services Director responded the sidewalk area would be eight feet, which is the length of the restaurant. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 16 December 2, 2008 | CityCouncil/2008-12-02.pdf |
CityCouncil/2009-01-06.pdf,16 | CityCouncil | 2009-01-06 | 16 | meet the $700,000 in decreased revenues. Mayor Johnson stated the explanation provided is why she wants the Council to receive information on how the budget is being balanced; Council did not take action; the report did not include numbers. The Fire Chief stated two funded positions in the Fire Department are vacant. Councilmember Matarrese inquired whether money was included in the budget and is not being paid out in paychecks. The Fire Chief responded in the affirmative. stated money might be spent in overtime. Mayor Johnson inquired whether there is no money to hire staff because money is being used for overtime, to which the Fire Chief responded in the negative. Mayor Johnson inquired whether there is money to hire two more if desired, to which the Fire Chief responded in the affirmative. Councilmember Matarrese stated the salary budget has money allocated that is not being spent. The Fire Chief stated money from overtime would be used if a person's absence causes staffing to fall below 27. Councilmember Matarrese inquired whether the salary savings would be used to cover overtime. The Fire Chief responded last year $2.2 million was spent on overtime; stated $2.2 million was not budgeted; vacancies created considerable salary savings, which off set the increase in overtime; the same could happen this year. Mayor Johnson stated when money allocated for firefighters salaries is used to cover an overage in overtime, the issue needs to come to Council; the Council needs to be aware of the issue, even in an Off Agenda Report. Councilmember Gilmore requested an explanation of whether hiring adds to the OPEB liability. The Interim Finance Director stated the two vacancies could be filled; the calculations in the [staff report] tables do not figure in vacancies; vacancies would only affect the numbers if more overtime has to be hired, but the amount would be a push because Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 16 January 6, 2009 | CityCouncil/2009-01-06.pdf |
CityCouncil/2009-01-20.pdf,16 | CityCouncil | 2009-01-20 | 16 | investment funding needs to be preserved; Senator Desaulnier is a proponent of preserving transportation dollars 18,000 to 30,000 jobs are created for every billion dollars in transportation money; the Caldecott Tunnel will be on the chopping block for funding Dan Hatfield, Bay Area Newspaper Group Editorial Page Editor, stated that he has four staff dealing with eleven different regions; information submitted needs to be clear and precise; incorrect information needs to be corrected immediately; stated that Mr. Hatfield provided his email address. (09-038 - ) Councilmember Matarrese stated more boats are stored on the streets; the City has no obligation to provide free boat storage on streets. Vice Mayor deHaan stated the problem is becoming more common; urged the Police Department to stay on top of the matter. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Vice Mayor deHaan adjourned the Regular Meeting at 11:05 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 16 January 20, 2009 | CityCouncil/2009-01-20.pdf |
CityCouncil/2009-02-03.pdf,16 | CityCouncil | 2009-02-03 | 16 | Councilmember Gilmore stated the study should be done regardless of whether granting agencies are not in favor of a transit bridge because the geological and technical information would be useful in the future. Mayor Johnson inquired whether the bicycle/pedestrian bridge study would need to be redone to include transit. The Public Works Director responded some information would need to be redone, but some of the geotechnical information could be used. Councilmember Tam seconded the motion. Under discussion, Councilmember Matarrese stated that he wants to make sure that the motion includes the attempt to make the bridge lifeline and multi-modal. Councilmember Gilmore concurred with Councilmember Matarrese; stated Oakland should help pay if the bridge is determined to be feasible; Alameda would be willing to take the first step but would not be willing to continue down the path on its own. Mayor Johnson stated Oakland indicates that the proposed project is a priority; inquired whether there has been any discussion regarding contributing to the $48 million, to which the Public Works Director responded that he does not think so. The Public Works Director stated that Council direction is to move approval of adopting the resolution with the following changes 1) the preference is that transit be included on the bridge however, if the granting agencies will not award funds with a transit component, the PSR should move ahead for bicycles and pedestrians because the information received will be valuable moving forward with a transit bridge in the future; 2) ensuring a bridge is truly feasible and is lifeline; 3) find out who would operate and maintain the bridge; and 4) approaching other jurisdictions regarding contributing to the local match. Mayor Johnson stated the City needs to be clear that it does not intend to operate or maintain the bridge. Councilmember Matarrese stated the bridge should not be built if no one is willing to handle operation or maintenance i inquired whether the City would get any money back if som… | CityCouncil/2009-02-03.pdf |
CityCouncil/2009-02-07.pdf,16 | CityCouncil | 2009-02-07 | 16 | the level of detail being proposed. Vice Mayor deHaan inquired whether the Recreation and Parks Department currently has the same cost centers. The Interim Finance Director responded in the affirmative; stated the cost centers remain the same in some cases; further stated the goal is to break down everything into programs to see the cost of providing the service. Mayor Johnson stated the programs should be broken down to the correct level even if it cannot be done in a year; for example, the cost of the Fire Academy should be known; Council needs to know the cost in order to set priorities. Councilmember Gilmore stated the categories provided [in Attachment C) would feed into the template for the upcoming budget inquired whether costs could still be obtained even if the deeper level would not be added to the template until FY 2010-11 The Interim Finance Director responded in the affirmative. reviewed the format. Councilmember Gilmore inquired how cost recovery is captured for non-revenue generating departments, to which the Interim Finance Director responded the department's portion of cost allocation is shown as revenue. Mayor Johnson inquired whether the Finance Department gets money from other departments. The Interim Finance Director responded in the affirmative; gave a brief explanation of cost allocation. Mayor Johnson inquired whether technology costs, including hardware, are part of cost allocation, to which the Interim Finance Director responded user departments are charged for IT. Vice Mayor deHaan inquired whether other municipalities have similar systems in place so Alameda does not have to reinvent the wheel. The Interim Finance Director responded the format presented is a standard program performance budget there are a variety of budget formats the proposed format is the way to identify service costs. In response to Vice Mayor deHaan's inquiry, the Interim Finance Director provided background information on program performance Special Meeting Alameda City Council 16 February 7, 2009 | CityCouncil/2009-02-07.pdf |
CityCouncil/2009-02-17.pdf,16 | CityCouncil | 2009-02-17 | 16 | Vice Mayor deHaan stated costs are going up and revenue is going down. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS (09-083) - Vice Mayor deHaan commended the Public Works Department on the work done during recent storms ; suggested an analysis and assessment on gutter ponding throughout the City be done while it is raining. (09-084) Mayor Johnson stated the Fire Department responded to an apartment toilet leak, turned off the water and later went back to vacuum up the water; the response was not an appropriate use of public funds; requested staff to work with the ICMA representative to ensure that taxpayers' money is not being abused. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the Regular Meeting at 10:33 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 16 February 17, 2009 | CityCouncil/2009-02-17.pdf |
CityCouncil/2009-03-03.pdf,16 | CityCouncil | 2009-03-03 | 16 | Counci lmember Gilmore inquired what would be the penalty for non- compliance. The Planning Services Manager responded staff would need to come back to Council for a monetary penalty; stated initially, enforcement action would be taken; ultimately, citations would be issued which would be difficult. Councilmember Gilmore inquired whether an owner would need to ensure that a person buying a property would live on the site; further inquired whether the City would advise the owner of record that both units could not be rented out. The Planning Services Manager responded in the affirmative; stated the City would require the property owner to put a deed restriction on the property; the owner would be required to live on the site. Councilmember Gilmore suggested that the owner-occupancy requirement be removed. Councilmembers Matarrese and Tam concurred with Councilmember Gilmore. Councilmember Matarrese inquired whether staff would bring back the ordinance with the wner-occupancy requirement removed, to which the Planning Services Manager responded in the affirmative. Councilmember Matarrese moved introduction of the ordinance. Councilmember Gilmore seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. Mayor Johnson clarified that the motion included removal of the owner occupied requirement. The Planning Services Manager stated Standard T would be removed. (09-099) Introduction of Ordinance Amending Various Sections of the Alameda Municipal Code Contained in Chapter II Article I Pertaining to City Council Meetings, Chapter II Article II Pertaining to the Historical Advisory Board, and Amending Ordinance No. 1082 As Amended by Ordinance No. 2497 Pertaining to an Existing Pension Fund. Introduced. Councilmember Gilmore moved introduction of the ordinance. Councilmember Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 16 March 3, 2009 | CityCouncil/2009-03-03.pdf |
CityCouncil/2009-03-17.pdf,16 | CityCouncil | 2009-03-17 | 16 | MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING TUESDAY- - -MARCH 17, 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 : (09-101) Conference with Labor Negotiators; Agency negotiators : Craig Jory and Human Resources Director Employee organizations : All Bargaining Units. (09-102) Conference with Legal Counsel - Anticipated Litigation; Initiation of litigation pursuant to subdivision (c) of Section 54956.9; Number of cases: One. (09-103) Conference with Labor Negotiator (54957.6) ; Agency Negotiator : City Attorney Name City Manager. (09-104) Public Employment; Title: City Manager. Following the Closed Session, the Special Meeting was reconvened and Mayor Johnson announced that regarding All Bargaining Units, the City Council received a briefing from its Labor Negotiators; no action was taken; regarding Anticipated Litigation, the City Council received a briefing; regarding City Manager, the City Council voted unanimously in favor of a settlement agreement with former City Manager, Debra Kurita; although the City Council and Debra shared many goals for the City, we differ in the manner in which to achieve them; the decision to take the City's management in a new direction was an amicable and mutual decision for Debra and the Council, and we wish her well in her future professional endeavors. ** Mayor Johnson called a recess at 7:40 p.m. to convene the Regular City Council Meeting and reconvened the Special Meeting at 10:20 p.m. *** Following the Closed Session, the Special Meeting was reconvened and Mayor Johnson announced that regarding Public Employment, the City Council discussed the appointment of an interim City Manager ; no action was taken. Special Meeting Alameda City Council 1 March 17, 2009 | CityCouncil/2009-03-17.pdf |
CityCouncil/2009-04-21.pdf,16 | CityCouncil | 2009-04-21 | 16 | MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING TUESDAY- - -APRIL 21, 2009- -7:31 P.M. Mayor Johnson convened the Special Meeting at 11:55 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: (09-168 ) Conference with Labor Negotiators: Agency Negotiators: Craig Jory and Human Resources Director Employee Organizations : All Bargaining Units. Following the Closed Session, the Special Meeting was reconvened and Mayor Johnson announced that the Council received a briefing on negotiation status and requirements from its Labor Negotiators; no action was taken. Adjournment There being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the Special Meeting at 12:35 a.m. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger City Clerk The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act. Special Meeting Alameda City Council April 21, 2009 | CityCouncil/2009-04-21.pdf |
CityCouncil/2009-05-05.pdf,16 | CityCouncil | 2009-05-05 | 16 | the June 2, 2009 Council meeting; competitive money has no guidelines; applications are due June 25, 2009. Mayor Johnson inquired when funding would be available, to which the Deputy City Manager responded as quickly as possible. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the Regular Meeting at 11:32 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 16 May 5, 2009 | CityCouncil/2009-05-05.pdf |
CityCouncil/2009-05-19.pdf,16 | CityCouncil | 2009-05-19 | 16 | The Ferry Services Manager responded from the Port of Oakland's General Fund. Vice Mayor deHaan inquired whether the Port of Oakland is entitled to Measure B revenue. The Ferry Services Manager responded Measure B revenue is strictly for Alameda's Ferry Services. Mayor Johnson stated WETA has access to a lot of funding not available to the City. The Public Works Director stated that the City Attorney is saying that Council could extend the Port of Oakland and Blue & Gold Agreements on a month-to-montl basis. The City Attorney stated Council could authorize the Interim City Manager to negotiate a fourth amendment with the understanding that the new paragraph proposed would not be included. Vice Mayor deHaan inquired what is WETA'S position on taking over the Ferry Service. The Ferry Services Manager responded the tentative transfer date is January 1, 2010; stated WETA has discussed using Measure 1B Preparation Funds for the Port of Oakland barge; WETA would need to negotiate with the Port of Oakland. Mayor Johnson stated that maintaining Oakland's ferry service is important because of the Oak Street to Ninth Street development. Councilmember Matarrese moved approval of the staff recommendation to apply for Regional Measure 1 Funds. Councilmember Tam seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. Councilmember Matarrese moved approval of a month-to-month extension to the existing terms for the Blue & Gold and Port of Oakland Agreements. Councilmember Gilmore seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. Councilmember Matarrese moved approval of authorizing the Interim City Manager to execute the amendment to the Harbor Bay Ferry Service Agreement. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 16 May 19, 2009 | CityCouncil/2009-05-19.pdf |
CityCouncil/2009-06-02.pdf,16 | CityCouncil | 2009-06-02 | 16 | inquired whether Councilmember Tam is referencing calendar year or fiscal year, to which Councilmember Tam responded calendar year. The Interim City Manager stated starting in the fall might be a good idea because staff has a critical path up to then. Councilmember Gilmore stated everyone seems to be in agreement with January issues not only include man hours but what else gets pushed off in order to satisfy Council requests having the public involved is imperative; public frustration may not be realized in terms of accessible information; that she received an email regarding the City's financial reports; she suggested obtaining the information from the City's website; the information was difficult to find; obtaining information is not second nature to the public. Mayor Johnson inquired how Laserfiche works. The City Clerk responded optical character recognition allows documents to be searchable; stated hand written documents are fuzzy and problematic; noted Council policies would be posted. Mayor Johnson stated the Alameda Museum has a lot of the City's historic documents ; the City should scan the documents so that individuals can have electronic access. Vice Mayor deHaan stated the scope needs to be understood. Councilmember Tam stated that she is suggesting not limiting the matter to the five issues outlined in the staff report; the scope deals with public access to government, boards and commissions, and information. Vice Mayor deHaan inquired whether Councilmember Tam is stating that the scope is much bigger than the five issues outlined in the staff report. Councilmember Tam responded the Brown Act requirements are what people consider to be the minimum; stated the City does more than the minimum for notifications but does not do more than the minimum for other public access to documents; maybe the public wants more than the minimum. Mayor Johnson stated that Councilmember Tam's idea of starting in the fall or January is good. Vice Mayor deHaan stated guidance is needed. Councilmember Matarrese suggested t… | CityCouncil/2009-06-02.pdf |
CityCouncil/2009-06-16.pdf,16 | CityCouncil | 2009-06-16 | 16 | deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese, Tam, and Mayor Johnson: Board Members Gallant, Hamm, Holmes, McCahn, McCormick - 10. Absent : None. The Special Joint Meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider : (09-231) Conference with Legal Counsel - Existing Litigation (54956.9) i Significant Exposure to Litigation Pursuant to Subdivision (b) of Section 54956.9. Name of Case: Brown V. City of Alameda. (09-232) Conference with Legal Counsel - Existing Litigation (54956.9) i Significant Exposure to Litigation Pursuant to Subdivision (b) of Section 54956.9 Name of Cases: Vectren Communication Services, Inc. V. City of Alameda, Nuveen Municipal High Income Opportunity Fund, et al. V. City of Alameda, et al. Bernard Osher Trust V. City of Alameda, et al. Following the Closed Session, the Special Joint Meeting was reconvened and Mayor Johnson announced that regarding Brown V. City of Alameda, Legal Counsel advised the City Council of a potential settlement offer and Council provided direction to Legal Counsel; regarding Vectren Communication Services, Inc. V. City of Alameda; Nuveen Municipal High Income Opportunity Fund, et al. V. City of Alameda, et al; Bernard Osher Trust V. City of Alameda, et al, the City Council and PUB received a briefing from Legal Counsel and outside Co-Counsel regarding the status of litigation and provided direction on litigation strategy. Adjournment There being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the Special Meeting at 7:40 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger City Clerk The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act. Special Joint Meeting City Council and Public Utilities Board June 16, 2009 | CityCouncil/2009-06-16.pdf |
CityCouncil/2009-07-21.pdf,16 | CityCouncil | 2009-07-21 | 16 | MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING TUESDAY - -JULY 21, 2009- -7:33 P. M. Mayor Johnson convened the Special Meeting at 10:02 p.m. ROLL CALL - Present : Councilmembers deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese, and Mayor Johnson - 4. Absent : Councilmember Tam - 1. CONSENT CALENDAR Councilmember Matarrese moved approval of the Consent Calendar. Councilmember Gilmore seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 4. [Absent Councilmember Tam - 1. ] [Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk preceding the paragraph number. ] (*09-313) Recommendation to Appropriate $1,304,000 in Federal American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 Funding, $59,000 in Rubberized Asphalt Concrete Grant Funds, and $71,000 from Fund 274.1, and Award a Contract in the Amount of $1,247,039, Including Contingencies, to Gallagher & Burk, Inc. for the City of Alameda Various Streets Rehabilitation Project (Central Avenue No. P.W. 02- 09-04). . Accepted. Councilmember Matarrese moved approval of the staff recommendation. Councilmember Matarrese inquired whether the $1.3 million Federal American Recovery and Reinvestment Act funding is money that the City did not have before and is federal stimulus money, to which the Public Works Director responded in the affirmative. Councilmember Gilmore seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 4. [Absent : Councilmember Tam - 1. ] AGENDA ITEMS None ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the Special Meeting at 10:02 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 Community Improvement Commission July 21, 2009 | CityCouncil/2009-07-21.pdf |
CityCouncil/2009-08-03.pdf,16 | CityCouncil | 2009-08-03 | 16 | The Interim City Manager responded Council took action a while back to earmark the $400,000 for Fire Station 3 rehabilitation; stated reserves are earmarked at Council discretion. Mayor/Chair Johnson stated Council needs to be very protective of reserves and fund balances; inquired how many fire fighters are scheduled per shift, to which the Fire Chief responded twenty- eight. Vice Mayor/Authority Member/Commissioner deHaan stated opportunities are available to use overtime to make up the delta; the City has obtained a portion of the Beltline property. louncilmember/Authority Member/Commissioner Tam stated getting another fire station seems ludicrous if staffing would be reduced. Mayor/Chair Johnson stated that she would be reluctant to have Council use the $400,000 for overtime without further analysis. Councilmember/Authority Member/Commissioner Gilmore inquired whether there has been a situation this fiscal year where staffing has dropped below twenty-four and over time was not used, to which the Fire Chief responded in the negative. louncilmember/Authority Member/Commissioner Gilmore inquired how long it would take to deplete the overtime budget. The Fire Chief responded each month is different; stated $100,000 was spent in July. Councilmember/Authority Member/Commissioner Gilmore stated there is time to study options and discuss whether or not to shift the $400,000. *** (09-323 CC / ARRA / 09-29 CIC ) Councilmember / Authority Member / Commissioner Matarrese moved approval of continuing the meeting past midnight. louncilmember/Authority Member/Commissioner Gilmore seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. Vice Mayor/Authority Member/Commissione: deHaan stated $400,000 was intended to be used for a study for Fire Station 3 replacement ; the building is not adequate; plans need to be evaluated. Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Agency, and Community Improvement Commission August 3, 2009 | CityCouncil/2009-08-03.pdf |
CityCouncil/2009-09-01.pdf,16 | CityCouncil | 2009-09-01 | 16 | MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY - - SEPTEMBER 1, 2009- - -7:29 P.M. Chair Johnson convened the Special meeting at 7:47 p.m. Commissioner Matarrese led the Pledge of Allegiance. Roll Call - Present : Commissioners deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese, Tam and Chair Johnson - 5. Absent : None. CONSENT CALENDAR Chair Johnson announced that the recommendation to award Contract [paragraph no. 09-32] was removed and would return at later date. Commissioner Gilmore moved approval of the remainder of the Consent Calendar. Commissioner Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. [Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by as asterisk preceding the paragraph number. . ] (*09-31) - Minutes of the Special Joint City Council, Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority, and CIC Meeting held on August 3, 2009. Approved. (09-32) - Recommendation to Award a Contract in the Amount of $151,315 to Ray's Electric, Inc. for Park Street and Buena Vista Avenue Utility Undergrounding. Not heard. AGENDA ITEMS None ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Chair Johnson adjourned the Special Meeting at 7:48 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 September 1, 2009 | CityCouncil/2009-09-01.pdf |
CityCouncil/2009-09-15.pdf,16 | CityCouncil | 2009-09-15 | 16 | The Supervising Civil Engineer stated the public did not support the idea. Councilmember Matarrese stated the study's value is in seeing what items cost; that he is impressed with the graphics of the removable bridge more people are utilizing bike racks on buses; additional bike racks could be a cheap solution and would be less expensive than a water taxi; the issue is a reality check more than anything else and forces everyone to look at something more practical. Councilmember Tam moved approval of the staff recommendation. Councilmember Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA None. COUNCIL REFERRALS None. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS (09-366) Consideration of Mayor's nomination for appointment to the Housing Commission. Mayor Johnson nominated Cullen Jones for appointment to the Housing Commission. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the meeting at 11:49 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 September 15, 2009 | CityCouncil/2009-09-15.pdf |
CityCouncil/2009-10-06.pdf,16 | CityCouncil | 2009-10-06 | 16 | MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING TUESDAY - -OCTOBER 6, 2009- -6:00 P.M. Mayor Johnson convened the Special Meeting at 6:10 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 : (09-369) Conference with Legal Counsel - Anticipated Litigation 54956.9 (b) ; Number of cases One. (09-370) Conference with Labor Negotiators; Agency negotiators Karen Willis and Craig Jory; Employee organizations: All Bargaining Units; and ( 09 -370 - A) Conference with Labor Negotiator; Agency negotiator: City Council Subcommittee; Employee: Interim City Manager. Following the Closed Session, the Special Meeting was reconvened and Mayor Johnson announced that regarding Anticipated Litigation, Council received a briefing from Legal Counsel and provided direction to Legal Counsel. regarding All Bargaining Units, Council received a briefing on the status of labor negotiations no action was taken; and regarding Interim City Manager, Council received a briefing no action was taken. Adjournment There being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the Special Meeting at 7:40 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger City Clerk The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act. Special Meeting Alameda City Council October 6, 2009 | CityCouncil/2009-10-06.pdf |
CityCouncil/2009-10-20.pdf,16 | CityCouncil | 2009-10-20 | 16 | Agenda for meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 16 October 20, 2009 | CityCouncil/2009-10-20.pdf |
CityCouncil/2009-11-03.pdf,16 | CityCouncil | 2009-11-03 | 16 | Councilmember Tam stated that she will oppose the motion; that she cannot impose an additional financial burden on the City when there are job cuts, closing of City Hall [ on Fridays], and potentially taking an ambulance out of service; based on conversations with outside counsel, a way should have been found to give Council flexibility; that she is not supportive of the motion. Mayor Johnson stated that she appreciates the concern for fiscal responsibility; the cost of the election is nothing compared to the issues presented in the initiative. On the call for the question, the motion carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Councilmembers deHaan, Matarrese, and Mayor Johnson - 3. Noes Councilmember Tam. Abstentions Councilmember Gilmore - 1. The City Clerk stated that tomorrow she will go out with a notice regarding submitting arguments Council can chose to designate authors for arguments the mailing of the sample ballot will be from December 24 through January 12; absentee ballots will be mailed out January 4; the last day to apply to vote by mail is January 26. Mayor Johnson inquired whether there could be one ballot argument on each side, to which the City Clerk responded in the affirmative. Mayor Johnson inquired whether ouncilmembers could select someone to write the argument on one side or another, to which the City Clerk responded in the affirmative. Mayor Johnson inquired when the argument needs to be submitted. The City Clerk responded the Registrar's suggested deadline for direct arguments is November 13; stated the she will bump the deadline back a little bit. Mayor Johnson inquired how many people can sign the argument, to which the City Clerk responded five. Councilmember Matarrese inquired whether timelines could be posted on the website. The City Clerk responded in the affirmative; stated Council can designate authors for the argument. The City Attorney stated there is no requirement for a Councilmember to volunteer to draft an argument, but it can be done. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council N… | CityCouncil/2009-11-03.pdf |
CityCouncil/2009-11-17.pdf,16 | CityCouncil | 2009-11-17 | 16 | 31, , 2009 is being compared to the same seven months in the prior three years. Councilmember Matarrese stated the tables should be labeled accordingly. The Fire Chief continued the presentation. Councilmember Tam inquired whether it is fair to say that the Fire Department's ability to comply with the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) standards for the months of April through October was a little over 70% of the time [previously] and in 2009, the yellow and red bar shows that the Department was out of compliance with the NFPA [standard] 90% time, to which the Fire Chief responded in the affirmative. Vice Mayor deHaan stated District 5 is less than 10% [in compliance with NFPA standards] inquired why the City selected the area. The Fire Chief responded Station 5 was selected because of the low call volume. Councilmember Matarrese stated statistics are pointers, not the total picture of assessing outcomes; performance was worse in 2006 than 2009 with the brownout situation; the matter begs all sorts of questions; that he wants to know impacts. The Fire Chief stated monthly reports show the number of affected calls throughout the City; impacts are noted; fortunately, significant impacts have not occurred due to delayed response times. Councilmember Tam stated the dice are being rolled by being out of compliance. The Fire Chief stated studies were conducted by Citygate in 2004 and by the International City/Council Management Association (ICMA) this year; the data matched the City's data; the City was hitting the same response time back then and now; continued the presentation. In response to Councilmember Matarrese's inquiry, the Fire Chief stated response times [in prior years] improved because of improved technology; response times this year dropped because of Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 16 November 17, 2009 | CityCouncil/2009-11-17.pdf |
CityCouncil/2009-12-01.pdf,16 | CityCouncil | 2009-12-01 | 16 | Mayor Johnson stated the suspect was commuted from a life sentence; people need to respond to the State's plan for early release of parolees. The Police Chief stated the California Chiefs Association is working closely with the Governors office to come up with alternative plans that can meet the State's needs as well as protect public safety. Mayor Johnson inquired whether the League of California Cities has taken a position on the matter, to which the Police Chief responded in the negative. Vice Mayor deHaan stated Council can individually send condolences to the City of Lakewood. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the Regular meeting at 11:14 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 16 December 1, 2009 | CityCouncil/2009-12-01.pdf |
CityCouncil/2009-12-15.pdf,16 | CityCouncil | 2009-12-15 | 16 | MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL JOINT CITY COUNCIL AND COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION (CIC) MEETING TUESDAY - -DECEMBER 15, 2009- -7:31 P.M. Mayor/Chair Johnson convened the Joint Meeting at 7:35 p.m. Councilmember/Commissioner Matarrese led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL - Present : Councilmembers/Commissioners deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese, Tam and Mayor/Chair Johnson - 5. Absent : None. CONSENT CALENDAR Councilmember/Commissioner Matarrese moved approval of the Consent Calendar Councilmember/Commissioner Tam seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. [Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk preceding the paragraph number . ] (*09-498 CC/09-57 CIC) Minutes of the Special Joint City Council, Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority, and Community Improvement Commission Meeting held on December 2, 2009. Approved. (*09-58 CIC) Recommendation to Authorize the Transmittal of the Community Improvement Commission Basic Component Unit Financial Statement for the Year Ended June 30, 2009. Accepted. (*09-499 CC/09-59 CIC) Recommendation to Authorize Transmittal of the Community Improvement Commission's Annual Report to the State Controller's Office and the City Council: Authorize Transmittal of the Redevelopment Agency Annual Housing Activity Report to the State Department of Housing and Community Development and the State Controller's Office; and Accept the Annual Report; and CIC) Resolution No. 09-164, "Approving and Adopting the Operating Budget and Appropriating Certain Moneys for the Expenditures Provided in Fiscal Year 2009-2010." Adopted. AGENDA ITEMS None. Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council and Public Utilities Board December 15, 2009 | CityCouncil/2009-12-15.pdf |
CityCouncil/2010-01-06.pdf,16 | CityCouncil | 2010-01-06 | 16 | MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING WEDNESDAY- JANUARY 6, 2010- -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: (09-002) Conference with Legal Counsel - Existing Litigation (54956.9); Name of case: United States of America, et al. V. City of Alameda, et al. (09-003) Conference with Labor Negotiators; Agency negotiators: Craig Jory and Human Resources Director; Employee organizations: International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers. Following the Closed Session, the Special Meeting was reconvened and Mayor Johnson announced that regarding Existing Litigation, Legal Counsel briefed the Council on the status of the litigation and Council provided direction; regarding Labor, Council received a briefing from its Labor Negotiators regarding the status of the negotiations. Adjournment There being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the Special Meeting at 7:15 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 January 6, 2010 | CityCouncil/2010-01-06.pdf |
CityCouncil/2010-01-26.pdf,16 | CityCouncil | 2010-01-26 | 16 | is expecting approximately fifty different measures which could be distilled down to eighteen; pension reform is not part of the League's goals this year; the ballot initiative signature allocation is 24,000 for the thirty-three cities in Alameda and Contra Costa counties; Contra Costa County Board of Supervisor Mary Piepho focused on the delta water issues and her opposition to the $11 billion water bond that will be coming in November; Supervisor Piepho stated the State cannot afford more dept and is very opposed to any effort to build a different version of the peripheral canal which is causing major divides in the Legislation between northern and southern California. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Mayor/Chair Johnson adjourned the joint meeting at 10:32 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger, City Clerk Secretary, CIC The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act. Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority and 16 Community Improvement Commission January 26, 2010 | CityCouncil/2010-01-26.pdf |
CityCouncil/2010-02-16.pdf,16 | CityCouncil | 2010-02-16 | 16 | Sullwold, Golf Commission; Joe VanWinkle, Alameda; and Robert Sullwold, Keep the Mif Coalition. The Interim City Manager stated the consultant report addresses non-profits and provides research and industry standards; the non-profit concept has become firmer since the RFP was issued; Council needs to advise staff whether to pursue the idea of a non-profit and review the plan. Vice Mayor deHaan stated that he would like staff to pursue the matter; non-profits have stepped in when there has been an opportunity to support fields and have been very successful; that he would like to give direction to have staff to pursue the matter. Councilmember Tam stated Council gave direction on January 6 to consider a non-profit in the context of what will happen with the long-term plan of the Golf Course; inquired whether the proposed non-profit submitted a proposal like any other entity would do; stated understanding how the proposal fits into the overall plan is important; without a proposal, Council would have a hard time providing the same diligence as in the case of the Boys and Girls Club and soccer groups financial capabilities; questioned how soon the proposal would be needed for the March 2 meeting. Mr. VanWinkle stated the Business Plan has been completed; reviews are being conducted with outside experts; that he would be happy to go over the report with the Interim City Manager at an already scheduled meeting on Friday. Mayor Johnson stated the issue needs to be reviewed in the context of the whole Golf Course and not in isolation. Councilmember Matarrese moved approval of giving the Interim City Manager direction to spend time on the proposal in the context of the larger operation of the Golf Course. Councilmember Tam requested that the motion be amended to include that Council wants to see an actual proposal. Mr. VanWinkle stated the by-laws, last three years of financials, and Business Plan would be provided. Councilmember Tam inquired whether everything could be provided to Council by 5:00 p.m. on February 22, to … | CityCouncil/2010-02-16.pdf |
CityCouncil/2010-03-16.pdf,16 | CityCouncil | 2010-03-16 | 16 | Blake responded a caretaker status has been maintained. Vice Mayor deHaan inquired what kind of cost savings have been derived from having all personnel under Kemper Sports, to which the Interim City Manager responded approximately $700,000. Vice Mayor deHaan inquired how the transition has been working. Mr. Vest responded currently sixteen employees are on the maintenance crew; stated things are working great. Vice Mayor deHaan stated the set up [Kemper managing City employees] was awkward at first, but [staffing] is now under Kemper's purview. Mr. Vest stated three [City] union staff members stayed; everyone is working as a team. Councilmember Gilmore inquired whether the $1 million to build a new Mif Albright course is part of the overall $6 million to $8 million, to which Mr. Vest responded in the affirmative. Councilmember Tam stated there is a threshold in which fees can be increased without losing rounds because the market can only bare so much given the conditions of the golf course; inquired whether Option D [in the Kemper proposal: one 18 hole course, a 9 hole course, a par 3 executive course and concession buyout] would allow charging the market rate which is between $30 to $38, but $47 could not be charged. Mr. Blake responded resident rates would be in the affordable category; stated other rates would change because Alameda would be more competitive. Councilmember Tam stated the north and south courses use reclaimed water from EBMUD; the Mif Albright course uses potable water; the cost differential is 20% and 30% rationing is imposed during a drought year, particularly for golf courses; using over the allotment imposes a 33% penalty; inquired whether turning the entire operation into potable water, paying more, and dealing with penalties would be worth it, to which Mr. Blake responded in the negative. Councilmember Tam stated the City made a conscious effort to be greener by participating in a recycled water program; the City was able to enjoy a discounted rate because the State pays subsidies for re… | CityCouncil/2010-03-16.pdf |
CityCouncil/2010-04-06.pdf,16 | CityCouncil | 2010-04-06 | 16 | MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING TUESDAY- APRIL 6, 2010--6:00 P.M. Mayor Johnson convened the meeting at 6:10 p.m. Roll Call - Present: Councilmembers deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese, Tam and Mayor Johnson - 5. Absent: None. The meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider: (10-130) Conference with Labor Negotiators; Agency negotiators: Interim City Manager and Human Resources Director; Employee organization: International Association of Fire Fighters (10-131) Conference with Legal Counsel - Existing Litigation; Name of Case: Alameda Gateway Ltd. V. City of Alameda Following the Closed Session, the meeting was reconvened and Mayor Johnson announced that regarding International Association of Fire Fighters (IAFF), the Interim City Manager provided a report on the status of negotiations with IAFF; and regarding Existing Litigation, the City Attorney provided a status report on the Alameda Gateway litigation, the City Council provided direction on litigation strategy, no action was taken. * Mayor Johnson called a recess at 7:10 p.m. and reconvened the meeting at 11:25 p.m. * The meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider: (10-132) Conference with Labor Negotiators; Agency negotiators: Interim City Manager; Employee organization: Executive Management (10-133) Public Employment; Title: City Manager Following the Closed Session, the meeting was reconvened and Mayor Johnson announced that regarding Executive Management, the City Council received a briefing from the Interim City Manager regarding the status of negotiations with the Executive Management, no action was taken; and regarding Public Employment, the Interim City Manager provided status on her existing employment contract and requested consideration of modifying her health insurance benefits; Council requested an amendment be brought back for consideration at the next meeting. Special Meeting Alameda City Council 1 April 6, 2010 | CityCouncil/2010-04-06.pdf |
CityCouncil/2010-04-20.pdf,16 | CityCouncil | 2010-04-20 | 16 | Mayor Johnson stated applicants should be given a picture of what the windows should look like; that she does not expect people to spend money for an architect to design windows. The Planning Services Manager stated staff hardly ever has a problem with applicants who are willing to spend money for an architect. Mayor Johnson stated hiring an architect cannot be a requirement. Councilmember Tam stated sometimes contractors have difficulty with the English language; inquired whether the City has resources to assist with translation, to which the Planning Services Manager responded employees help with translation. In response to Vice Mayor deHaan's inquiry regarding solar panels, the Planning Services Manager responded State code determines that the City cannot regulate solar panels through the Design Review program. In response to Vice Mayor deHaan's inquiry regarding roof pitch, the Planning Services Manager responded all zoning requirements need to be met; exceeding the zoning height by matching the pitch of a roof would require a variance and would not have an exemption. Councilmember Matarrese moved introduction of the ordinance with the amendments discussed. Councilmember Tam seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (10-174) Andy McKinley, Grand Marina General Manager, submitted a handout; discussed rent increase. Mayor Johnson stated Council would have a briefing on the issue; inquired whether Mr. McKinley has a deadline on Friday. Mr. McKinley responded he needs to submit $108,000 by Friday and also sign an agreement stating that Grand Marina agrees with the interpretation of the lease, which Grand Marina does not. Mayor Johnson inquired whether the timeline could be adjusted until after the Council briefing, to which the City Attorney responded in the affirmative. Mayor Johnson suggested that Mr. McKinley contact the City Attorney's office for confirmation. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 16 April 20, 2010 | CityCouncil/2010-04-20.pdf |
CityCouncil/2010-05-04.pdf,16 | CityCouncil | 2010-05-04 | 16 | Governments (ABAG) general meeting on April 22nd; the meeting addressed environmental land use, stopping urban sprawl, and developing communities in environmentally sensitive ways; provided packet to the City Clerk. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the meeting at 10:45 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 16 May 4, 2010 | CityCouncil/2010-05-04.pdf |
CityCouncil/2010-05-18.pdf,16 | CityCouncil | 2010-05-18 | 16 | Vice Mayor/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan stated the ENA inferred the PDC baseline and allowed looking at modifying Measure A. The Deputy City Manager - Development Services responded the ENA has been amended twice; the ENA was amended the first time in order to provide some time for shifting milestones; the ENA was amended the second time to allow for a ballot initiative and dealt with adding an investor and allowing a one year extension. Vice Mayor/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan inquired what were the key items in the ballot initiative. The Deputy City Manager - Development Services responded the ballot initiative consisted of a Charter amendment, a specific plan, a General Plan amendment, a zoning amendment, and a development agreement; stated the ballot initiative included almost all entitlements with the exception of the Disposition and Development Agreement (DDA). Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Tam stated focus should be on what is wanted: job creation costs, work force housing, 25% affordable housing, recreational amenities, public facilities and all infrastructure associated with the commercial development; the EIR process is supposed to help look at the spectrum of alternatives and to understand impacts associated with traffic; not realizing that there would be significant upfront costs for amenities would be naive; the project has to be fiscally neutral; facilities would need to generate sufficient revenues to pay for infrastructure; that she is not hearing what is the balance; inquired whether there is a process to resolve the issues, to which the Deputy City Manager - Development Services responded currently, staff is in the process. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Tam stated that she would like to scope the full spectrum of alternatives, understand impacts associated with each alternative, and see whether impacts associated with alternatives could be mitigated; the City has a master developer as a partner until July 20th; the plan should not be referred to as a master developer's… | CityCouncil/2010-05-18.pdf |
CityCouncil/2010-06-01.pdf,16 | CityCouncil | 2010-06-01 | 16 | $593 per square foot for a 2500 square foot house ends up with a house priced at $1,347,000; EPS started with the all residential bucket at $582,000, as opposed to the single family bucket at $666,000, which ends up with a price of $1,462,000 for a 2500 square foot single family house using the EPS methodology; EPS estimates that the average premiums at Alameda Point to be 1% of sale price; the SunCal estimate is 6.4%; explained the basis for SunCal's estimate; stated SunCal disagrees with the 1%; regarding absorption, SunCal is not opposed to changing to the City and EPS's recommendation; if the City wants to take a slower absorption, it is fine with SunCal; for single family construction costs, SunCal estimates $115 versus EPS's estimate of $130; explained the basis for SunCal's estimate; further stated another area that has been discussed is what should be anticipated as the real growth in home prices over time; SunCall's pro forma includes 2% starting in 2012; ESP recommends 1.4%; both sides have gone back and forth over the analysis; long term construction cost trends range from -0.7% to 0.5%; SunCal included a 0% real price growth; all of SunCal's prices are increased by CPI throughout the term of the project; there have been some clear mistakes in the EPS methodology as to price; EPS's premium analysis is simple; SunCal has done a lot more research on direct construction costs; regarding SunCal's Albuquerque, New Mexico project with D.E. Shaw being put into bankruptcy, it is fair to say any large real estate player, particularly in residential, has struggled in the past several years; assets have gone through a devaluation; SunCal and its partners have been severely hurt; in the Albuquerque example, $180 million in D.E. Shaw and SunCal's combined equity is in danger of being lost, which is an unfortunate circumstance that is part of the price and risk of working in development; the good news is D.E. Shaw continues to invest along side of SunCal and to express faith that SunCal will go forward, as evidenced… | CityCouncil/2010-06-01.pdf |
CityCouncil/2010-06-15.pdf,16 | CityCouncil | 2010-06-15 | 16 | that she has never worked with Mr. Reynolds or Mr. Thimmig before; both firms are highly reputable; that she worked for Westhoff and Martin Financial Services Group in 1993 and 1994; the innuendo that Mr. Holmstedt or Mr. Westhoff would get the deal because of some type of payback is professionally insulting and is not the case; Mr. Holmstedt and Mr. Westhoff would not get any compensation other than for work done; Stone and Youngberg and WCH are the two strongest firms in the market for California dirt bonds; a good structure for a very difficult transaction has been proposed; in the future, staff could start an RFP process for financial advisors; an RFP could be done for investment bankers also; an RFP process would be difficult at this time because of the stringent timeframe. Mayor Johnson stated the City wants to help property owners save money; the savings would be significant for many; that she likes the idea of an RFP process for financial advisors and creating a short list moving forward; the City could move forward with the transaction with parameters. Councilmember Gilmore stated Council needs to have discussions going forward so that everyone is clear; one member of the team got the position without having to compete; everyone is scrambling around looking for jobs and opportunities in today's economy; the appearance of how the City does things is just as important, if not more, than how the City actually does things; the City should be very clear to ensure that everyone gets an opportunity to complete; in the past, opportunities for women and minorities have been based on who the person knew, not how good the person was at what they did; the appearance of the City being accused of not following procedures or not going out for competitive bid is bothersome. The Interim City Manager stated the issue needs to apply to everything across the board and not just isolated cases regarding investment bankers or financial advisors; the issue should be revisited and a menu of different categories should be created… | CityCouncil/2010-06-15.pdf |
CityCouncil/2010-06-24.pdf,16 | CityCouncil | 2010-06-24 | 16 | Mayor Johnson stated the term "conflict of interest" has been thrown around loosely; the public needs to understand what is and is not a technical conflict of interest. Councilmember Gilmore stated the conflict of interest may not be technical, but the actuality is that if the ordinance passes midstream, incumbents would get a practical advantage over non-incumbents in the upcoming election. Councilmember Tam inquired whether Ms. Lipow shared her email with Task Force colleagues, to which Mr. Lipow responded in the negative. Councilmember Tam inquired whether Ms. Lipow was present at the June 16th Task Force Meeting, to which Ms. Lipow responded in the affirmative. Councilmember Tam stated the Sunshine Task Force Vice Chair stated "as the Council reaffirmed, the Task Force operates under the Brown Act and because we do, the campaign finance reform issue was not and could not be legally agendized at our meeting of Wednesday, June 16, 2010; however, the item was unanimously, and without concern, added to our July public workshop for full participation and discussion"; inquired whether Ms. Lipow expressed concern, to which Ms. Lipow responded in the affirmative. Councilmember Tam inquired whether Ms. Lipow indicated to the Task Force that she did not feel that she was qualified to take on the project. Ms. Lipow stated generally, she tends to do things when she sees things in writing; that her concern was with what Council was really saying and what Council wanted the Task Force to do. Councilmember Tam stated that she understands the facilitator would be willing to step in and assume the responsibility of serving on the Task Force. Ms. Lipow stated that she does not know how other Task Force members feel about the issue. Mayor Johnson stated the intent of the Council Referral is not to debate the merits of campaign finance reform but to discuss the process of handling the matter; Council voted to send the matter to the Sunshine Task Force which might not be the right place; Council gave specific direction to the Sun… | CityCouncil/2010-06-24.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]) );