pages
268 rows where page = 19
This data as json, CSV (advanced)
Suggested facets: body
date (date) 268 ✖
- 2005-01-10 1
- 2005-02-28 1
- 2005-05-17 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
- 2005-12-06 1
- 2006-02-21 1
- 2006-06-20 1
- 2006-07-24 1
- 2006-09-05 1
- 2006-09-19 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
- 2007-01-16 1
- 2007-02-20 1
- 2007-03-20 1
- 2007-03-26 1
- 2007-04-17 1
- 2007-05-15 1
- 2007-06-05 1
- 2007-06-19 1
- 2007-07-03 1
- 2007-07-17 1
- 2007-08-07 1
- 2007-09-11 1
- 2007-10-24 1
- 2007-11-06 1
- 2007-11-20 1
- 2007-12-04 1
- 2008-01-15 1
- 2008-02-19 1
- 2008-03-18 1
- 2008-04-15 1
- 2008-05-06 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
- 2008-12-02 1
- 2009-01-06 1
- 2009-02-03 1
- 2009-02-07 1
- 2009-03-03 1
- 2009-03-17 1
- 2009-05-19 1
- 2009-06-02 1
- 2009-06-16 1
- 2009-08-03 1
- 2009-10-20 1
- 2009-11-03 1
- 2009-11-17 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
- 2010-07-07 1
- 2010-07-20 1
- 2010-07-27 1
- 2010-09-07 1
- 2010-10-05 1
- 2010-11-16 1
- 2011-02-15 1
- 2011-07-19 1
- 2012-03-12 1
- 2012-05-08 1
- 2012-05-15 1
- 2012-06-06 1
- 2012-06-19 1
- 2013-04-02 1
- 2013-04-16 1
- 2013-06-18 1
- 2013-07-23 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
- 2014-07-01 1
- 2014-07-15 1
- 2014-09-16 1
- 2014-12-02 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
- 2015-05-05 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
- 2015-11-04 1
- 2015-12-15 1
- 2016-01-05 1
- 2016-02-02 1
- 2016-02-16 1
- 2016-03-01 1
- 2016-03-15 1
- 2016-04-05 1
- 2016-05-17 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
- 2016-09-20 1
- 2016-10-04 1
- 2016-10-18 1
- 2016-11-01 1
- 2016-12-06 1
- 2016-12-14 1
- 2016-12-20 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
- 2017-06-20 1
- 2017-07-05 1
- 2017-07-18 1
- 2017-09-05 1
- 2017-09-19 1
- 2017-10-03 1
- 2017-10-17 1
- 2017-11-07 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
- 2018-04-17 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
- 2018-10-02 1
- 2018-10-16 1
- 2018-11-27 1
- 2018-11-28 1
- 2019-01-02 1
- 2019-01-29 1
- 2019-02-05 1
- 2019-03-05 1
- 2019-03-13 1
- 2019-03-19 1
- 2019-04-02 1
- 2019-04-16 1
- 2019-05-07 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
- 2019-12-12 1
- 2019-12-18 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
- 2020-06-29 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
- 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
- 2021-04-20 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
- 2021-07-19 1
- 2021-07-20 1
- 2021-07-26 1
- 2021-09-07 1
- 2021-09-21 1
- 2021-10-05 1
- 2021-10-19 1
- 2021-11-02 1
- 2021-11-16 1
- 2021-11-30 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/2005-05-17.pdf,19 | CityCouncil | 2005-05-17 | 19 | Vice Mayor Gilmore inquired whether the actuarial accrued liability is in excess of $70 million for both the closed plans and the on- going retiree benefits. The Finance Director responded in the negative; stated $70 million is for the retiree benefit plan; the actuarial accrued liability for the 1079 and 1082 plans is $31,683,000 as of January 1, 2005. Councilmember Daysog inquired whether the outstanding liabilities are reported to bond underwriters. The Finance Director responded bond underwriters receive the CAFR for three prior years; the liabilities are included in the footnotes. Councilmember Daysog inquired whether the outstanding liabilities would affect the City's bond rating. The Finance Director responded in the affirmative; stated the City is judged on whether or not a plan has been established; pay as you go is one plan. In response to Mayor Johnson's inquiry whether a plan would be brought to Council, the Finance Director stated a report would be brought back shortly after the first draft of the 10-year plan. Councilmember Daysog inquired whether Alameda's liabilities are typical for a city of its size. The Finance Director stated the City's consultant who completed the study could respond. John Bartel, Bartel Associates, stated the City of Alameda's 1079 and 1082 plans are a little unique; most agencies do not have frozen plans; the retiree health care plan is a $70 million unfunded liability with two separate promises : safety and non- safety; the promise to the non-safety group is at the lower quartile of what other agencies promise the promise to the safety group is in line with an upper quartile of what agencies promise. Councilmember Daysog requested a background report on the matter to understand the quartiles and median being used. (05-246) Presentation on the Operating Budget and Capital Improvements for Fiscal Year 2005-06. The Acting City Manager provided a brief report on the budget and provided examples of surrounding cities budget problems. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 19 May … | CityCouncil/2005-05-17.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-06-07.pdf,19 | CityCouncil | 2005-06-07 | 19 | the expense of the boat operation. The City Attorney gave a brief presentation on the City Attorney' S office budget reduction impacts. Mayor Johnson requested further explanation on the impacts of the City Attorney's office reductions. The City Attorney stated that the duties of two full-time positions that are being cut would be absorbed within the existing staff and would result in some delays in quantity and timeliness of the workload. Mayor Johnson inquired whether the reduction would cause delays in reviewing contracts, to which the City Attorney responded that the current contract review time is two days; contract review will continue to be treated as a priority. Mayor Johnson inquired whether two days is an average time for contract review, to which the City Attorney responded the two-day turnaround time was the average time for contract review during the last five months. Mayor Johnson inquired what service impacts the City departments could expect; stated that a Charter change might be necessary if there was a delay in the City Attorney's office approving a contract. The City Attorney responded that the existing workload would be spread among existing staff; phones may need to be placed on voice mail at lunch time there may be a delay in document production and routine tasks; stated the City Attorney's office is trying to work smarter the workload that is handled by the Administration Management Analyst would need to be spread among the remaining staff; there would be a need to have Department Heads do more in terms of contract preparation and review. Mayor Johnson inquired whether there was a way to advise the Department Heads which contracts need to be approved by the City Attorney's office and which do not. The City Attorney stated that she has tried to triage the contracts by preparing a training program and getting forms and options on line to enable the departments to do more of the routine tasks; the level of the budget cut requires that things be done differently. Special Joint Meeting Alameda C… | CityCouncil/2005-06-07.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-06-21.pdf,19 | CityCouncil | 2005-06-21 | 19 | recommendation Councilmember/Commissioner Matarrese stated there is an opportunity to provide meaningful, affordable housing. 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 meeting at 8:05 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger, City Clerk Secretary, Community Improvement Commission The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act. Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council and 2 Community Improvement Commission June 21, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-06-21.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-07-19.pdf,19 | CityCouncil | 2005-07-19 | 19 | to Council, but Finance never implemented the change; that she questions whether the memo even went to Finance in 2001. Councilmember Matarrese stated the policy that he is looking for is that if there is a dollar figure in a contract, that the matter should return as a Contract or MOU amendment. Mayor Johnson stated sending a copy of a memo to the Council is not a way of notifying the Council. Councilmember Matarrese stated the question is not notification; the question is approval; there is an easy fix: going forward, all changes will come to Council for a vote. Councilmember deHaan concurred with the suggestion; stated policy should be set going forward; the Contract for the new City Manager states that the amount is a fixed amount a new Contract is being negotiated with the City Attorney and the matter can be clarified; inquired what will be done in the interim in the next five months; stated putting the matter in the open to understand how the City reached the current status is good; safeguards can be put in place. Mayor Johnson stated the Council voted to make the legal opinion a public document and should call the next agenda item to address the policy. ( 05-365) - Discussion and recommendations regarding City Manager and City Attorney contract provisions pertaining to vehicle allowance limit. Councilmember Matarrese stated his previous comments [ under the previous agenda item, paragraph no. 05-364] hold. Mayor Johnson and Councilmember deHaan concurred. Councilmember Daysog that he does not have a problem with the direction to have issues come back to the City Council; however, when he received the legal opinion in 2001, he felt it was consistent going forward, Council's request for everything to come before Council is acceptable. Councilmember deHaan stated actions should be done equitably among Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 19 July 19, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-07-19.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-08-16.pdf,19 | CityCouncil | 2005-08-16 | 19 | Counci deHaan inquired whether or not rounding off the corner would be considered mimicking. The Development Services Director responded rounding off would not be mimicking; stated mimicking would be trying to make people believe the building is art deco. Councilmember deHaan stated the Cineplex and parking structure corners could be smoothed; where the Cineplex steps back from the historic theater there are funny, square windows. The Development Services Director stated that she met with AAPS last week; AAPS feels strongly about the need for a much stronger vertical element; at a number of different public meetings addressing design, people liked the glass lobby element. Councilmember deHaan stated that he is concerned about the long, 20 to 21 inch, protrusions, which do not match the downtown district and result in an awkward mass; that he would be happy if the project was one-story; however, more screens are needed to make the project financially feasible. Councilmember Daysog thanked everyone for taking the time to voice opinions; stated that the Council would vote on the appeal of the Planning Board's decision regarding the project design and other design related elements tonight that he is troubled by the business deal aspects of the project and continues to struggle over what constitutes the proper balance between fulfilling an earnest desire for a historic movie theater that the community could be proud of and the wise and prudent use of public dollars; that he is also troubled by the fact that the cinema project is a negative $7 million and the new information tonight regarding the $0.40 per square foot [rent] when market is $1.35; that the Council has a fiduciary responsibility to exercise leadership when the public's appetite for amenities conflicts with fiscal prudence; that he understands the desire to restore the historic theater and that some people want the Cineplex; however, he is struggling with the rent; $0.40 per square foot is one-third of the market rate. Councilmember Matarrese inquired whe… | CityCouncil/2005-08-16.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-12-06.pdf,19 | CityCouncil | 2005-12-06 | 19 | Councilmember/Commissioner/Authority Member deHaan inquired whether the improvement could be attributed to the Finance Director, to which the External Auditor responded in the affirmative. Mayor/Chair Johnson stated the Interim City Manager also contributed to the improvement. The External Auditor stated staff tried very hard not to have adjustments. Councilmember/Commissioner/AuthorityMember deHaan stated that the External Auditor's findings confirm the Council's beliefs. Mayor/Chair Johnson inquired why there was such a fluctuation in administrative expenses in the Police and Fire Pension Plans; stated the benefits and refunds remain about the same. The External Auditor responded the 1999-2000 increase was the cost of the GASB 25 and 27 implementation; the 2004-2005 increase was the cost of actuarial studies and implementing new accounting standards. Mayor/Chair Johnson stated money cannot be transferred from fund to fund without Council approval but can be transferred within funds ; inquired whether one department charging another department was considered an inter-fund transfer. The External Auditor responded in the negative; stated one department charging another department is not considered moving budgeted resources. Mayor Johnson requested money budgeted for one department and allocated to another department be highlighted in the next budget. Vice ayor/Commissioner/Authority Member Gilmore inquired whether the ten-year financial plan figures would be scarier for the Police and Fire unfunded pension benefit obligation. The External Auditor responded in the affirmative; stated the obligation outpaces the funding. Vice Mayor/Commissioner/Authority Member Gilmore stated the challenge would be funding the Plan without hitting other City services too much. Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Community 5 Improvement Commission, and Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority December 6, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-12-06.pdf |
CityCouncil/2006-02-21.pdf,19 | CityCouncil | 2006-02-21 | 19 | housing funds. Councilmember/Commissioner Daysog inquired whether the funds were for some type of housing program, and whether the subsidy was fulfilling the original mandates, to which the Development Services Director responded in the affirmative to both. incilmember/Commissioner Matarrese moved approval of the staff recommendation with recognition of the people involved in the process. Councilmember/Commissioner Matarrese stated the money was set aside for housing to meet a need that is nowhere near fulfilled. 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 8:07 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 February 21, 2006 | CityCouncil/2006-02-21.pdf |
CityCouncil/2006-06-20.pdf,19 | CityCouncil | 2006-06-20 | 19 | whether the $1.6 million Vehicle Replacement Program is a substantial increase from the past. The Finance Director responded the vehicle replacement amount has been $150,000 to $200,000 in the past, except for the years when an ambulance was replaced. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan stated vehicle replacement was neglected because of budget constraints; inquired whether catch-up could be done during the next fiscal year. The Finance Director responded an equipment replacement reserve is part of the General Fund budget; vehicles that should have been replaced were set aside in favor of keeping public safety vehicles current. Mayor/Chair Johnson inquired whether vehicles would be replaced with alternative fuel vehicles, to which the Finance Director responded in the affirmative. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan stated Alameda Power and Telecom is investigating natural gas for three vehicles. The Public Works Director stated Council authorized the City Manager to submit an application for four electric vehicles which would replace three existing vehicles on the vehicle replacement listi a recommendation was made to have an all electric vehicle for the Information Technology Department also. Mayor/Chair Johnson stated vehicles should be replaced with vehicles that are appropriate for the use. The City Manager/Executive Director stated having a Managed Vehicle Replacement Program is advantageous. Mayor/Chair Johnson inquired whether the 2006-2007 Capital Improvement Program included anything for parks. The City Manager/Executive Director responded three parks were budgeted in 2005-2006; stated the parks will be improved in the current fiscal year the Turf Management Program will help determine where funds will be applied. Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Alameda Reuse 5 and Redevelopment Authority, and Community Improvement Commission June 20, 2006 | CityCouncil/2006-06-20.pdf |
CityCouncil/2006-09-05.pdf,19 | CityCouncil | 2006-09-05 | 19 | MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING TUESDAY - -SEPTEMBER 5, 2006- -6:00 P.M. Mayor Johnson convened the Special Meeting at 6:00 p.m. Roll Call - Present : Councilmembers Daysog, deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese, and Mayor Johnson - 5. Absent : None. The Special Meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider: (06-426) Conference with Labor Negotiators; Agency negotiators : Craig Jory and Human Resources Director; Employee organizations : Alameda City Employees Association, International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Management and Confidential Employees Association, and Executive Management Group. (06-427) Conference with Legal Counsel - Existing Litigation; Name of case : Zornes V. City of Alameda et al. Following the Closed Session, the Special Meeting was reconvened and Mayor Johnson announced that regarding Conference with Labor Negotiators, Council received a briefing from Labor Negotiators on the status of negotiations with Alameda City Employees Association, International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, and Management and Confidential Employees Association and no action was taken; regarding Conference with Legal Counsel, Council received a briefing from Legal Counsel and gave direction on settlement of this matter. Adjournment There being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the Special Meeting at 7:25 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger City Clerk The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act. Special Meeting Alameda City Council September 5, 2006 | CityCouncil/2006-09-05.pdf |
CityCouncil/2006-09-19.pdf,19 | CityCouncil | 2006-09-19 | 19 | Adjournment There being no further business, Mayor/Chair Johnson adjourned the Special Joint Meeting at 7:40 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger, City Clerk Secretary, Community Improvement Commission The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act. Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Community 2 Improvement Commission, Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority, and Housing Authority Board of Commissioners September 19, 2006 | CityCouncil/2006-09-19.pdf |
CityCouncil/2006-10-03.pdf,19 | CityCouncil | 2006-10-03 | 19 | MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY - -OCTOBER 3, 2006- - -7:27 P.M. Chair Johnson convened the Special Meeting at 9:41 p.m. ROLL CALL - Present : Commissioners Daysog, deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese and Chair Johnson - 5. Absent : None. CONSENT CALENDAR Commissioner Matarrese moved approval of the Consent Calendar. 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. ] (*06-061C) Minutes of the Special Joint City Council, Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority (ARRA) , Community Improvement Commission (CIC), and Housing Authority Board of Commissioners (HABOC) Meetings, and Special Joint City Council, ARRA, and CIC Meeting held on September 19, 2006. Approved. (*06-061D) Recommendation to enter into a Contract with Construction Testing Services, Inc. in the amount of $84,260 to provide Special Inspection and Testing Services for the Civic Center Parking Garage and Alameda Theater Project. Accepted. AGENDA (06-061E) Resolution No. 06-147, "Referring the Proposed Sixth Amendment to the Community Improvement Plan for the Business and Waterfront Improvement Project to the Planning Board of the City of Alameda for Its Report and Recommendation and Authorizing Transmittal of Said Sixth Amendment to the Affected Taxing Entities and Other Interested Persons and Organizations. Adopted. The Development Services Director gave a brief presentation. Commissioner Matarrese inquired whether there would be a cost savings and whether the time to sync up the redevelopment plan following a General Plan amendment would be reduced. The Development Services Director responded in the affirmative stated the legal noticing process takes five months said time would be saved; the current amendment is costing $50,000. Special Meeting Community Improvement Commission 1 October 3, 2006 | CityCouncil/2006-10-03.pdf |
CityCouncil/2006-10-17.pdf,19 | CityCouncil | 2006-10-17 | 19 | process works in that people are able to step up and acknowledge the problem and other options are reviewed; he feels that Policy No. 7 needs to be flushed out. Mayor Johnson stated that Policy No. 7's language needs work; Policies No. 1 through 6 look like good goals to have; the policies should be changed to be more like guidelines. The Transportation Commission Chair stated the recommendation is twofold; the first recommendation is that the policies are guidelines for the EIR policy the second recommendation is to go forward with the TMP and adopt the TMP as policies into the General Plan as part of the Transportation Element the Transportation Commission wanted to get the recommendations to Council before a number of very large EIR'S came up so that the recommendations could be considered as guideline policies. Mayor Johnson stated the policies are good because the policies address the issue of traffic reduction, not just mitigation and the Travel Choice shows that traffic reduction is possible if the right efforts are made; she is okay with Policies No. 1 through 6; Policy No. 7 needs more work to make sure the intent is correct. The Transportation Commission Chair stated at the Transportation Commission meeting next week, the policies going forward with the TMP would be discussed. Mayor Johnson inquired whether the A through F level of service ratings would change, to which the Transportation Commission Chair responded in the negative. Councilmember Daysog stated Policy No. 7's first sentence could be interpreted more broadly in that the Policy is not just about congestion but is about other impacts associated with congestion such as noise and air quality. Councilmember deHaan stated he has an additional concern with Policy No. 7; already many activities occurring across the Estuary have impacts on the City's intersections; Oak Street to Ninth Avenue is a good example; inquired whether situations might occur where widening or creating additional automotive traffic lane options should be considered. The Tran… | CityCouncil/2006-10-17.pdf |
CityCouncil/2006-11-21.pdf,19 | CityCouncil | 2006-11-21 | 19 | Mayor Johnson stated a project application is needed before prioritizing staff time on the project. Mr. Wang stated that he cannot submit a project application until he knows what the project should be; said work requires staff time otherwise years continue to go by without anything being completed; encouraged the Council/Commission to direct staff to work with him; stated that he could provide the City with tentative maps applications. Mayor/Chair Johnson stated that the Council/Commission does not know how many units are being proposed. Mr. Wang stated approximately 200 housing units are proposed. Mayor/Chair Johnson inquired how many square feet of commercial and retail space are proposed, to which Mr. Wang responded 200,000 square feet. Mayor/Chair Johnson stated another way to work out cost recovery needs to be figured out if staff believes it is appropriate to dedicate a lot of staff time to the project; cautioned against prioritizing staff time at the expense of other projects that have been waiting to move forward, including individual homeowner projects. Mr. Wang stated privately funded projects can move forward much faster than the Naval Air Station project; perhaps tax increment could be used for the City's next project. buncilmember/Commissioner Matarrese moved approval of postponing an ENA until the following occur: 1) that there is an approved NWSP; 2) there is an application or staff can move forward on the project as a project, not a concept, concurrent with public hearings at the EDC because tax increment money was mentioned, and at the Planning Board because projects at said stage rightfully go through the Planning Board for screening before returning to the CIC. Mayor/Chair Johnson inquired whether Councilmember/Commissioner Matarrese's motion refers to the ENA returning to the CIC for consideration, to which Councilmember/Commissioner Matarrese responded in the affirmative. Councilmember/Commissioner deHaan requested Councilmember Commissioner Matarrese to clarify whether the Planning Board an… | CityCouncil/2006-11-21.pdf |
CityCouncil/2006-12-05.pdf,19 | CityCouncil | 2006-12-05 | 19 | organizational issues have come up, such as working with the West Alameda Business Association (WABA) in conjunction with the developer. The Base Reuse and Community Development Manager responded Catellus is willing to work with the City and WABA to bring pressure on CalTrans to put a little more elbow grease in keeping the Webster Street Tube area cleaned up. louncilmember/Authority Member/Commissioner Daysog requested an explanation of coordinating physical design issues with Webster Street. The Base Reuse and Community Development Manager stated WABA is interested in ensuring that the Alameda Landing project and Webster Street are seen as one big project which would encourage people to go between Alameda Landing and Webster Street; matching light standards, benches and landscaping have been discussed. Councilmember/Authority Member/Commissioner deHaan inquired what amount has been budgeted for the Willie Stargell extension, to which the Base Reuse and Community Development Manager responded approximately $20 million. Councilmember/Authority Member/Commissioner deHaan inquired what the amount would be if in-lieu fees occurred. The Base Reuse and Community Development Manager responded the in- lieu fees are based on a formula; stated phasing is very important; the project contemplates that the last conveyance parcel has to be acquired no later than 2016, which is two years earlier than the last required land purchase under the existing DDA; the first phase is accelerated from the existing DDA which had 14 acres of minimum takedowns the first backbone demolition phase contains approximately 38 acres; the City would require Catellus to take down a minimum 14-acre parcel and begin demolition work three years from now in the event that all the conditions preceding the first phase of demolition have been met with the exception of the requirement that the project makes a 12% return; the latest time the developer would start working on the first phase would be three years from now; the latest time the developer could p… | CityCouncil/2006-12-05.pdf |
CityCouncil/2007-01-02.pdf,19 | CityCouncil | 2007-01-02 | 19 | entertained this evening. Councilmember Matarrese stated traffic is the biggest issue; the retail mix had a good, methodical means of review; good measures and standards are set on the retail side; inquired whether there is a way to evaluate traffic management and transportation demands after progress is made on the project build-out further inquired whether an unmet need could be met due to the over performance of the project. The Base Reuse and Community Development Manager responded the project requirements already state that Catellus has to submit a detailed TDM Program plan for the overall project when the first phase development plan is presented; the plan must be in place at either the 150th residential unit or the first 100,000 square feet of office development; Catellus could come back with a set of criteria for evaluating the success of the TDM; the criteria would be worked out with the Transportation Commission and Planning Board; the formulated criteria would be used five years down the road to determine whether the project is performing well or is performing below the Performa and whether the TDM Program budget should be bumped up in the event that the TDM Program is under performing due to lack of funds. Vice Mayor Tam inquired how the $425,000 cap was determined and whether there was a way to look at restructuring opportunities to tie key performance measures to specific expenditures and remove the language so that it does not sound like a cap. The Base Reuse and Community Development Manager stated the $425,000 commitment was a negotiated amount between the City and the developer; Exhibit D of the DA is the Master Plan Conditions of Approval Condition #11 is a thorough outline of the TDM Program components and more specifically the first phase of the TDM program; the developer and staff knew what the TDM Program would look like in general and what the first phase TDM program would look like more specifically; the developer had a TDM program consultant; the $425,000 is a general figure because the … | CityCouncil/2007-01-02.pdf |
CityCouncil/2007-01-16.pdf,19 | CityCouncil | 2007-01-16 | 19 | Mayor Johnson stated former Vice Mayor Daysog also served on the Airport Operating Committee; requested that Councilmembers let her know their areas of interest before the next Council meeting. (07 -039 - ) Councilmember Matarrese stated an Alameda Power and Telcom (AP&T) consultant report was published in the newspaper requested that Council receive a briefing on decisions and recommendations after the public workshops. The City Manager stated the process would begin this week; the public is invited to attend two public forums scheduled for Thursday and Saturday a voice over Internet protocol is one of the consultant's recommendations; updates will be provided to Council. Councilmember Matarrese requested the update be provided in the first quarter. (07-040) Councilmember Matarrese stated he has heard concerns that Alameda does not have a Cultural Arts Center; he would like to have the matter reviewed by the Public Arts Commission. (07-041) Councilmember deHaan stated webcasting is available but is only utilized in the Chambers; suggested that the AP&T workshop meetings be available to the public through webcasting. (07-042) - Councilmember deHaan requested that Closed Session information be released on Alameda Point negotiations. (07-043) Councilmember Gilmore inquired whether there is a mechanism for requiring shopping carts to have boots; stated the boots would be helpful in limiting stray shopping cart problems at Alameda Landing, Bridgeside, and Alameda Towne Center. Mayor Johnson stated the Police Department has been requested to review the issue in the past suggested that a phone number be placed on the shopping carts for stores to pick up carts within a certain number of hours. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the Regular Meeting at 11:50 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger City Clerk Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 19 January 16, 2007 | CityCouncil/2007-01-16.pdf |
CityCouncil/2007-02-20.pdf,19 | CityCouncil | 2007-02-20 | 19 | discussion include a review of the reserve threshold needed to secure good bonding rates. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan inquired why the reserve target is 25%. The Finance Director responded 25% represents approximately two to three months of payables; stated 25% has been memorialized as part of the City's financial policies; the amount was temporarily reduced in order to meet deferred maintenance goals. Councilmember/Board ember/Commissioner deHaan stated the reserve should get back to 25%; including a 1% to 2% increase in the next budget cycle would be nice. Mayor/Chair Johnson stated the issue should be discussed; the 25% reserve was accumulated from deferring maintenance; the goal should be 25% but not at the expense of accumulating deferred maintenance. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan stated the deferred maintenance backlog should be understood by the next budget. The City Manager stated an infrastructure update would be presented. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan inquired whether the ten-year forecast would be pursued. The Finance Director responded the mid-year items would be added to the ten-year forecast; past performance is no predictor of the future. Mayor/Chair Johnson inquired whether the sewer fund is lower than expected to which the Finance Director responded the sewer fund is lower because only a partial payment has been received from the County. Mayor/Chair Johnson inquired when the proposed Golf resolution could come back, to which the City Manager responded 30 days. The Finance Director stated the resolution could be addressed at the March 20 City Council meeting. In response to Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan's inquiry regarding Golf cost allocation charges, the Finance Director stated Council could decide not to charge a particular Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, 3 Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority, and Community Improvement Commission February 20, 2007 | CityCouncil/2007-02-20.pdf |
CityCouncil/2007-03-20.pdf,19 | CityCouncil | 2007-03-20 | 19 | Commission deHaan requested information on the amount of money the City contributed to the Ruby Bridges Elementary School construction. Mayor Johnson opened the public portion of the hearing. Bill Smith, Alameda, stated the City should provide affordable housing. There being no further speakers, Mayor Johnson closed the public portion of the hearing. Commissioner Matarrese stated that the Business and Waterfront Improvement Project and West End Community Improvement Project unencumbered fund balances reflect 20% set-aside funds for housing ; requested information on the 80% unencumbered funds; discussions are needed for funding other projects such as the Carnegie building, new Fire House, and Webster Street Streetscape Phase II project. The Housing Development Manager stated the numbers in the report reflect housing funds; State law is very prescriptive regarding the type of information in the Implementation Plan. Commissioner Matarrese stated that 80% of the picture is missing he would like to plan some other activities such as the Carnegie interior renovation or Webster Street Streetscape completion; inquired whether the matter should be placed on an agenda. The Development Services Director responded the matter could be addressed as part of the budget report, which is scheduled for May. Commissioner deHaan requested that historical funding information be provided. Commissioner Matarrese stated that some generated funds would pay the debt for completed projects; choices should be provided for the 80% unencumbered portion. Commissioner deHaan inquired whether the lifespan for redevelopment projects was 30 or 35 years. The Development Services Director responded each project is different; stated a 25 to 30 year lifespan is typical when a redevelopment project area is originally adopted. Special Meeting Community Improvement Commission 4 March 20, 2007 | CityCouncil/2007-03-20.pdf |
CityCouncil/2007-04-17.pdf,19 | CityCouncil | 2007-04-17 | 19 | MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY- - -APRIL 17, 2007- - -7:31 P.M. Chair Johnson convened the Special Meeting at 10:01 p.m. ROLL CALL - Present : Commissioners deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese, and Chair Johnson - 5. Absent : None. CONSENT CALENDAR Commissioner Tam moved approval of the Consent Calendar. Commissioner Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. [Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk preceding the paragraph number. . ] ( *07-012) Minutes of the Community Improvement Commission meeting held on April 3, 2007. Approved. (*07-013) Recommendation to authorize the Executive Director to execute a Consultant Agreement with Harris & Associates in an amount not to exceed $540,000, to be reimbursed by the Developer pursuant to the Disposition and Development Agreement, to provide Engineering Review and Construction Support Services for the Alameda Landing Project. Accepted. AGENDA ITEMS (07-014) Update on the Alameda Theater, Cineplex and Parking Structure Construction Project; and (07 - 014A) Recommendation to amend the Construction Contract with C. Overaa & Co. for the Civic Center Parking Garage to increase the Scope of Work and approve reduction of the contingency budget. The Redevelopment Manager gave a brief presentation. Commissioner Gilmore inquired whether either alternative would add to the length of the Contract. The Redevelopment Manager responded that she hopes to stay on schedule; stated the marquee and blade sign are custom items; shop drawings would need to be prepared; no additional costs would occur with a week or two delay. Chair Johnson inquired whether the blade sign and marquee canopy Special Meeting Community Improvement Commission 1 April 17, 2007 | CityCouncil/2007-04-17.pdf |
CityCouncil/2007-05-15.pdf,19 | CityCouncil | 2007-05-15 | 19 | MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY- - -MAY 15, 2007 - - -7:31 P.M. Chair Johnson convened the Special Meeting at 11:47 p.m. ROLL CALL - Present : Commissioners deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese, Tam and Chair Johnson - 5. Absent : None. MINUTES (07-017) Minutes of the Special Joint City Council and Community Improvement Commission (CIC) meeting and the Special CIC meeting held on April 17, 2007, and Special Joint City Council, Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority, and CIC meeting held on May 8, 2007. Commissioner Gilmore moved approval of the minutes. Commissioner deHaan seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. AGENDA ITEM (07-018) Update on the Alameda Theater, Cineplex and Parking Structure Construction Project; (07-018A) Recommendation to authorize staff to approve a Change Order for up to $100,000 for preserving and restoring the auditorium bas relief niches and ceiling; and (07-018B) Recommendation to release $250,000 in project budgeted funds to Alameda Entertainment Associates, L.P. for Cineplex site work. * * (07-019) Commissioner Matarrese moved approval of continuing the meeting past 12:00 midnight. Commissioner Tam seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. * Commissioner Matarrese requested that photographs of the Historic Theater restoration be posted to the City's website. The Development Services Director gave a brief presentation. Special Meeting Community Improvement Commission 1 May 15, 2007 | CityCouncil/2007-05-15.pdf |
CityCouncil/2007-06-05.pdf,19 | CityCouncil | 2007-06-05 | 19 | interactions between the contemplated expansion, including Target at the Alameda Towne Center, and the proposed fueling station; the mitigated negative declaration does just that [looks at project as a whole] ; the impacts of six different intersections are fully disclosed in the mitigated negative declaration there will be opportunities to have a full discussion regarding the impacts of the proposed fueling station, Target or other expansion projects at Alameda Towne Center if the matter comes to Council or the Planning Board; Council is being requested to review the adequacy of the mitigated negative declaration; she concurs with the Planning Board's findings that the mitigated negative declaration is adequate because she does not see anything that would need an additional analysisi the Planning Board considered the most conservative assumption for the Alameda Towne Center expansion and larger fueling station. Councilmember Matarrese concurred with Vice Mayor Tam; stated that he appreciates the detail that the Planning Services Manager outlined regarding the differences between the 2003 and 2006 numbers; it is important to review the potential of a worse case for impact of the entire project on the adjacent parcel. Councilmember Matarrese moved approval of upholding the Planning Board's decision to adopt the Initial Study and Negative Declaration for the Safeway gas station project. Vice Mayor Tam seconded the motion, which carried by the following voice vote: Ayes : louncilmembers Gilmore, Matarrese, Tam, and Mayor Johnson - 4. Noes: ouncilmember deHaan - 1. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA ( 07-269 - ) Michael John Torrey, Alameda, wished everyone a Happy Father': Day. (07-270) Former Councilmember Barbara Thomas, stated Councilmembers work a great number of hours; suggested that Councilmembers give themselves a raise or consider hiring a staff person; stated the City deserves to have officials who are able to concentrate and are well advised. (07-271) Bill Smith, Alameda, discussed waste and transit systems.… | CityCouncil/2007-06-05.pdf |
CityCouncil/2007-06-19.pdf,19 | CityCouncil | 2007-06-19 | 19 | The Recreation and Park Director responded the facility is open one Saturday per month for tours; stated special tours can be scheduled; the gardens are open on a daily basis. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan inquired whether the endowment goes up every year. The Recreation and Park Director responded the endowment depends on the performance of the trust. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan inquired whether the endowment is keeping up with expenses, to which the Recreation and Park Director responded in the negative. Mayor/Chair Johnson inquired what are trust provisions; further inquired whether the facility could revert back to the trust. The Recreation and Park Director responded the original will requires that the house be used as a museum stated the facility could revert back to the trust if said stipulation was not met. Mayor/Chair Johnson requested an Off-Agenda report on whether renegotiating the trust would make sense; stated it is important to protect the City and not to use taxpayer's money on an asset that could revert back to the trust. louncilmember/Boaro Member/Commissioner deHaan inquired whether other Meyers properties are tied to the same trust, to which the Recreation and Park Director responded in the affirmative. Mayor/Chair Johnson stated assets should be sold to support other trust properties if properties are doing poorly. Vice Mayor/Board Member/Commissioner Tam inquired whether there is a possibility of increasing hours of operation. The Recreation and Park Director responded the matter could be reviewed; stated staffing levels are a concern. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan inquired when the $2.2 million AP&T and $5 million ARRA General Fund loans are due; further inquired whether other loans are outstanding. The City Manager/Executive Director responded other loans are not outstanding; stated an Off-Agenda report would be provided on when referenced loans are due. Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Alameda 8 Reuse and Redevelopment Author… | CityCouncil/2007-06-19.pdf |
CityCouncil/2007-07-03.pdf,19 | CityCouncil | 2007-07-03 | 19 | MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY- - -JULY 3, 2007- - - -7:27 P.M. Chair Johnson convened the Special Meeting at 7:50 p.m. ROLL CALL - Present : Commissioners deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese, Tam, and Chair Johnson - 5. Absent : None CONSENT CALENDAR Commissioner Matarrese moved approval of the Consent Calendar. Commissioner Tam seconded the motion with the following correction to the minutes : Page 11: "Vice Mayor Tam inquired whether Board Members are required to make contributions over time. Commissioner Gilmore noted the following correction to the minutes : Page 15: "...the City needs to help the Museum with finding a site if fund raising is not enough to cover a projected rent increase. " On the call for the question, the motion carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. [Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk preceding the paragraph number. ] (*07-026) - Minutes of the Annual Community Improvement Commission (CIC) meeting and the Special Joint City Council, Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority and CIC meeting held on June 19, 2007. Approved. ( 07-027) - Recommendation to authorize the Executive Director to enter into Contracts with the Park Street Business Association in the amount of $108,020 and the West Alameda Business Association in the amount of $98,200 for Fiscal Year 2007-2008. Accepted. AGENDA ITEMS None ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Chair Johnson adjourned the Special Meeting at 7:55 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger Secretary, Community Improvement Commission Agenda for meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act. Special Meeting Community Improvement Commission July 3, 2007 | CityCouncil/2007-07-03.pdf |
CityCouncil/2007-07-17.pdf,19 | CityCouncil | 2007-07-17 | 19 | ADJOURNMENT (07-361) - There being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the Regular Meeting at 10:59 p.m. in a moment of silence in honor of Archie Waterbury and Tom Matthews. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger City Clerk The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act. Regular Meeting 19 Alameda City Council July 17, 2007 | CityCouncil/2007-07-17.pdf |
CityCouncil/2007-08-07.pdf,19 | CityCouncil | 2007-08-07 | 19 | officers now; inquired whether anything can be done regarding people feeding the meters in back of the Beauty College before the parking structure opens; stated customers are prevented from using the spaces. The Development Services Director responded students have a right to use the metersi stated efforts should be made to get the students to use the parking structure; other businesses' employees are feeding the meters also; enforcement is complicated. The Police Lieutenant stated the Police Department is authorized to have five part-time technicians; one technician is assigned to abandoned vehicle abatement; two additional part-time technicians would increase enforcement work; tires are marked and citations are issued at the Beauty College; Alameda's parking fines are lower than other cities. Chair Johnson inquired whether there is a rule for reissuing a ticket. The Police Lieutenant responded a ticket can be reissued within two hours in a two-hour parking zone. Chair Johnson stated the Beauty College students are not merchants and should not park at the Beauty College. Commissioner deHaan inquired what is the cost of a ticket. The Police Lieutenant responded tickets vary between $17 and $24. Commissioner deHaan stated Bank of America's parking fine is $45. The Police Lieutenant stated Alameda's parking citations are approximately one-third of what other cities charge. Commissioner Tam inquired what needs to be done to increase fines. The Police Lieutenant responded increasing fines requires Council action. Chair Johnson stated that parking structure fines should be lower to encourage use; street and surface parking fines should be increased. Commissioner Tam stated that the Development and Disposition Agreement (DDA) stipulates that the parking rates would be fifty Special Joint Meeting 3 Alameda City Council and Community Improvement Commission August 7, 2007 | CityCouncil/2007-08-07.pdf |
CityCouncil/2007-09-11.pdf,19 | CityCouncil | 2007-09-11 | 19 | Demographics: Household Income 8,000 7,000 6,000 5,000 4,000 3,000 2,000 1,000 0 Income Source: 2005 American Community Survey 7 Demographics: Geographic Mobility 90% 83% 80% Same residence as 70% 2004 Different residence, 60% same county 50% Different state 40% 30% Different county, same state 20% Abroad 9% 10% 4% 4% 0% 0% Source: 2005 American Community Survey 8 4 | CityCouncil/2007-09-11.pdf |
CityCouncil/2007-11-06.pdf,19 | CityCouncil | 2007-11-06 | 19 | MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL JOINT CITY COUNCIL AND HOUSING AUTHORITY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS (HABOC) MEETING TUESDAY - -NOVEMBER 6, 2007- -7:25 P.M. Mayor/Chair Johnson convened the Special Joint Meeting at 7:38 p.m. Commissioner Torrey led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL - Present : Councilmembers/Board Members deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese, Tam, Commissioner Torrey, and Mayor/Chail Johnson - 6. Absent : None. CONSENT CALENDAR Commissioner Torrey moved approval of the Consent Calendar. Commissioner Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 6. [Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk preceding the paragraph number. . ] ( *HABOC) Minutes of the Special Board of Commissioners meeting held September 4, 2007. Approved. AGENDA ITEMS (07-514) Recommendation to authorize the City Manager or her designee to accept a Deed of Release of Restrictions from the National Park Service for Neptune Park and a Declaration of Restrictions for a new City-owned parcel located near Towata Park and to enter into a license agreement with the Housing Authority to provide parking for Independence Plaza residents on an 11,575 square foot tract of land on Neptune Park. louncilmember/Commissioner Gilmore stated that she would recuse herself from the item because of the possible appearance of bias. Vice Mayor/Commissioner Tam inquired what is the parking need. The Housing Authority Executive Director responded the parking need is for the Independent Plaza Senior Complex as well as the Housing Authority office; stated the Senior Complex requires .75 parking spaces per unit; the Complex has 186 units; the office parking need has a formula and is also left to the judgment of the Planning Director; a total of 195 or 198 parking spaces are required; the proposed additional parking spaces would bring the total to 180 spaces ; Berkeley studies have shown that low-income senior complexes can get by with .6 parking spaces per unit; experience Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council and Housing 1 Authority Bo… | CityCouncil/2007-11-06.pdf |
CityCouncil/2007-11-20.pdf,19 | CityCouncil | 2007-11-20 | 19 | On the call for the question, the motion carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: louncilmembers Gilmore, Tam and Mayor Johnson - 3. Noes : Councilmembers deHaan and Matarrese - 2. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (Public Comment) (07-553) Musiy Rishin, Alameda, submitted handout ; requested a waiver on a parking ticket delinquent fee. Mayor Johnson requested staff to work with Mr. Rishin on the matter stated courts allow individuals to perform community service in order to reduce fines. (07-554) Jason Ross, submitted handout discussed foreclosures. (07-555) Diana Wong urged Council to petition Congress to freeze foreclosures. (07-556) Joelle Wright, Larouche Political Action Commission, discussed foreclosures and the banking crises; urged Council to reflect on families who could be losing their homes this holiday season. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS (07-557) Vice Mayor Tam stated that she attended the League of California East Bay Division Meeting on November 15; stated that Alameda is one of the two cities where home appreciation values went up; the median price for a home in Alameda is approximately $725,000; 80% to 85% of loans in Alameda are conventional loans; the foreclosures within the City have been steady; the volume of transactions has declined. Councilmember Matarrese inquired whether the League presentation could be provided in writing. Mayor Johnson suggested a written report be requested. (07-558) Councilmember deHaan stated there were concerns on the future direction on the Carnegie Library with regard to centralizing the City's operation; he would like to place the matter on an agenda Mayor Johnson stated that an analysis of other facilities is a good idea. Councilmember Gilmore stated that she thought she heard that the Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 19 November 20, 2007 | CityCouncil/2007-11-20.pdf |
CityCouncil/2007-12-04.pdf,19 | CityCouncil | 2007-12-04 | 19 | The Development Services Director responded there is approximately $106,000 left in contingency. Commissioner Tam inquired whether staff is requesting $200,000 on top of the loan, to which the Development Services Director responded in the negative. Commissioner Matarrese inquired whether the $300,000 loan is coming from undesignated bond money, to which the Development Services Director responded in the affirmative. On the call for the question, the motion carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. (*07-053 CIC) Recommendation to accept the Annual Report and authorize transmittal to the State Controller's Office and the City Council. Accepted. (*07-573 CC/*07-054 CIC) Recommendation to accept transmittal of the: 1) Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) for Fiscal Year ended June 30, 2007; 2) Auditor's Agreed Upon Procedures Report on compliance with Vehicle Code Section 40200. 3 Parking Citation Processing; 3) Agreed Upon Procedures Report on compliance with the Proposition 111 21005-06 Appropriations Limit Increment; 4) Police and Fire Retirement System Pension Plans 1079 and 1092 Audit Report for Fiscal Year ended June 30, 2007; 5) Metropolitan Transportation Commission Grant Programs Financial Statements for Year ended June 30, 2007; 6) Community Improvement Commission Basic Component Unit Financial Statements for the Year ended June 30, 2007; and 7) Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority Basic Component Unit Financial Statements for the Year ended June 30, 2007. Accepted. AGENDA ITEMS (07-574CC/07-055CIC) Public Hearing to consider approval of a first addendum to the Alameda Landing Mixed-use Development Project Supplemental Environmental Impact Report, first amendment to the Development Agreement, and first amendment to the Disposition and Development Agreement for the Alameda Landing Mixed Use Project to modify the Public Waterfront Promenade; 07-574A CC) Resolution No. 14162, "Approving and Authorizing Execution of an Amendment of the Disposition and Development Agreement (Alameda Landing Mixed Use Pr… | CityCouncil/2007-12-04.pdf |
CityCouncil/2008-01-15.pdf,19 | CityCouncil | 2008-01-15 | 19 | service than to have the Monarch Street portion; the bus service needs to be on time. Councilmember deHaan stated the bus line brings retail segments together. Councilmember Matarrese amended the motion to move approval of recommendations 1, 2, 3, 5, and 6. Councilmember deHaan seconded the motion. Under discussion Councilmember Matarrese directed staff to find the balance of money needed to satisfy Shoreline Drive bus stops that are on sand. Mayor Johnson inquired whether Councilmember Matarrese wanted to include addressing the issue that the Transportation Commission raised regarding traffic calming speed reduction. Councilmember Matarrese stated said issue could be a separate motion. Councilmember Gilmore stated the motion is to have AC Transit reroute from Monarch Street to Lexington Street, provide service at Encinal High School during peak periods does not include #4, which is implementing new bus stops on Otis Drive, the bus will run down Otis Drive as usual; staff is directed to find money for Shoreline Drive bus stop improvements; the Whitehall Place and Willow Street bus stops will continue to be a priority. Vice Mayor Tam inquired whether the matter still has to go to AC Transit for evaluation, regardless of Council's decision. Mr. Bruzzone responded the evaluation would be a formality stated the earliest date for a possible route change is June. On the call for the question, the motion carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Councilmembers deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese, Mayor Johnson - 4. Noes: Vice Mayor Tam - 1. Vice Mayor Tam stated that the proposal is not fiscally responsible. Councilmember Gilmore stated that staff has been directed to find the money for bus stop improvements; Council may not like any of the proposals; the bus would not run along Shoreline Drive if improvements cannot be made; a decision would need to be made to Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 19 January 15, 2008 | CityCouncil/2008-01-15.pdf |
CityCouncil/2008-02-19.pdf,19 | CityCouncil | 2008-02-19 | 19 | Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Matarrese stated deferment of any capital improvement project should be reviewed very carefully from a policy standpoint because continued deterioration causes costs to increase. Mayor/Chair Johnson stated there is not a real reserve because of the millions of dollars in public safety retirement health benefit obligations, and deferred street, sidewalk, park, and building maintenance; the money could be spent on very critical City needs in a second and is not fun money. Councilmember/BoardMember/Commissioner deHaan requested background on the reserves accumulation and the erosion over the last two to three years. The Finance Director stated the reserve levels were adopted and codified in a 1997 document addressing financial policies; in 1989, a motion adopted that reserves be 25% of operating expenditures for economic uncertainties; the fund balance was approximately 27% in 2004-2005; portions have been used to fund: 1) deferred street, sidewalk, and tree maintenance; 2) playing fields; and 3) the Beltline litigation; a small portion of expenditure savings were contributed at the end of last year. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan inquired what is the current reserve level. The Finance Director responded the forecast indicates the reserve will be at 17% at the end of the fiscal year. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan stated the concern is how much of the reserve is liquid. The Finance Director responded $5.9 million of the $15 million is loaned out to the Alameda Public Improvement Corporation, Community Improvement Commission, and Alameda Power and Telecom, and $400,00 has been designated for fire station replacement. Councilmember/Boaro Member/Commissioner deHaan inquired what is the amount of deferred street maintenance; stated the estimate was approximately $31 million at one time. The Public Works Director responded $12 million is identified for street resurfacing $100 million is identified for all of the various infrastructures. Special Joint… | CityCouncil/2008-02-19.pdf |
CityCouncil/2008-03-18.pdf,19 | CityCouncil | 2008-03-18 | 19 | Under negotiation Price and terms. Following the Closed Session, the Special Joint Meeting was reconvened and Mayor Johnson announced that Council and the Public Utilities Board received a briefing from Real Property Negotiators; no action was taken. Adjournment There being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the Special Meeting at 6:55 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger City Clerk The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act. Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council and Public Utilities Board March 18, 2008 | CityCouncil/2008-03-18.pdf |
CityCouncil/2008-04-15.pdf,19 | CityCouncil | 2008-04-15 | 19 | Commissioner Matarrese inquired what the money would be spent on if left in the Planning Department. The Development Services Director responded other studies i stated the fund is sequestered and created by the Planning Department through the fee collection process. Commissioner Matarrese stated questions need to be asked during the budget processi something will not be done if the money is used for watercolors. The City Manager stated the funds are specified for this type of work; money would not be taken away from another type of study. Commissioner Matarrese stated that explanations are needed; money equals services. Commissioner deHaan inquired where the initial $75,000 came from, to which the Development Services Director responded a line item in the CIC budget for planning studies. Commissioner deHaan inquired why the $6,500 would not come out of the $75,000. The Development Services Director responded the Planning Department assisted with money from their budget; stated the CIC did not have the funds. Commissioner Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. AGENDA ITEMS None. ADJOURNMEN'T There being no further business, Mayor/Chair Johnson adjourned the Special Joint Meeting at 8:15 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger City Clerk Secretary, CIC The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council and 19 Community Improvement Commission April 15, 2008 | CityCouncil/2008-04-15.pdf |
CityCouncil/2008-05-06.pdf,19 | CityCouncil | 2008-05-06 | 19 | (08-201) Bill Smith, Alameda, discussed global wealth. COUNCIL REFERRALS None. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS (08-202) Consideration of Water Emergency Transportation Authority Community Advisory Committee appointment. Mayor Johnson suggested that Councilmember Gilmore be appointed to the Committee and Councilmember deHaan serve as the alternate. Councilmember Matarrese moved approval of appointing Councilmember Gilmore as the City's representative and Councilmember deHaan as the alternate. Vice Mayor Tam seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. (08 -203 - ) Consideration of Mayor's nomination for appointment to the Planning Board. Mayor Johnson nominated Arthur A. Autorino. (08-204) Councilmember Gilmore stated that she attended the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) Spring General Assembly on April 24; discussions included focused, priority development areas; speakers explained that change should not be confused with growth because change does not always equal growth; change can happen without growth; growth should be discussed in terms of quality of life, rather than number of businesses; communities should know that change or growth may require trade offs. (08-205) Vice Mayor Tam stated that she attended the April 2 Environmental Policy Committee for the League of California Cities; the League is converging on supporting legislation that would extend universal waste disposal responsibility to the original producer so that cities and counties are not left with responsibility and costs for disposal alternatives. the diversion rate was also discussed; Alameda has an exceptional record; stated that she attended the League of California Cities Legislative Action Day on April 16; the budget overshadowed the conversation; Finance Director Michael Genest gave his prospective on the grim, Statewide budget; Mr. Genest stated that the Vehicle License Fee tax cut is the most significant cause of State budget problems ; a balanced budget is not anticipated this summer stated that she Regular Meeting… | CityCouncil/2008-05-06.pdf |
CityCouncil/2008-06-03.pdf,19 | CityCouncil | 2008-06-03 | 19 | Councilmember/Commissioner Gilmore inquired when Catellus would acquire the UP right-of-way; further inquired where Catellus is in terms of deciding whether or not to proceed. Mr. Barry responded Catellus negotiated a term sheet with UP; stated Catellus is in negotiations on a draft purchase and sale agreement he hopes to conclude negotiations this month; a formal due diligence effort needs to be done and should be concluded within sixty days; Catellus is running a parallel path of negotiations with the retailers. Vice Mayor/Commissioner Tam acknowledged the help of former Mayor Bill Withrow and General Counsel of the Peralta Community College District provided in negotiating the four-way agreement; stated that significant expenditures were made, such as the removal of the Faithful; funds were expended to fix some major water leaks; the City helped redesign the waterfront when it was determined that it was not financially feasible to seismically retrofit the area because of pier decay; stated State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) funds must be requested by February 2009 in order to go before the California Transportation Commission (CTC) ; inquired what is the level of competition and availability for said funding. The Base Reuse and Community Development Manager responded assurances have been given that STIP allocations would not be impacted by the State budget. The City Engineer stated a lot of the projects are large prioritization is based upon how many people are impacted by the project, how much safety will be enhanced, and where the projects are in the planning process. Mayor/Chair Johnson stated the question is whether the money is in jeopardy money will be in serious jeopardy if the City does not move forward with the project. The Base Reuse and Community Development Manager stated larger projects will start to come on line as the Fiscal Year progresses opportunities are maximized by getting in before the other projects. Councilmember/Commissioner Gilmore inquired whether the City would get the … | CityCouncil/2008-06-03.pdf |
CityCouncil/2008-06-17.pdf,19 | CityCouncil | 2008-06-17 | 19 | increasing. Vice Mayor Tam stated that complete cost recovery is recommended for some areas, but no others; there seems to be some disparity in which services are more valuable. Councilmember Matarrese stated small businesses provide sales tax; CPI is recommended instead of cost recovery because small businesses are taking on the extra burden of property tax; businesses need to be kept alive. Vice Mayor Tam stated that she is in support of giving small businesses a break; the City seems to be subsidizing the Golf Course. Councilmember Gilmore stated Council had previous discussions regarding only being able to raise fees so high and get same number of players. Mayor Johnson stated the City is not subsidizing the Golf Course now; raising golf fees would result in less revenue; golf fees would not be frozen. Councilmember Matarrese stated the Golf Commission would be discussing the Golf Master Plan soon; looking at golf fees today would be premature. On the call for the question, the motion carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. Mayor Johnson stated a policy is needed regarding not having the General Fund subsidize the Golf Course. (ARRA) Resolution No. 42, "Approving and Adopting the Operating Budget and Appropriating Certain Moneys for the Expenditures Provided in Fiscal Year 2008-09. " Adopted (08-36CIC) Resolution No. 08-157, "Approving and Adopting the Operating Budget and Appropriating Certain Moneys for the Expenditures Provided in Fiscal Year 2008-09. " Adopted (08-277D CC) Resolution No. 14225, "Approving and Adopting the Operating Budget and Capital Improvements and Appropriating Certain Moneys for the Expenditures Provided in Fiscal Year 2008-09 and Establishing an Other Post Employment Benefit (OPEB) Plan." Adopted; Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Alameda Public Financing Authority, Alameda Reuse and 9 Redevelopment Authority, and Community Improvement Commission June 17, 2008 | CityCouncil/2008-06-17.pdf |
CityCouncil/2008-07-01.pdf,19 | CityCouncil | 2008-07-01 | 19 | issue a RFP for an interim operator for maintenance as well as operations until a RFP is issued for a long-term operator, and that the community would be engaged regarding other options stated she was never in favor of an open ended RFP because a lot of professionals would think responding would be a waste of time if the community did not know what they wanted; bracketing the parameters would be helpful. Councilmember deHaan stated the banquet facility should be a long- term option. Councilmember Gilmore stated an operator would want to stabilize infrastructure before considering amenities. Mayor Johnson stated golfers think that it is more important to address Golf Course issues first before spending money on a banquet facility. Ms. Sullwold stated tournament business cannot be encouraged without a banquet facility; tournament business is the highest revenue stream at golf courses higher rates are charged; a banquet facility is more urgent than it seems; the Golf Commission has not been given any information on interim management options. Mayor Johnson stated there are a number of ways to address a banquet facility. Ms. Sullwold stated the operational review has a list of expenses on what to do the first year, which includes building a banquet facility, improving the driving range, and improving the south and north courses. Councilmember Matarrese stated on-site management is key an individual would be contracted to manage the Golf Course on an interim basis; he would like the RFP to include both a hybrid with the City contracting the management operation and a fully contracted operation. Councilmember Gilmore inquired whether an individual would be hired to run the Golf Course full time in the interim, and the City would still be responsible for maintenance and operating costs. louncilmember Matarrese responded the maintenance and operating costs are already in place; a person would be brought in on a commission basis salary would depend on how many rounds are generated. Mayor Johnson stated community feedback … | CityCouncil/2008-07-01.pdf |
CityCouncil/2008-07-15.pdf,19 | CityCouncil | 2008-07-15 | 19 | MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL JOINT CITY COUNCIL AND PUBLIC UTILITIES BOARD (PUB) MEETING TUESDAY- - -JULY 15, 2008- - -6:45 P.M. Mayor Johnson convened the Special Joint Meeting at 7:05 p.m. ROLL CALL - Present : Councilmembers deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese, Tam, and Mayor Johnson; Board Members Hamm, Holmes, Kurita, McCahan, and McCormick - 10. Note: Board Member Hamm was present via teleconference from Royal Meridien Hotel, Sahar Airport Road, Andheri East, Mumbai, 400099, India. Absent : None. The Special Joint Meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider: (08-301) Conference with Legal Counsel - Existing Litigation (54956.9 ) ; Name of Case: Vectren Communications Services, Inc. V. City of Alameda. Following the Closed Session, the Special Joint Meeting was reconvened and Mayor Johnson announced that Council and the PUB received a briefing from Legal Counsel regarding the status of the litigation; Council and the PUB authorized expenditure of defense costs. 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 Joint Meeting Alameda City Council and Public Utilities Board July 15, 2008 | CityCouncil/2008-07-15.pdf |
CityCouncil/2008-08-05.pdf,19 | CityCouncil | 2008-08-05 | 19 | Spencer, Alameda. (08-320 CC/08-4 CIC) Following Gerry Torres's comments, Councilmember/Commission Matarrese moved approval of continuing the meeting past midnight. Councilmember/Commissioner deHaan seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 4. Absent : Councilmember / Commissioner Gilmore - 1. ] There being no further speakers, Mayor/Chair Johnson closed the public comment period. Councilmember/Commissioner deHaan stated the City set a 60% homeownership goal; the recommendation tonight is out of character; the Planning Board and Economic Development Commission (EDC) have always wanted to have a balanced community; that he would support keeping the inclusionary housing within the development. Councilmember/Commissioner Matarrese stated there are two goals: 1) Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council and Community Improvement Commission 6 August 5, 2008 | CityCouncil/2008-08-05.pdf |
CityCouncil/2008-08-19.pdf,19 | CityCouncil | 2008-08-19 | 19 | (08340CC/ARRA/08-46CIC) Recommendation to concur with the Non- - Binding Summary of Terms and Conditions for a transfer of the Exclusive Negotiation Agreement with SCC Alameda Point LLC to a New Entity with D.E. Shaw or transfer of an Ownership Interest in the SCC Alameda Point LLC to D.E. Shaw; and 08-340A CC/ARRA/08-46A CIC) Recommendation to authorize the City Manager/Executive Director to negotiate a Second Amendment to the Exclusive Negotiation Agreement with SCC Alameda Point LLC . The Base Reuse and Community Development Manager gave a brief presentation. Mayor/Chair Johnson opened the public portion of the meeting. Proponents (In favor of the staff recommendation) : Michael Krueger, Alameda Helen Sause, Housing Opportunities Make Economic Sense; Doug Biggs, Alameda Point Collaborative. Neutral : Richard Bangert, Alameda; Elizabeth Krase, Alameda. There being no further speakers, Mayor/Chair Johnson closed the public portion of the hearing. Mayor/Chair Johnson stated that a financial partner is being considered density and transportation issues are not relevant tonight. Vice Mayor/Board Member/Commissioner Tam requested clarification of the confidentiality of the term sheet. The City Attorney stated the term sheet is a confidential real property document and is being negotiated; discussing the document in Closed Session is appropriate. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Matarrese inquired whether the term sheet would be disclosed at some point. The City Attorney responded the term sheet would be disclosed once the project is finalized. Vice Mayor/Board Member/Commissioner Tam stated everyone is encouraged that the Master Developer is able to secure a funding partner in difficult economic times; the Master Developer is willing to pay for the planning process as well as the $108. 5 million conveyance cost; written assurance is being sought to Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Alameda 2 Reuse and Redevelopment Authority, and Community Improvement Commission August 19, 2008 | CityCouncil/2008-08-19.pdf |
CityCouncil/2008-09-16.pdf,19 | CityCouncil | 2008-09-16 | 19 | significant items; most meetings would not have City Manager reports. The City Manager suggested that the item be placed before regular agenda items. Councilmember Matarrese moved adoption of the resolution, with moving City Manager Communications before Agenda items. Councilmember deHaan seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS (08-405 - ) Consideration of Mayor's nominations for appointment to the Economic Development Commission and Youth Advisory Commission. Mayor Johnson nominated Harry Dahlberg and Michael J. Schmitz for reappointment to the Economic Development Commission and continued nominations for remaining vacancies; nominated Maggie Mei for appointment to the Youth Commission; continued nominations for remaining vacancies. (08-406) - Councilmember deHaan stated there would be a review of the conceptual portion for the Alameda Point project September 19, 2008; he was hoping that the matter would come back to Council. The Assistant City Manager stated many meetings have been held with committees; a joint meeting is being scheduled with the Transportation Commission and Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority for acceptance of the Master Plan prior to November. Councilmember deHaan inquired whether the matter would be reviewed by anyone else. The Assistant City Manager responded the matter would be going to the Recreation and Park Commission, Planning Board, etc. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the Regular Meeting at 1:05 a.m. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger City Clerk Agenda for meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 19 September 16, 2008 | CityCouncil/2008-09-16.pdf |
CityCouncil/2008-10-07.pdf,19 | CityCouncil | 2008-10-07 | 19 | MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL JOINT CITY COUNCIL, ALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMEN'T AUTHORITY (ARRA) AND COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION (CIC) MEETING TUESDAY- - - -OCTOBER 7, 2008- -6:00 P.M. Mayor/Chair Johnson convened the Special Joint Meeting at 6:10 p.m. ROLL CALL - Present : Counci ilmembers / Board Members / Commissioners deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese, Tam, and Mayor/Chair Johnson - 5. Absent : None. The Special Meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider : (08-411 - CC) Conference with Labor Negotiators; Agency Negotiators : Craig Jory and Human Resources Director; Employee Organizations : All Bargaining Units. (08-412 CC / ARRA / 08-50 CIC) Conference with Real Property Negotiators; Property: Alameda Point; Negotiating parties : City Council, ARRA, CIC, and SunCal; Under negotiation: Price and terms. Following the Closed Session, the Special Meeting was reconvened and Mayor/Chail Johnson announced that regarding Labor, the Labor Negotiator gave an update on Alameda City Employee Association (ACEA) International Association of Fire Fighters (IAFF) and Alameda Police Officers Association (APOA) negotiations, and Council provided instruction; regarding Real Property, the Council, CIC, and ARRA were provided with a briefing on negotiations regarding Alameda Point; no action was taken. Adjournment There being no further business, Mayor/Chair Johnson adjourned the Special Joint Meeting at 7:20 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, Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority, and Community Improvement Commission October 7, 2008 | CityCouncil/2008-10-07.pdf |
CityCouncil/2008-10-21.pdf,19 | CityCouncil | 2008-10-21 | 19 | dollars, to which the Interim Finance Director responded in the affirmative. Mayor/Chair Johnson stated the amount is too high. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan inquired how much was added last year, to which the Interim Finance Director responded $400,000 Mayor/Chair Johnson stated the amount in the fund increased last year when 4% to 5% cuts were made in department budgets; the matter should be reviewed. The Interim Finance Director stated staff would provide Council with information on what auditors would expect. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Gilmore inquired whether the $1 million sales tax overpayment would come from the General Fund. The Interim Finance Director responded in the affirmative; stated the amount would not be included in the last Fiscal Year; provided background information on the State Board of Equalization's claim that the City was overpaid $1. 1 million in sales tax. Mayor/Chair Johnson inquired about the ambulance service bill from the County. The City Manager responded the City returned the bill to the County because the City does not have a Contract. Mayor/Chair Johnson inquired the amount, to which the City Manager responded over $1 million. Mayor/Chai Johnson inquired what the bill is for. The City Manager responded the bill is for the County providing regulation for ambulance services; stated the City pays the amount from the General Fund because the City does not assess residents for the service; the City has been negotiating with the County since 2005. Mayor/Chair Johnson stated the City Fire Department provided back up to American Medical Response (AMR) approximately 600 times; the number of times AMR backed up the City is much, much less; the City should send the County a bill for the disproportionate amount of Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Alameda Reuse and 2 Redevelopment Authority, and Community Improvement Commission October 21, 2008 | CityCouncil/2008-10-21.pdf |
CityCouncil/2008-11-06.pdf,19 | CityCouncil | 2008-11-06 | 19 | Under discussion, Councilmember Matarrese stated marijuana has not been found to be safe and affective by the Federal Drug Administration; all aspects need to be reviewed before the matter is sanctioned or prohibited. Councilmember Gilmore stated the City is in the fortunate position of not being the first community to address the issue; reviewing other community experiences is important; access and safety issues need to be addressed. Councilmember deHaan stated that he echoes the same concernsi lessons need to be learned from mechanisms used by other communities. On the call for the question, the motion carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the Special Meeting at 7:56 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 November 6, 2008 | CityCouncil/2008-11-06.pdf |
CityCouncil/2008-12-02.pdf,19 | CityCouncil | 2008-12-02 | 19 | Councilmember deHaan stated a lot of General Fund staffing has a revenue stream; the Fire Department supports the State for wild fires; that he hopes that the City gets reimbursed for overtime. Mayor Johnson stated the City gets some reimbursement inquired whether policies are compiled in one area. The City Clerk responded the word "policies" has not always been used in the past; the General Fund balance policy has been captured; policies have been traced back to the mid 1990' S. Regular Meeting 19 Alameda City Council December 2, 2008 | CityCouncil/2008-12-02.pdf |
CityCouncil/2009-01-06.pdf,19 | CityCouncil | 2009-01-06 | 19 | Councilmember Gilmore stated one policy is that operating expenses and revenues should match; dipping into the reserve would be using one time money to cover on going expenses. Mayor Johnson stated everyone is concerned next year will be worse. Councilmember Gilmore stated the City does not know what the State is going to do. Mayor Johnson stated taking money out of reserve to fund something for a short period of time will not help next year, which is the sustainability issue in the budget policies the City has to live within its means. Councilmember Gilmore stated the three revenue reports that will be presented in February are needed in order to have an informed discussion about the amount of money the City has to spend. Mayor Johnson inquired whether staff is confident about the $700,000 figure. The Interim Finance Director responded the amount could be more, but probably not significantly more; staff is trying to do internal manipulations to prevent drastic cuts; positions are not being eliminated; things are not being unfunded; the budget is very tight and staff is working very hard not to use one dime out of the reserves this year knowing that the City faces a larger issue in the future; the dynamic for Fiscal Year 2009-10 changes if pre- funding OPEB has to be included in Police and Fire budgets. Councilmember Gilmore inquired whether the City would be stuck with its operating costs and have to look to the fund balance if the State decides to do the triple flip and issues an I.O.U. to the City. The Interim Finance Director responded in the affirmative. stated the fund balance would set the City into an equilibrium; service levels would be retained while waiting for cash to come from the State; cash poor cities would end up cutting drastically. Councilmember Gilmore stated the fund balance has to be taken care of until the unknown from the State becomes known; the City does not have a say and just has to deal with the State's decision. The Interim Finance Director stated the State punted the problem from la… | CityCouncil/2009-01-06.pdf |
CityCouncil/2009-02-03.pdf,19 | CityCouncil | 2009-02-03 | 19 | (09-058) Domenick Weaver, Alameda Firefighters, discussed brownouts stated thirteen calls have been impacted with delayed responses the rescue boat was placed out of service in May 2008 because of mechanical issues the fire boat was placed out of service in November 2008; direction has been given to leave the boats in the water, which creates a deception that the Fire Department is not being picked on and that the boats are still in service; service levels are being reduced in the community. (09-059) Bill Klump, Alameda Firefighters Local 689, discussed overtime costs versus costs for full time Fire Department staff. COUNCIL REFERRALS None. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS (09-060 - ) Mayor Johnson stated that she attended the Conference of Mayors mid January the economic stimulus package and energy have become very popular topics; that she hopes solar energy will become an option for Alameda. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the Regular Meeting at 12:10 a.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 19 February 3, 2009 | CityCouncil/2009-02-03.pdf |
CityCouncil/2009-02-07.pdf,19 | CityCouncil | 2009-02-07 | 19 | done due diligence to get to true numbers; the question is what needs to be done now. Councilmember Matarrese stated building a budget starting with the fixed costs makes sense. Mayor Johnson inquired whether the negative amounts are due to not charging enough or departments not paying. The Interim Finance Director responded the issue is a system issue, not departmental; funds are taken out of department budgets. Mayor Johnson inquired whether the amount is from the current fiscal year. The Interim Finance Director responded in the negative; stated the amount has been reached over many years; $2.6 million is too much to absorb. Mayor Johnson requested an explanation of the significance of having a negative in the workers' compensation fund. The Interim Finance Director stated workers' compensation premiums and claims are being paid from other funds. The City Attorney inquired how much of the workers' compensation deficit is a build up over time from not charging departments and how much is from choosing not to backfill from the account used to pay claims. The Interim Finance Director responded both; stated it is not uncommon for an ISF to run negative because a claim that was estimated to cost $250,00 might end up costing $500,000; the additional $250,000 should be factored in the next year and the department would have to pay an increased rate. the fund should be built up to create a reserve. Mayor Johnson inquired whether claim payment comes from the General Fund and is reimbursed. The Interim Finance Director responded in the negative; stated a transfer is not made between the General Fund and the ISF; the claim is paid and adds to the cumulative negative. Mayor Johnson inquired where does the money come from. The Interim Finance Director responded the cash comes from the City's cash account and is negative cash. Special Meeting Alameda City Council 19 February 7, 2009 | CityCouncil/2009-02-07.pdf |
CityCouncil/2009-03-03.pdf,19 | CityCouncil | 2009-03-03 | 19 | MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY - -MARCH 3, 2009-7:31 P.M. Chair Johnson convened the Special Meeting at 11:47 p.m. ROLL CALL - Present : Commissioners deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese, Tam, and Chair Johnson - 5. Absent : None. CONSENT CALENDAR Chair Johnson announced that the Minutes [paragraph no. 09-07] were pulled from the Consent Calendar for discussion. Commissioner deHaan moved approval of the remainder of the Consent Calendar. 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. . ] (09-07) Minutes of the Special Joint Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority and CIC Meeting held on February 3, 2009. Commissioner Gilmore stated that she does not recall that the Façade Grant Program has any money; inquired whether the $800,000 would be split between water repairs and electrical upgrades. The Development Services Director responded $150,000 would go towards water repairsi $200,000 would be used from interest earnings from the 2003 Merged Bond to pay a portion of the $450,000 in water repairs $200,000 would be taken from the Fleet Industrial Supply Center revenue and transferred to the Façade Grant Program; the staff report incorrectly noted $750,000 instead of $800,000. (*09-08) Resolution No. 08-158, "Referring the Proposed Ninth Amendment to the Community Improvement Plan for the Business and Waterfront Community Improvement Project and the Proposed Seventh Amendment to the Community Improvement Plan for the West End Community Improvement Project to the Planning Board for Report and Recommendation and to the Economic Development Commission for Review and Consideration. Adopted. AGENDA ITEM (09-09) Update on the Alameda Landing Project and presentation by Catellus. Special Meeting Community Improvement Commission 1 March 3, 2009 | CityCouncil/2009-03-03.pdf |
CityCouncil/2009-03-17.pdf,19 | CityCouncil | 2009-03-17 | 19 | Mayor/Chair Johnson inquired what would happen if timelines are not met, to which the Base Reuse and Community Development Manager responded the $4 million would be forfeited. Mayor/Chair Johnson inquired whether staff is watching to see whether the project would qualify for stimulus funding, to which the Base Reuse and Community Development Manager responded in the affirmative. Councilmember/Commissioner Matarrese inquired 1) whether the City would be paid back the $3 million in Sewer Fund money if stimulus funding were received; 2) what would happen if Catellus does not move forward; and 3) whether the City would only receive $2 million back from Catellus or whether the $2 million is the down payment on the obligation. The Base Reuse and Community Development Manager responded the City would receive $2.2 million for the Stargell Avenue project if Catellus moved forward with Target only; stated Catellus would be 100% responsible for the local match if the rest of the project moves forward; that she is not sure whether the City would be able to be reimbursed with stimulus funding. Councilmember/Commissioner Matarrese inquired whether the City could lose $3 million, which is the delta between the estimate and the actual bid, in addition to the $4 million, to which the Base Reuse and Community Development Manager responded in the affirmative. Mayor/Chair Johnson inquired whether thought should be given to phasing the project. The Interim Finance Director responded the Stargell Avenue project would not qualify for stimulus funding; stated the federal government is talking about a second, third, and fourth recovery; the City needs to look to the State because the State may be offering some incentives for ready projects; the City would draw down on the loan amount based on actual needs; not having some opportunity to repay the Sewer Fund in the next five years is less than 3% Vice Mayor/Commissioner deHaan inquired how much money is in the Sewer Fund. The Interim Finance Director responded the true cash fund balance i… | CityCouncil/2009-03-17.pdf |
CityCouncil/2009-05-19.pdf,19 | CityCouncil | 2009-05-19 | 19 | MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL JOINT CITY COUNCIL, ALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (ARRA) AND COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION (CIC) MEETING TUESDAY- - -MAY 19, 2009- -6:45 P.M. Mayor/Chair Johnson convened the Special Meeting at 6:50 p.m. ROLL CALL - Present : Councilmembers/Board Members/Commissioners deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese, Tam, and Mayor/Chair Johnson - 5. Absent : None. Public Comment : Jean Sweeney, Alameda, stated that development agreements are enforceable by law even if the development does not materialize as long as there is public benefit; SunCal has already sold their interest to D. E. Shaw; the Alameda Point Master Plan has twenty pages of parks that may or not happen and contains big promises about saving the historic buildings; the SunCal initiative has a different story; demolishing three hundred buildings to make way for six thousand homes on toxic land in a flood plain; to rip off Alameda citizens is unconscionable. The Special Meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider: (09-192 CC/ARRA/09-17 CIC) Conference with Real Property Negotiators (54956.8) i Property: Alameda Point Negotiating parties : City Council / AARRA / CIC / SunCal; Under negotiations : Price and terms. Following the Closed Session, the Special Meeting was reconvened and Mayor/Chair Johnson announced that the City Council, ARRA, and CIC received a briefing on the status of negotiations with SunCal; no action was taken. Adjournment There being no further business, the Special Joint meeting was adjourned at 7:40 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lana Stoker, Acting City Clerk Acting Secretary, CIC The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 19 May 19, 2009 | CityCouncil/2009-05-19.pdf |
CityCouncil/2009-06-02.pdf,19 | CityCouncil | 2009-06-02 | 19 | through June 30 of this year; the estimate for the City could increase 3% or 4% above the estimated 2% to 6%. ADJOURNMEN'T 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 19 June 2, 2009 | CityCouncil/2009-06-02.pdf |
CityCouncil/2009-06-16.pdf,19 | CityCouncil | 2009-06-16 | 19 | (09-235CC/ARRA/09-22CIC City Council Resolution No. 14341, ARRA Resolution No. 44, and CIC Resolution No. 09-160, "Approving Interim Expenditures Prior to Adoption of the Operating and Capital Improvement Budget for Fiscal Year 2009-2010 for the City of Alameda, the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority, and the Community Improvement Commission. Vice Mayor/Authority Member/Commissioner deHaan moved adoption of the resolutions. Councilmember/Authorit Member/Commissioner Matarrese 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 7:52 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 Community Improvement Commission June 16, 2009 | CityCouncil/2009-06-16.pdf |
CityCouncil/2009-08-03.pdf,19 | CityCouncil | 2009-08-03 | 19 | The Interim City Manager continued the presentation. Councilmember/Authority Member/Commissioner Gilmore inquired how the depreciation allocation is calculated for the equipment maintenance reserve. The Interim City Manager responded the purchase price is depreciated; stated that she would find out whether depreciation of an inflated number would be allowed. Councilmember/Authority Member/Commissioner Gilmore stated that she is afraid that the depreciation would be short of actual money needed. Mayor/Chair Johnson inquired whether plans for keeping up with street and sidewalk maintenance is being reviewed. The Public Works Director responded more money is available for resurfacing this year because of ARRA (American Recovery and Reinvestment Act) funds stated $4.2 million is budgeted this fiscal year; $350,000 is budgeted for sidewalks; $550,000 should be budgeted; the City is receiving less Measure B money. Mayor/Chair Johnson stated new development should be responsible for putting sidewalks on both sides of the street. The Public Works Director stated developers are now required to maintain public infrastructure. louncilmember/Authority Member/Commissioner Matarrese stated an eye should be kept on the health of the sewer system to ensure that the City does not cost itself out down the road; the storm water runoff and lagoon system are high price tag items. The Public Works Director stated lagoon project funds come from the Urban Runoff Fund, which is separate from the Sewer Fund; master plans are being developed for the Urban Runoff and Sewer projects staff is very close to receiving ARRA funding for the lagoon seawalls. Councilmember/Authority Member/Commissioner Gilmore inquired whether mapping has been completed for sewers, to which the Public Works Director responded mapping is in Phase 2. louncilmember/Authority Member/Commissioner Gilmore clarified Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Agency, and Community Improvement Commission August 3, 2009 | CityCouncil/2009-08-03.pdf |
CityCouncil/2009-10-20.pdf,19 | CityCouncil | 2009-10-20 | 19 | MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL JOINT CITY COUNCIL, ALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (ARRA) AND COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION (CIC) MEETING TUESDAY- - -OCTOBER 20, 2009- - -7:31 P.M. Mayor/Chair Johnson convened the Special Joint Meeting at 9:58 p.m. ROLL CALL - Present : Councilmembers / Authority Members / Commissioners deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese, Tam, and Mayor/Chair Johnson - 5. Absent : None. CONSENT CALENDAR Mayor/Chair Johnson announced that the Recommendation to Authorize the Interim Executive Director to Sign a Letter of Agreement [paragraph no. 09-40 CIC] and the Recommendation to Authorize the Interim Executive Director to Enter into a Contract in the Amount of $40,000 [paragraph no. 09-43 CIC] were removed from the Consent Calendar for discussion. louncilmember/Authority Member/Commissioner Tam moved approval of the remainder of the Consent Calendar. Councilmember/Authority Member/Commissioner Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. [Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk preceding the paragraph number. . ] (*09-421 CC/*09-39 CIC) Minutes of the Special Joint City Council and Community Improvement Commission Meeting held on October 6, 2009. Approved. (09-40 CIC) Recommendation to Authorize the Interim Executive Director to Sign a Letter of Agreement in the Amount of $11,400 with the Greater Alameda Business Association for Fiscal Year 2009- 2010. The Economic Development Director gave a brief presentation. Commissioner Matarrese inquired whether the lack of reliability in CIC funds comes from tax increment. The Economic Development Director responded in the affirmative; stated the lack in reliability is not a relationship to how the organization is run but is a direct relationship to what is happening in the State. Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority, and Community Improvement Commission October 20, 2009 | CityCouncil/2009-10-20.pdf |
CityCouncil/2009-11-03.pdf,19 | CityCouncil | 2009-11-03 | 19 | of the amended ordinance. Councilmember Matarrese stated a boat on Grand Street is being moved and is abandoned; the hazard needs to be removed. Vice Mayor deHaan stated trailers are also an issue. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the Regular Meeting at 10:47 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 November 3, 2009 | CityCouncil/2009-11-03.pdf |
CityCouncil/2009-11-17.pdf,19 | CityCouncil | 2009-11-17 | 19 | Councilmember Tam stated the Fire Department would not be able to get accreditation with the current response times. The Fire Chief stated a process would be needed to determine how accreditation could be accomplished. Mayor Johnson inquired what percentage of transports go outside of Alameda, to which the Fire Chief responded approximately half. Mayor Johnson stated outside transports put people at risk. The Fire Chief stated staff is evaluating other ways to deliver patients off the Island. Councilmember Matarrese stated the problem is geographical ; the City has walked up to the edge and needs to see how solid is the edge; the City has been fortunate that there have not been any significant impacts. Mayor Johnson requested a breakdown of emergency and non- emergency calls. * * (09-471) Councilmember Matarrese moved approval of continuing the meeting past midnight. Vice Mayor deHaan seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. Councilmember Gilmore thanked staff for the detailed report; stated Council is vitally interested in the issue; data is important Council's decisions are only as good as the data provided; the data is presented in a very understandable manner. Vice Mayor deHaan inquired whether other fire departments are performing data collection, to which the Fire Chief responded data collection is performed to a certain extent. (09-472) Update on Councilmember Tam's Referral: Sunshine Community Task Force The Interim City Manager gave a brief presentation. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 19 November 17, 2009 | CityCouncil/2009-11-17.pdf |
CityCouncil/2010-02-16.pdf,19 | CityCouncil | 2010-02-16 | 19 | MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL JOINT CITY COUNCIL, ALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (ARRA) AND COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION (CIC) MEETING TUESDAY- - - -FEBRUARY 16, 2010- 7:01 P.M. Mayor/Chair Johnson convened the meeting at 10:36 p.m. ROLL CALL - Present: Councilmembers / Board Members / Commissioners deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese, Tam and Mayor/Chair Johnson - 5. Note: Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Tam arrived at 10:38 p.m. Absent: None. CONSENT CALENDAR Mayor/Chair Johnson announced that the Chamber of Commerce Contract Amendment [paragraph no. 10-06 CIC would be continued to a future meeting. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Matarrese moved approval of the remainder of the Consent Calendar. Vice Mayor/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 4. [Absent: Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Tam - 1.] [Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk preceding the paragraph number.] (*10-080 CC/ARRA/10-05 CIC) Minutes of the Special Joint City Council, ARRA and CIC Meetings Held on January 26, 2010. Approved. (10-06 CIC) Recommendation to Authorize the Interim Executive Director to Amend Scope of Contract with the Alameda Chamber of Commerce for Fiscal Year 2009-2010. Continued to future meeting. (*10-081 CC/10-07 CIC) Recommendation to Approve an Amendment to the Grand Marina Village Affordable Housing Agreement and Authorize the Interim City Manager/Interim Executive Director to Execute the Amendment. AGENDA ITEM (10-082 CC/ARRA/10-08 CIC) Consider SunCal's Requests to: (1) Approve an Addendum to the Exclusive Negotiation Agreement (ENA) between SunCal and Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Alameda 1 Reuse and Redevelopment Authority and Community Improvement Commission February 16, 2010 | CityCouncil/2010-02-16.pdf |
CityCouncil/2010-03-16.pdf,19 | CityCouncil | 2010-03-16 | 19 | Vice Mayor deHaan inquired whether Mr. Blake is comfortable in light of the changes. Mr. Blake responded that he is not willing to make said statement; stated more homework needs to be done; pencils need to be sharpened; that he is willing to work on the issues. Vice Mayor deHaan stated the north and south courses have different skill levels; making the two courses the same would be difficult. Mr. Blake stated a professional golf architect was hired to come up with renditions; that he feels comfortable making three 9-hole courses in a similar style. Vice Mayor deHaan inquired whether Mr. Blake has seen clubhouses at other similar level courses, to which Mr. Blake responded all of them. Vice Mayor deHaan inquired whether accommodating all activity is difficult on a single course, to which Mr. Blake responded in the negative. Councilmember Gilmore stated the Commuter and East Bay Junior Tournaments have a long history in Alameda; inquired whether tournaments could be run with only 27 holes without disrupting the flow and pace of play; further inquired how much revenue is made off tournaments every year. Mr. Vest responded approximately $200,000 for almost 6,000 rounds. Councilmember Gilmore inquired whether rounds have remained stable over the last three or four years. Mr. Vest responded rounds are blended with other golf course rates; stated last year's revenue was $176,000; under the 27-hole concept, the biggest impact [on tournaments] would be during the first weekend; the qualifier would be different; players would have to go in two waves and would have to play the same two 9 holes to qualify on like conditions and courses. Councilmember Gilmore inquired whether the Mif Albright course has a safety problem; stated some areas of the course get tight. Mr. Blake responded the architect designed the new par 3 with spacing considered safe today; stated that he cannot comment on the [current] safety of the Mif Albright course. Councilmember Gilmore requested Mr. Van Winkle to comment. Mr. Van Winkle stated that he is… | CityCouncil/2010-03-16.pdf |
CityCouncil/2010-04-06.pdf,19 | CityCouncil | 2010-04-06 | 19 | provisions, force majeure, and term, can be negotiated without knowing the actual financial deal or project description. Mayor/Chair Johnson inquired whether staff is waiting on the pro forma; further inquired whether SunCal is working on the pro forma. The Deputy City Manager - Development Services responded staff is waiting and has requested the pro forma. Mayor/Chair Johnson inquired whether there is a time frame when the document will be provided, to which the Deputy City Manager - Development Services responded staff has not been given a specific time frame for when the information will be provided. Vice Mayor/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan inquired when the Exclusive Negotiation Agreement (ENA) expires, to which the Deputy City Manager - Development Services responded July 20. Vice Mayor/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan stated the time line does not seem adequate to put things in proper perspective; a whole lot of work has not been presented to staff for analysis; it [the document submitted by SunCal] seems very incomplete and does not appear close to an "A" paper. The Deputy City Manager - Development Services stated staff would be meeting with SunCal on Thursday and would be requesting information. Vice Mayor/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan provided a handout; stated when the City started negotiating with SunCal, the Preliminary Development Concept (PDC) was used as the baseline to make determinations regarding the number of residences, commercial use and various land use issues; the handout breaks down the PDC, the Measure B Specific Plan that was voted down [February 2, 2010], and the modified Optional Entitlement Application (OEA); the OEA could generate more residential units than the Measure B Specific Plan because of the Density Bonus, which was not requested in the [Measure B] Specific Plan; that he compared the PDC and the residential project grew 144% under the modified OEA; the PDC included 2,116 residential units; the maximum SunCal could have [under the modified OEA] is 5,162, which is a su… | CityCouncil/2010-04-06.pdf |
CityCouncil/2010-04-20.pdf,19 | CityCouncil | 2010-04-20 | 19 | MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL JOINT CITY COUNCIL, ALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (ARRA) AND COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY-APRIL 20, 2010- -6:00 P.M. Mayor/Chair Johnson convened the meeting at 6:05 p.m. Roll Call - Present: Councilmembers/Board Members/ Commissioners deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese, Tam and Mayor/Chair Johnson - 5. Absent: None. The meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider: (10-157 CC/ARRA) Conference with Real Property Negotiator; Property: Alameda Ferry Vessels and Ferry Terminals; Negotiating Parties: City of Alameda, Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority, Water Emergency Transit Authority; Under Negotiations: Terms under which City will transfer the Alameda Ferry Services to WETA. (10-158 CC/ARRA/10-17 CIC) 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 meeting was reconvened and Mayor/Chair Johnson announced that regarding Alameda Ferry Vessels and Ferry Terminals, the Council/Board Members received a briefing on the status of negotiations regarding the transfer of Ferry Services to the Water Emergency Transit Authority and provided direction on negotiating parameters; regarding City Council/ARRA/CIC Anticipated Litigation, the Council/Board Members/Commissioners received a briefing from the City Attorney/Legal Counsel regarding a matter of anticipated litigation; no action was taken. Mayor/Chair Johnson called a recess at 7:10 p.m. and reconvened the meeting at 11:55 p.m. The meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider: (10-159 CC) Conference with Labor Negotiators; Agency Negotiators: Interim City Manager; Employee Organization: Executive Management. (ARRA) Conference with Real Property Negotiator (54956.8); Property: Alameda Point (Potential Lease of a 1 Acre Site); Negotiating Parties: ARRA and Bay Ship & Yacht; Under Negotiation: Price and terms. Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Alameda Reu… | CityCouncil/2010-04-20.pdf |
CityCouncil/2010-05-04.pdf,19 | CityCouncil | 2010-05-04 | 19 | Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Matarrese stated assumptions are optimistic and overestimated. The Deputy City Manager - Economic Development stated staff has questions regarding whether or not there is enough contingency; the bus rapid transit was based on an rough per mile estimate in Oregon; SunCal would provide additional back up information for review; continued the presentation; read the following email response from SunCal regarding special election costs: "In response to the letter from Ann Marie Gallant dated April 20, 2010 regarding special election costs, SunCal agrees to include in the Development and Disposition Agreement (DDA) executed by the Community Improvement Commission (CIC) and SunCal a provision that SunCal will reimburse the City for the cost of the election and such payment will be treated as an approved predevelopment cost". Mayor/Chair Johnson inquired whether Development Agreement (DA) discussions have involved restructuring of concepts given the state of redevelopment funds. The Deputy City Manager - Economic Development responded SunCal has agreed to remove provisions in the DA that requires 100% commitment of the City's redevelopment fund; stated staff has requested SunCal to review what happens to the project pro forma when tax increment funds are eliminated; staff is having on-going public financing discussions. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Tam inquired whether mitigation fees are charged on top of having the developer build schools, parks, and other public amenities. The Deputy City Manager - Economic Development responded school fees are State fees and are separate; stated the concept is that SunCal would pay all school impact fees; staff has performed a very detailed analysis of all improvements proposed by SunCal and has provided credits regarding the dwelling unit tax, which is a fee for park improvements; there are $13 million in Citywide development fee credits; fees are not being duplicated. In response to Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Tam's inq… | CityCouncil/2010-05-04.pdf |
CityCouncil/2010-05-18.pdf,19 | CityCouncil | 2010-05-18 | 19 | Vice Mayor/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan inquired why SunCal did not do an EIR two years ago. Mr. Brown responded the road map to achieve a transit oriented plan was unclear; stated now; the process is more straightforward. Vice Mayor/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan stated the ENA will sunset in 60 days or has to be extended. Mr. Brown stated SunCal is working with staff to advance the plan; if milestones are met, the ENA extends automatically; the process takes time. Mayor/Chair Johnson inquired whether the pictures [submitted by Vice Mayor/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan] are from the Planning Board meeting, to which Mr. Brown responded the pictures have been modified from the presentation. Mayor/Chair Johnson stated the pictures should be posted on the website; that she does not understand how the development would be transit oriented without a transportation plan. Mr. Brown stated $700,000 has been budgeted for traffic and transit studies; the plan has been built on the shoulders of 2008 studies. Mayor/Chair Johnson stated that she is not certain that the starting point for residential units and commercial square footage is correct. Mr. Brown responded the 2008 plan was a combined plan done by transportation engineers, land planners, and an economic consultant; the transit plus plan was the third option and contemplated 5,000 residential units and 3.4 million square feet of commercial; the plan has been studied by the City and delivers enough economic value to be able to afford the required transportation improvements. Mayor/Chair Johnson stated the rest of Alameda does not live in a transit oriented development and has to get through the Tube; half of the residents get on and off the island through the Tubes; that she is not sure the starting point is correct. Mr. Brown stated that an EIR would look at transit oriented land plans at a unit count up to 4,700 units; the number may change; the process is ongoing; the project and transit solution do not exist in a bubble but within the context of the City. … | CityCouncil/2010-05-18.pdf |
CityCouncil/2010-06-01.pdf,19 | CityCouncil | 2010-06-01 | 19 | homes are currently listed for $375 per square foot; the assumption in the Optional Entitlement Agreement (OEA) is $360 per square foot. Mr. Musbach stated that he couldn't follow the numbers; the comparison is not apples to apples but is a trick to change the average number, which is not accurate. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan stated that he received the information [SunCal's Power Point] at 3:30 p.m. via email; things seem to be premature; SunCal and EPS need to sit down and have a discussion on the matter; EPS has worked with the City for thirteen years; neither SunCal or EPS understand what the City is going through; EPS should review issues and respond; tonight is not the time and place for discussion; the Power Point presentation is difficult to see; the pro forma has many other issues. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Gilmore stated that she is thoroughly confused; requested an apple to apple comparison for single-family homes and townhouses, stated that she wants SunCal and EPS to start at the same spot; if both parties end up in a different place, she wants to know where and why in plain English. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Matarrese stated the pro forma shows an IRR of 19% to 25%; the project would be spread over twenty years; inquired what PERS hopes to get on investments, to which the Deputy City Manager - Administrative Services responded 7.75%. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Matarrese stated the IRR is not an acceptable level. Mayor/Chair Johnson state there have been discussions regarding conservative or aggressive assumptions; the real discussion is what would happen if there are not enough funds to pay for public improvements; questioned whether there would be enough money to pay for transportation solutions for 4,800 housing units and 4.5 million square feet of commercial development; said discussions are critical for a successful outcome; understanding the transit oriented nature of the development is important; having enough money to pay for transit… | CityCouncil/2010-06-01.pdf |
CityCouncil/2010-06-15.pdf,19 | CityCouncil | 2010-06-15 | 19 | Vice Mayor deHaan seconded the motion On the call for the question, the motion carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. (10-297) Resolution No. 14460, "Authorizing the Interim City Manager to Apply for Regional Measure 1 Five Percent Unrestricted State Funds and Two Percent Bridge Toll Reserve Funds for the Operating Subsidy and Capital Projects, and Regional Measure 2 Bridge Toll Funds for the City of Alameda Ferry Services, and to Enter Into All Agreements Necessary to Secure These Funds for Fiscal Year 2010-2011.' Adopted; (10-297 A) Recommendation to Authorize the Interim City Manager to Negotiate and Execute a Fifth Amendment to the Amended and Restated Ferry Services Agreement with the Port of Oakland to Extend the Term for One Additional Year at a Cost of $60,649; (10-297 B) Recommendation to Authorize the Interim City Manager to Negotiate and Execute an Eighth Amendment to the Sixth Amended and Restated Operating Agreement for the Alameda Harbor Bay Ferry and Adopt the Associated Budgets; and (10-297 C) Recommendation to Authorize the Interim City Manager to Negotiate and Execute an Amendment to the Agreement to Extend the Term for One Additional Year of the Blue & Gold Fleet Operating Agreement with the Alameda/Oakland Ferry Service and Adopt Associated Budgets. The Public Works Director gave a brief presentation. Mayor Johnson inquired whether Regional Measure 1 and 2 funds are new. The Public Works Director responded the City has always received Measure 1 funds; stated Regional Measure 2 funds are new. Mayor Johnson inquired whether the $10,000 Port of Oakland reduction is not so significant, to which the Public Works Director responded in the affirmative. Mayor Johnson inquired whether the City would be spending over $1 million more for the ferries if the City did not get the Regional Measure 2 funds. The Ferry Services Manager responded the Regional Measure 2 allocation consists of two components: 1) Regional Measure 2 funds controlled by the Water Emergency Transportation Authority (WETA) for chartering… | CityCouncil/2010-06-15.pdf |
CityCouncil/2010-06-24.pdf,19 | CityCouncil | 2010-06-24 | 19 | for organizational purposes. The City Clerk stated the item could be added to the agenda. Councilmember Matarrese stated that he wants to hear back from the Sunshine Task Force with a recommendation. The Interim City Manager inquired who places items on the agenda. The Deputy City Manager - Administrative Services responded staff placed matters on the agenda at first; stated now, staff consults with the Chair to place items on the agenda. Vice Mayor deHaan stated Council needs to explain what it wants and be specific about the change in direction; Council can choose to discuss the issue; the timeline should be put aside; feedback is needed from the public whether at a Council meeting or Sunshine Task Force meeting; the matter should be brought back for discussion and finalization and then figure out when the ordinance would go into effect; that he thinks accepting more than $250 is unfair. Mayor Johnson stated there is no reason not to continue to work in a diligent manner to get the job done; Council can choose to implement the ordinance when it chooses. Councilmember Gilmore stated that she understands Council told the Sunshine Task Force that the matter could be brought back at any time, but the ordinance would not be effective until at least January 1st. Mayor Johnson stated that she does not recall said direction; that she thinks the direction was to bring the matter back no sooner than January 1st; the facts will be checked. Vice Mayor deHaan stated that he recalls that Council would not consider the matter until January. The City Clerk stated the motion was to extend the period for public comment, including review by the Sunshine Task Force and League of Women Voters and that the ordinance not be effective until 2011. Vice Mayor deHaan stated the issue is whether Council wants to task the Task Force to go forward; Council's obligation is to spell out what the Sunshine Task Force should do. Councilmember Matarrese stated Council's obligation is whether to reconsider the vote taken last time; that his answer… | CityCouncil/2010-06-24.pdf |
CityCouncil/2010-07-07.pdf,19 | CityCouncil | 2010-07-07 | 19 | AGENDA ITEMS None. Adjournment There being no further business, Mayor/Chair Johnson adjourned the meeting at 10:58 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 18 Community Improvement Commission July 7, 2010 | CityCouncil/2010-07-07.pdf |
CityCouncil/2010-07-20.pdf,19 | CityCouncil | 2010-07-20 | 19 | Clerk's office by 3:00 p.m. the following day; the offer was reviewed over the weekend; nothing in the last, best and final offer changes staff's recommendation; inquired whether Councilmembers/Board Members/Commissioners want to focus on financial issues. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Gilmore responded in the affirmative; stated that she understands the timing but is uncomfortable with not having a chance to review the offer and ask questions; the public has not been able to review and digest the offer. The Deputy City Manager - Development Services stated staff requested that the financing plan be attached to the DDA, including the pro forma; the pro forma submitted with the last, best and final offer did not include the financing plan; the financing plan would be due before the close of Phase 1. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Gilmore inquired whether SunCal has made promises to pay without a document showing how payment would be made. The Deputy City Manager - Development Services responded in the affirmative; stated the pro forma was the same as the pro forma attached to previous staff reports; Section 7.8 contains the financial assurances of the last, best, and final offer; staff wants to have financial assurances up front; SunCal has provided financial assurances that cover the period of time from the execution of the DDA up until the close of Phase 1; staff wants to ensure that SunCal has enough money to get through the project, not just the development period. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Gilmore inquired how terms would be written to prevent land banking. The Deputy City Manager - Development Services responded terms would be written in the DDA; stated scheduled performances would be included in addition to default provisions; fiscal neutrality would be guaranteed; SunCal would provide a guarantee from an entity that has a net worth of $100 million; the guarantee would not be for project implementation; staff wants more than guarantees for fiscal neutrality; staff does not t… | CityCouncil/2010-07-20.pdf |
CityCouncil/2010-07-27.pdf,19 | CityCouncil | 2010-07-27 | 19 | (10-389A CC) Resolution No. 14481, "Establishing Appropriations Limit for Fiscal Year 2010-2011. Adopted; (10-389B CC) Resolution No. 14482, "Approving and Adopting the Operating and Capital Budget and Appropriating Certain Moneys for Said Expenditures in Fiscal Year 2010-2011.' Adopted; (10-63 CIC) Resolution No. 10-170, "Approving and Adopting the Operating and Capital Budget and Appropriating Certain Moneys for Said Expenditures in Fiscal Year 2010- 2011.' Adopted; and (ARRA) Resolution No. 48, "Approving and Adopting the Operating and Capital Budget and Appropriating Certain Moneys for Said Expenditures in Fiscal Year 2010-2011. Adopted. The Interim City Manager/Executive Director gave a presentation. Mayor/Chair Johnson requested clarification on call provisions. The Interim City Manager/Executive Director stated call provisions are structured and indentured when bond holders are able to be paid off; sometimes call provisions are limited and conditions are structured in a municipal debt as an incentive to the buyer of the municipal debt because no one wants to take X amount of dollars if the bond will be called; the debt service term has not been expanded. Mayor/Chair Johnson inquired whether doing that kind of debt made sense at the time; stated the 2000 AMP bonds that are being refinanced did not make sense even in 2000; policies need to be in place to ensure that bad debt is not done. The Interim City Manager/Executive Director stated a lot of cities do dirt bonds [Community Facilities Districts]; the best ratio is $1 of debt for every $4 of land value; the City needs more elaborate financial policies; municipal debt has variations. Mayor/Chair Johnson stated the issue with the 2000 bonds is that the bonds were taxable. The Interim City Manager/Executive Director stated in general, taxables have been at a higher rate; nowadays, cities can get taxables that are less than a municipal rate because city tax credit is not as good as some taxables; government can no longer budget for just a year. Mayor/Chair Jo… | CityCouncil/2010-07-27.pdf |
CityCouncil/2010-09-07.pdf,19 | CityCouncil | 2010-09-07 | 19 | MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL JOINT CITY COUNCIL AND COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION (CIC) MEETING TUESDAY -SEPTEMBER 7, 2010- -7:02 P.M. Mayor/Chair Johnson convened the meeting at 10:40 p.m. ROLL CALL - Present: Councilmembers/Commissioners deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese, Tam and Mayor/Chair Johnson - 5. Absent: None. Councilmember/Commissioner Tam left the dais at 10:40 p.m. and returned at 10:42 p.m. PROCLAMATIONS, SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY & ANNOUNCMENTS (10-65 CIC) Presentation on Façade Assistance Program for fiscal year 2009-2010. The Development Coordinator gave a Power Point presentation. Chair Johnson stated the façade grants make a big difference within the community; the before and after pictures are unbelievable; that she wishes more money could be found for the Program. Commissioner Gilmore stated a lot of work has been done on Park Street and Webster Street; a critical mass has now been reached and the faces of the streets are changing. Speakers: Jon Spangler, Alameda; and Robb Ratto, Park Street Business Association. Commissioner deHaan stated the Façade Assistance Program has been extremely successful; involving new proprietors in the beginning is very important. MINUTES (10-429 CC/10-66 CIC) Minutes of the Joint City Council, Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority, and Community Improvement Commission Meetings held on July 20, 2010, and July 27, 2010. Approved. Vice Mayor/Commissioner deHaan moved approval of the minutes. Councilmember/Commissioner Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. AGENDA ITEMS Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council and Community 1 Improvement Commission September 7, 2010 | CityCouncil/2010-09-07.pdf |
CityCouncil/2010-10-05.pdf,19 | CityCouncil | 2010-10-05 | 19 | MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL JOINT CITY COUNCIL, ALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, AND COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION (CIC) MEETING TUESDAY--OCTOBER 5, 2010- -7:01 P.M. Mayor/Chair Johnson convened the meeting at 7:13 p.m. ROLL CALL - Present: Councilmembers / Board Members / Commissioners deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese, Tam and Mayor Johnson - 5. Absent: None. CITY MANAGER COMMUNICATIONS (10-488 CC/ARRA/10-69 CIC) Receive a Report on the Status of America's Cup The Economic Development Director gave a brief presentation. Mayor/Chair Johnson inquired whether the Alameda Waterfront website is linked to the City's website, to which the Economic Development Director responded in the negative. Mayor/Chair Johnson stated efforts should be made to link the Alameda Waterfront website to the City's website. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Gilmore stated updates are provided via email. Vice Mayor/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan stated another challenge is to bring a super carrier into Alameda within the next couple of years for Fleet Week. *** Mayor/Chair Johnson called a recess at 7:24 p.m. and reconvened the meeting at 11:09 p.m. *** CONSENT CALENDAR Councilmember/Commissioner Tam moved approval of the Consent Calendar. Councilmember/Commissioner Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. [Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk preceding the paragraph number.] Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Alameda Reuse and 1 Redevelopment Authority, and Community Improvement Commission October 5, 2010 | CityCouncil/2010-10-05.pdf |
CityCouncil/2010-11-16.pdf,19 | CityCouncil | 2010-11-16 | 19 | Commissioner Tam is asking is would the City be able to terminate the Contract if a site or sites could not be found to relocate the Corporation Yard and Alameda Shelter after the City pays Warmington Residential for geotechnical and environmental costs. The City Attorney/Legal Counsel responded the ENA would terminate for any reason if the terms of the Disposition and Development Agreement could not be negotiated or executed, which would include finding alternate sites for the Animal Shelter and Corporation Yard. Councilmember/Commissioner Matarrese inquired whether the ENA would lapse and the City would pay the $100,000 for geotechnical and environmental studies if the City could not find a site for the Animal Shelter and/or the Corporation Yard. The Deputy City Manager - Development Services responded the City would not pay the $100,000; stated Warmington Residential would bear the risk; Warmington Residential would assume costs by electing to proceed. Mayor/Chair Johnson stated Warmington Residential would not be reimbursed if they elect to proceed; the City would pay Warmington Residential $100,000 if Warmington Residential terminates the Agreement before they elect to proceed. The Deputy City Manager - Development Services stated the studies would be useful for renovation or redevelopment. Vice Mayor/Commissioner deHaan inquired what is the amounted budgeted for consultants to study Animal Shelter and Corporation Yard relocation. The Deputy City Manager - Development Services Manager responded the City's current fiscal year Public Works budget includes $376,000 in CIP funds; stated this month, staff issued a Request for Proposals (RFP). Mayor/Chair Johnson suggested that the item be continued. Councilmember/Commissioner Matarrese withdrew his motion. (10-79 CIC) Recommendation to Authorize the Interim Executive Director to Negotiate and Execute a Purchase and Sale Agreement for the Islander Motel Property Located at 2428 Central Avenue; Issue a Request for Qualifications to Secure a Development Partner for … | CityCouncil/2010-11-16.pdf |
CityCouncil/2011-02-15.pdf,19 | CityCouncil | 2011-02-15 | 19 | matter with Catellus; stated Catellus would be asking for DDA amendments; both Catellus and the City want recognition for past expenditures. Commissioner deHaan stated the City's sewer funds were loaned to the Stargell Project, which some thought should have been covered by Catellus. Commissioner Johnson inquired when conveyance would occur, to which Mr. Marshall responded Catellus is focused on committing to infrastructure, which would precede conveyance. Commissioner Johnson stated not moving forward aggressively would be easy for Catellus; the City does not want Catellus holding on to the land longer than necessary. The Deputy City Manager - Development Services stated Catellus would be taking down the land and selling 10 acres to Target. Commissioner Johnson stated having something more concrete on Target's plan to move forward in Alameda would be nice; Target is opening in other areas within close proximity; questioned when market saturation would be reached; stated decisions have been made based on Target coming to Alameda; an economic disincentive should be established, such as conveying the land by a set date, to prevent Catellus from simply holding on to the land; that she is reluctant to consider the Estoppel Agreement if Catellus is asking for DDA amendments; that she would prefer to see everything come at the same time. Chair Gilmore inquired what happens if Catellus does not meet the first mandatory milestone. Mr. Marshall responded the City would put Catellus on notice; stated one remedy would be for the City to start marketing the property; Catellus would have a first position lien to recover the money it advanced on the Stargell right-of-way. Chair Gilmore inquired whether Catellus asking for consent to the transfer would allow the City to impose any more stringent requirements to accelerate the timeline. The Acting City Attorney responded the Commission has absolute discretion over approval; stated the Commission deciding to deny the transfer would trigger a sequence of events, including a meet a… | CityCouncil/2011-02-15.pdf |
CityCouncil/2011-07-19.pdf,19 | CityCouncil | 2011-07-19 | 19 | take as much property, either through FOST, and discussing a FOSET (Finding Of Suitability for Early Transfer), potentially finding more property beyond what is FOSTable. That property would all be at no cost to the extent that it stayed within the development envelope plan for the reuse plan. That may not be enough development. At some future date there may be the need to do something different to develop the property. | CityCouncil/2011-07-19.pdf |
CityCouncil/2012-05-08.pdf,19 | CityCouncil | 2012-05-08 | 19 | MINITES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING TUESDAY- - -MAY 8, 2012--6:00 P.M. Mayor Gilmore convened the meeting at 6:04 p.m. Roll Call - Present: Councilmembers Bonta, deHaan, Johnson, Tam and Mayor Gilmore - 5. [Note: Vice Mayor Bonta arrived at 6:10 p.m.] Absent: None. Public Comment Carol Gottstein, Alameda, inquired about the City Manager's contract provisions allowing him to teach a course on municipal law at Bolt and the verifiable performance measures. The meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider: (12-212) Public Employee Performance Evaluation; (54957); Title: City Manager John Russo (12-213) Conference with Legal Counsel - Existing Litigation (54956.9); Name of Case: SCC Alameda Point, LLC, et al V. City of Alameda, et al.; U.S. District Court Case No CV-10-5178; this is to discuss strategy regarding a lawsuit brought by our former developer, SunCal, based on the Exclusive Negotiating Agreement. (12-214) Conference with Labor Negotiators (54957.6); Agency Negotiators: Holly Brock-Cohn, Human Resources Director, and Masa Shiohira, Contract Labor Negotiator; Employee Organizations: Management and Confidential Employees Association; Anticipated Issues: All (Wages, Hours, Benefits, and Working Conditions). Following the closed session, the meeting was reconvened and Mayor Gilmore announced that regarding Labor, the City Council direction was given to staff and the item was continued to May 15th; and regarding Existing Litigation, Council receiving a briefing on the status of litigation. * Mayor Gilmore called a recess to hold the open session meeting at 6:58 p.m. and reconvened the meeting at 10:49 p.m. * (12-215) Vice Mayor Bonta moved approval of continuing the meeting past 11:00 p.m. Special Meeting Alameda City Council May 8, 2012 | CityCouncil/2012-05-08.pdf |
CityCouncil/2012-05-15.pdf,19 | CityCouncil | 2012-05-15 | 19 | Councilmember deHaan noted the City has $3 million set aside for vehicles, which should last 3 to 4 years. The City Manager stated staff does not agree with said assessment; the Public Works fleet alone would use the entire amount; Measure C would keep the bank from breaking. The Assistant City Manager reviewed vehicles not covered by Measure C. The City Manager stated staff could visit expansion if Measure C passes. Councilmember Johnson stated departments would have to be severely cut to increase payments to the internal service funds. Councilmember Tam moved introduction of the ordinance. Vice Mayor Bonta seconded the motion. Vice Mayor Bonta inquired whether the depreciation money is from Measure C, to which the City Manager responded in the negative; stated the money would be from the General Fund. Councilmember Johnson inquired whether staff is confident that the City will be able to keep up with the depreciation coming from the General Fund, to which the City Manager responded in the affirmative. On the call for the question, the motion carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Councilmembers Bonta, Johnson, Tam and Mayor Gilmore - 4. Abstention: Councilmember deHaan - 1. CITY MANAGER COMMUNICATIONS (12-247) The City Manager thanked everyone for the excellent process on golf. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (12-248) Jon Spangler, Alameda, urged Council to consider types on of businesses in the business districts. COUNCIL REFERRALS None. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 19 May 15, 2012 | CityCouncil/2012-05-15.pdf |
CityCouncil/2012-06-19.pdf,19 | CityCouncil | 2012-06-19 | 19 | The Chief Building Official stated that his understanding is the amount is assessed at the time of sale; the County pays the City in advance of collecting the money. The City Attorney stated liens typically have to be cleared when the property is sold, but property can be foreclosed on due to liens. Councilmember Johnson stated the City needs to check with the County. The Chief Building Official stated that he would contact the County. The City Attorney stated there are many different types of liens; assessments are paid as part of property taxes; a lien is not an assessment. Vice Mayor Bonta stated the attorney indicated the County has a process for reviewing hardships. Ms. Harrington stated as an example, San Francisco County places a lien and forecloses on property if taxes are not paid for 5 years; whether or not the property would be foreclosed upon is not clear. Vice Mayor Bonta inquired what is the City's process for hardships, to which the Chief Building Official responded staff works with property owners willing to make payments; stated enforcement is not stopped until the property is in compliance. Vice Mayor Bonta inquired whether enforcement means additional citations, to which the Chief Building Official responded in the affirmative. In response to Councilmember Johnson's inquiry regarding the first letter, the Chief Building Official stated the first letter informs the property owner that the City needs to investigate a complaint; if a violation is found, the second letter states the property owner needs to comply and pay the permit and fees; citations are brought up after there is no compliance; three to four letters are sent prior to issuing the first citation; there are many Code Enforcement cases and only a 13 are being brought to Council. The City Manager reminded Council the issues are health and safety issues that could impact surrounding properties. Vice Mayor Bonta moved approval of providing a 90 day moratorium for 1523 Pacific Avenue whereby there will be no additional fines imposed and g… | CityCouncil/2012-06-19.pdf |
CityCouncil/2013-04-02.pdf,19 | CityCouncil | 2013-04-02 | 19 | Vice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the 60 foot limit could be retained and conditions could be included about what it would take to get to 60 feet. The City Planner responded that the City should be very careful from a process stand point and should not include vague ideas between first and second reading of the ordinance; stated very specific could be addressed and come back for the second reading; however, he thinks the design guidelines could be amended; Council would approve the package tonight with direction; there is an addendum sheet because the Planning Board had other changes for staff; the ordinance would not change; Council could direct staff to include additional guidelines in the design manual for the top 20 feet over 40 feet. Mayor Gilmore inquired whether the design guidelines would go back to the Planning Board. The City Planner responded in the affirmative; stated the Planning Board would approve the changes before approving any 60 foot buildings. Vice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the ordinance would be changed [to indicate the design manual include additional criteria to go above 50 feet]. The City Planner responded that he does not think an ordinance change is necessary; stated everyone has to review the design manual whether the building is 10, 20, 30, 40, or 50 feet; the design manual would be supplemented to the Santa Cruz design concepts to indicate a tall building has to be beautiful; something special is required to go over 40 feet; the Planning Board and staff would work on supplemental guidelines, which would not have to return to Council. Vice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she is fine with allowing 50 feet without requiring extra criteria. Councilmember Daysog inquired whether Vice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft is proposing the additional criteria would only be required to go above 50 feet. Vice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft responded additional language would be added to the design guidelines. The City Planner stated the ordinance is not changing; Council is directing staff to work with … | CityCouncil/2013-04-02.pdf |
CityCouncil/2013-04-16.pdf,19 | CityCouncil | 2013-04-16 | 19 | Mr. Whiskeman responded the market is creating a lot of opportunity; stated Target is under construction, which is a driver and has generated additional interest; Safeway is also a driver of activity and holds the key to the rest of the retail; the economy is improving; things are getting better; challenges still exist; retailers are still cautious about expansion, but the market has helped create opportunities; noted the Safeway would include a fuel center just like South Shore; the fuel center would be on a separate parcel that is not part of the Alameda Landing DDA and would be at the entry to the site; three buildings are proposed for the entry site, including the fuel center; approval would go through the Planning Board process. Vice Mayor/Agency Member Ezzy Ashcraft commended Catellus for all the hard work marketing the center; stated that she is very excited to see the list of potential retailers; her only concern is the Safeway Gas Station; she visited the site; the community is concerned about the appearance of gateways to Alameda; hopefully, Park Street will get better due to the new North Park Street Zoning Code just adopted; a couple of business are being proposed for Webster Street; rumors are a drive-thru burger establishment is in the mix; the Planning Board is hesitant to add a drive-thru, except pharmacies which benefit the community; that she is concerned about the appearance coming out of the Tube; the West End should not look like it is off of a freeway with a gas station and drive thru restaurant; when the Planning Board previously heard the matter there was a lot of discussion about not competing with Webster Street; the Planning Board limited the minimum footprint of stores at Alameda Landing to not compete directly with the footprint size of stores on Webster Street; fuel falling under sales leakage surprised her; in the past couple of years, two different gas stations requested use permits changes, including longer hours, due to not getting enough business; a Webster Street station is add… | CityCouncil/2013-04-16.pdf |
CityCouncil/2013-06-18.pdf,19 | CityCouncil | 2013-06-18 | 19 | Committee meeting. (13-320) Mayor Gilmore invited the community to attend the Conveyance Ceremony. (13-321) Mayor Gilmore announced that a hold was placed on Assembly Bill 935 related to the Water Emergency Transit Authority governance. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Mayor Gilmore adjourned the meeting at 9:47 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger City Clerk The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Sunshine Ordinance. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 18 June 18, 2013 | CityCouncil/2013-06-18.pdf |
CityCouncil/2013-07-23.pdf,19 | CityCouncil | 2013-07-23 | 19 | a trust fund is important because employees are going to want to know that money will go towards the benefit if they are asked to pay more for OPEB or receive reduced benefits; the trust fund is needed for transparency and credibility; the trust fund would be a starting place to ask employees what they would be willing to do. The Finance Director stated Council has indicated staff should return with different trust fund firms and work with Bartell and Associates, as they work on the revised OPEB actuarial, to provide estimates and potential savings for each proposed solutions; establishing the trust fund is a critical first step. Mayor Gilmore stated the plan should be developed with employees; some intense and long discussions with employees will be held throughout the process. The City Manager stated staff would present a report on the proposed trust fund in the early fall; Council direction seems to be to proceed with the trust fund regardless of solutions that may or may not manifest through negotiations; staff has already begun talking to different firms; discussed his experience with pension reform in Oakland; stated unlike Oakland, Alameda has always paid its existing liability and has not borrowed money; the problem is the actuarials and assumptions indicate that numbers are going to rise very quickly and soon; there is a window of opportunity; the City is trying to get ahead of the wave before it crashes; there is no one solution in his opinion; staff has offered a menu of potential solutions; tonight, the Council has indicated staff should put anything which impacts existing retirees at the bottom of the priority list and a trust fund should be started; the problem took more than 50 years to develop; the goal is to do something that will make a substantial impact on the liability; the amount cannot get to zero in one shot unless there are massive cuts and layoffs; relations with bargaining units are excellent; bargaining units have demonstrated an understanding of the City's financial situation and have… | CityCouncil/2013-07-23.pdf |
CityCouncil/2013-09-25.pdf,19 | CityCouncil | 2013-09-25 | 19 | when staff comes back with issues discussed tonight, Council should discuss the pros and cons of having more housing on the water and embedded in that discussion is the overall number of housing units which will be initially constructed; the issues dovetail because deciding to have more housing on the water raises the question of whether to spread units over more areas. CITY MANAGER COMMUNICATIONS (13-427) The Assistant City Manager presented the results from a survey for naming options for Alameda Point; stated the community favored Seaplane Village and Seaplane Lagoon. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS None. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Mayor Gilmore adjourned the meeting at 11:20 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger City Clerk The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Sunshine Ordinance. Joint Meeting Alameda City Council and 19 Planning Board September 25, 2013 | CityCouncil/2013-09-25.pdf |
CityCouncil/2013-10-15.pdf,19 | CityCouncil | 2013-10-15 | 19 | Adjournment There being no further business, Mayor Gilmore adjourned the meeting at 11:56 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger City Clerk The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Sunshine Ordinance. Special Meeting Alameda City Council October 15, 2013 | CityCouncil/2013-10-15.pdf |
CityCouncil/2013-11-05.pdf,19 | CityCouncil | 2013-11-05 | 19 | Adjournment There being no further business, Mayor Gilmore adjourned the meeting at 12:52 a.m. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger City Clerk The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Sunshine Ordinance. Special Meeting Alameda City Council November 5, 2013 | CityCouncil/2013-11-05.pdf |
CityCouncil/2014-04-15.pdf,19 | CityCouncil | 2014-04-15 | 19 | The Assistant City Manager responded the firm currently has 12 clients. Vice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired what type of reporting can be expected. The Assistant City Manager responded a monthly report would be provided; the firm builds plans geared toward obtaining funds instead of just informing the City about available funds. Councilmember Tam inquired whether the funds proposed for the Akerman contract are structured differently than Senator Perata's contract. The Assistant City Manager responded in the negative; stated the funds are structured the same; there will be more lobbying in Sacramento at the State level instead of at the federal level. Councilmember Tam inquired what type of funding Akerman secured for the Port of Oakland. The Assistant City Manager responded in 2009, Akerman secured $30 million to improve barge traffic and reduce air pollution at the Port; since 2003, Akerman secured $175 million for dredging projects working with US Army Corp of Engineers. Councilmember Chen inquired how much the Port of Oakland paid Akerman per year, to which the Assistant City Manager responded that he did not ask the Port for that information. Vice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft moved approval of the staff recommendation. Councilmember Daysog seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. CITY MANAGER COMMUNICATIONS (14-153) The City Manager introduced the new Economic Development Manager; announced a workshop would be held next Tuesday to address parking in the business districts; commented on the fabulous public policy discussion tonight. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA None. COUNCIL REFERRALS None. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council April 15, 2014 | CityCouncil/2014-04-15.pdf |
CityCouncil/2014-05-06.pdf,19 | CityCouncil | 2014-05-06 | 19 | 4. [Absent: Councilmember Chen - 1.] CITY MANAGER COMMUNICATIONS (14-180) The City Manager provided a flyer and announced the upcoming broker event. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (14-181) Irma Garcia, Alameda, discussed the transport of hazardous material in the Tube. COUNCIL REFERRALS None. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS (14-182) Consideration of Mayor's Nomination for Appointment to the Golf Commission. Mayor Gilmore nominated Cheryl Saxton for appointment to the Golf Commission. (14-183) Vice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she attended the Association of Bay Area Governments Assembly; suggested that Alameda submit Jack Capon Villa for an award next year. (14-184) Councilmember Tam stated that she attended the League of California Cities Advocacy Days; the League is seeking support regarding massage parlors. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Mayor Gilmore adjourned the meeting at 12:41 a.m. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger City Clerk The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Sunshine Ordinance. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 18 May 6, 2014 | CityCouncil/2014-05-06.pdf |
CityCouncil/2014-07-01.pdf,19 | CityCouncil | 2014-07-01 | 19 | the affirmative; stated change were made for consistency and clarity. Councilmember Tam noted the changes will be included for the second reading. In response to Mayor Gilmore's inquiry, the City Attorney stated the second reading of the Ordinance would be July 15th and the initiative would become effective in 30 days, which is August 14, 2014. Councilmember Chen stated that he would not support the motion; stated the additional language has not been vetted by the community; he prefers to delay the initiative, but understands delaying is not an option. On the call for the question, the motion carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Councilmembers Daysog, Ezzy Ashcraft, Tam and Mayor Gilmore - 4. Noes: Councilmember Chen - 1. (14-296) Public Hearing to Consider Resolution No. 14951, "Establishing Integrated Waste Collection Ceiling Rates and Service Fees for Alameda County Industries, Inc. (ACI) for Rate Period 13 (July 2014 to June 2015).' Adopted. The Administrative Services Manager and Marva Sheehan, Hilton Farnkopf & Hobson (HF&H), gave a Power Point presentation. Stated PSBA is in support of the rate increase; thanked ACI for working with PSBA: Robb Ratto, PSBA. Councilmember Tam moved adoption of the resolution. Councilmember Daysog seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. CITY MANAGER COMMUNICATIONS None. COUNCIL REFERRALS None. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA None. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS (14-297) Councilmember Daysog stated that he attended the League of California Cities Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 18 July 1, 2014 | CityCouncil/2014-07-01.pdf |
CityCouncil/2014-07-15.pdf,19 | CityCouncil | 2014-07-15 | 19 | Rent Survey for City of Alameda -Summary of Survey Results as of July 15, 2014 The purpose of this rent survey is to gather data on the extent and impact of rising rents in the City of Alameda. About Renewed Hope Housing Advocates: This rent survey is administered by Renewed Hope Housing Advocates, a volunteer nonprofit organization. Since 1998, Renewed Hope has advocated tenant protections and affordable housing in Alameda. Renewed Hope has achieved a 25 percent affordable housing settlement for Alameda Point, and has pushed for a revision of the current Housing Element to allow more affordable housing development. www.RenewedHopeHousing.org Contact Renewed Hope Housing: RenewedHopeHousing@gmail.com or Laura Thomas at (510) 522-8901 Survey launched in April 2014 Total # of responses to Date: 189 1. In what neighborhood of Alameda is your home located? Central Alam West End 25% Harbor Bay Other East End 20% Central Alameda 45% Harbor Bay 3% West End East End Other 8% 2. How long have you lived in your current unit? 5 10 years Less than 1 year 15% 1 - 2 years 22% More than 10 3 5 years 3 5 years 32% 5 - 10 years 17% Less than 1 More than 10 years 15% 1 2 year Submitted by Catherine Relucio Re: 6-E - 7-15-14 Rent Survey for City of Alameda - Summary of Survey Results as of July, 15, 2015 1 www.RenewedHopeHousing.or RenewedHopeHousing@gmail.com I Laura Thomas (510)522-8901 | CityCouncil/2014-07-15.pdf |
CityCouncil/2014-09-16.pdf,19 | CityCouncil | 2014-09-16 | 19 | MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL JOINT CITY COUNCIL AND SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION (SACIC) MEETING TUESDAY- -SEPTEMBER - 16, 2014- -7:01 P.M. Mayor/Chair Gilmore convened the meeting at 7:12 p.m. Boy Scout Troop 1015 led the Pledge of Allegiance. Roll Call - Present: Councilmembers/Agency Members Chen, Daysog, Ezzy Ashcraft, Tam and Mayor/Chair Gilmore - 5. Absent: None. Oral Communications None. Consent Calendar Agency Member Tam moved approval of the consent calendar. Agency Member Ezzy Ashcraft seconded the motion which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. [Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk preceding the paragraph number.] (*14-009 SACIC) Minutes of the Special Joint City Council and Successor Agency to the Community Improvement Commission Meetings Held on March 18, 2014 and June 3, 2014. Approved. Agenda Item (14-371 CC/14-010 SACIC) SUMMARY: Approval of Actions to Refund Certain Outstanding Bonds of the Former Community Improvement Commission of the City of Alameda. (14-010 A SACIC) Resolution No. 14-1, "Approving the Issuance of Refunding Bonds in Order to Refund Certain Outstanding Bonds of the Former Community Improvement Commission of the City of Alameda, Approving the Execution and Delivery of an Indenture of Trust, Escrow Agreements and a Bond Purchase Agreement Relating Thereto, Requesting Oversight Board Approval of the Issuance of the Refunding Bonds, Requesting Certain Determinations by the Oversight Board, and Providing for Other Matters Properly Relating Thereto." Adopted; and (14-371 A CC) Resolution No. 14967, "Approving Continuing Disclosure Procedures." Adopted. Joint Meeting Alameda City Council and Successor Agency to the Community Improvement Commission September 16, 2014 | CityCouncil/2014-09-16.pdf |
CityCouncil/2014-12-02.pdf,19 | CityCouncil | 2014-12-02 | 19 | parking, to which Mr. Meeks responded in the affirmative; stated the units would be reduced to 380 without the City-owned property. Mayor Gilmore inquired whether the 31 affordable housing units would go on Site C if Tim Lewis Communities could not acquire Site B, to which Mr. Meeks responded in the affirmative; stated the 31 units would go on a portion of Site B and partially on Site C. Vice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired under what scenario would TLC not be able to acquire the City property, to which Councilmember Tam responded if Council decides to retain Parcel B for future use such as green or open space. Mayor Gilmore noted approval of the Master Plan tonight does not include approval of the Parcel B acquisition, which would be decided later. Councilmember Tam suggested modifying the DA to cap the total number of units to less than 414; stated Council should be responsive to the community's concerns about the number of units, while preserving amenities and public benefits. Councilmember Daysog thanked City Staff and the public; stated the DA gives power to the Council to police the built environment and protects the developer in dealing with the City; the DA also protects the City; the DA is silent on certain subject matters which leaves both parties exposed; the analysis and mitigation plans of the TDM are inadequate; that he supports reducing number of units; suggested placing the issue on hold to strengthen the TDM plan so it is Council-adopted. Vice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated the Del Monte is a beautiful but decaying building with lots of potential; there are many complaints about truck and commute traffic; employees have challenges in finding a wider stock of housing; neighborhood groups worked with staff and the Planning Board to come up with workable alternatives; that she met with the developer team and is impressed with their planning process and the plans to reduce traffic impacts; other communities were successful by allowing flexibility; climate change an issue in Alameda and it is incumbent for e… | CityCouncil/2014-12-02.pdf |
CityCouncil/2015-01-20.pdf,19 | CityCouncil | 2015-01-20 | 19 | The Assistant City Manager stated the Vavrinek contract [paragraph no. 15-056 and the Audit [paragraph no. 15-068 CC/15-002 SACIC on the joint meeting need to be heard tonight; requested the audit be heard next as an outside consultant is present. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 18 January 20, 2015 | CityCouncil/2015-01-20.pdf |
CityCouncil/2015-01-21.pdf,19 | CityCouncil | 2015-01-21 | 19 | Alameda's identified commercial and industrial business clusters by providing both strategic policy and tactual business attraction and retention advice; the seven member Panel would be appointed by the Mayor for two year terms and report to the City Council; in contrast to the EDC, the Panel would be a more flexible and informal structure assessing the rich pool of experience and personal contacts by working with the advisers individually or in subgroups; the Panel may officially convene once or twice per year; there are differences between an ad hoc committee and a Commission; the prior Council decision was progress; she appreciates having insight from the Councilmembers that made the decision; she concurs with Councilmember Daysog; inquired what Vice Mayor Matarrese would like to do and if he is open to having the Economic Development Manager speak to Council about why the change was made. Vice Mayor Matarrese responded everyone can read why the change was made; that he would prefer a more formal and public process; he agrees to table the referral for the moment and come back with a more compelling argument after hearing the objections; he will come back with additional information. Mayor Spencer stated the Mayors Economic Development Panel was agreed upon and can move forward; she is proceeding and looks forward to the Panel, which is a good step moving forward. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS (15-077) Designation of a Voting Delegate and Alternate for the League of California Cities. (Continued from January 20, 2015) Mayor Spencer stated the delegate is appointed by Council, not by the Mayor; the League of California Cities meetings are held monthly; meeting announcements and locations are sent to the representative; the designation of the voting delegate at the annual conference requires a Council vote; the League's mission is to expand and protect local control for cities through education and advocacy and to enhance the quality of life for all Californians; the liaison had been former Councimember Tam and the alte… | CityCouncil/2015-01-21.pdf |
CityCouncil/2015-02-17.pdf,19 | CityCouncil | 2015-02-17 | 19 | established in 2007; dealing with procedure gaps is not a priority against all the other things Council has to do; the matter does not have to be dealt with tonight; that he supports the referral. Mayor Spencer clarified that the resolution speaks to what goes on the agenda; the minutes speak to the process. Vice Mayor Matarrese stated everyone knows the process. Councilmember Oddie stated all five members on the Council have to follow the referral process; Council equity is important; each member is elected but ultimately has just one vote; there were a couple times the responsibility was not exercised; if Council followed the referral process in the Del Monte situation, staff would have been able to hear Council needs; meetings could be more productive with more order; suggested trying the process of requiring all five members of the Council to go through the referral process for one year. Councilmember Daysog stated the Del Monte item had a time frame and he understands the Mayor's desire to agendize the item; there were different opinions with regard to the Special meeting called; past and future Mayors rise to responsibility of a situation and place matters on the agenda accordingly; he is not of the opinion of treating the Mayor differently; it is his understanding that there has been some deference with interactions between the City Manager and the Mayor; he trusts the City Manager to do a professional job. Mayor Spencer stated in the December 2007 minutes, the City Attorney stated making a request is not a violation of the Charter; all five members can equally suggest something to the City Manager; the City Manager ultimately determines what ends up on the agenda; stated that she has not done any referrals; she has called a special meeting, which is separate from what is discussed; she appreciates Councilmember Daysog's comments about the tight time frame; the City Manager would accommodate any one of the Council on matters brought to him. Vice Mayor Matarrese stated the key word in referral process is di… | CityCouncil/2015-02-17.pdf |
CityCouncil/2015-03-03.pdf,19 | CityCouncil | 2015-03-03 | 19 | (15-170) Councilmember Oddie stated that he attended a risk management summit regarding new taser technologies and body cameras. ADJOURNMENT (15-171) There being no further business, Mayor Spencer adjourned the meeting at 12:38 a.m. in memory of Rita Albright Scott and Roan Kees. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger City Clerk The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Sunshine Ordinance. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council March 3, 2015 | CityCouncil/2015-03-03.pdf |
CityCouncil/2015-03-17.pdf,19 | CityCouncil | 2015-03-17 | 19 | MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING TUESDAY- - MARCH 17, 2015- 5:00 P.M. Mayor Spencer convened the meeting at 5:02 p.m. Roll Call - Present: Councilmembers Daysog, Ezzy Ashcraft, Matarrese, Oddie and Mayor Spencer - 5. Absent: None. The meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider: (15-178) Conference with Legal Counsel - Workers' Compensation Claim (54856.95); Claimant: Darren Olson; Claim Against: City of Alameda (15-179) Conference with Labor Negotiators (54957.6); City Negotiator: John Russo; Employee Organizations: Public Safety Unions (International Association of Fire Fighters (IAFF), Alameda Fire Chiefs Association (AFCA). Alameda Police Officers Association (APOA) and Alameda Police Managers Association (APMA)); Issue Under Negotiation: Post Employment Benefits Following the Closed Session the meeting was reconvened and Mayor Spencer announced that regarding the Workers' Compensation Claim and the Conference with Labor Negotiators, the Council unanimously gave direction to staff. Adjournment There being no further business, Mayor Spencer adjourned the meeting at 7:03 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger City Clerk The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Sunshine Ordinance. Special Meeting Alameda City Council March 17, 2015 | CityCouncil/2015-03-17.pdf |
CityCouncil/2015-04-07.pdf,19 | CityCouncil | 2015-04-07 | 19 | MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING TUESDAY- -APRIL 7, 2015- -6:00 P.M. Mayor Spencer convened the meeting at 6:24 p.m. and led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL - Present: Councilmembers Daysog, Ezzy Ashcraft, Matarrese, Oddie and Mayor Spencer - 5. Absent: None. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS (15-204) Update by the Interim Fire Chief on the Fluid Spill in the Estuary. The Assistant City Manager gave a brief presentation. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (15-205) April Squire, Alameda, and Monty Heying, Alameda, provided a handout and discussed the estuary spill that occurred in October 2014. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS (CONTINUED) (15-206) Update by the Interim Fire Chief on the Fluid Spill in the Estuary. Continued. Addressed the February 10th fuel spill; stated the City and the community deserves the truth about what happened; the Coast Guard should take responsibility: Brock deLappe, Alameda Marina. (15-207) Update on Safety of Vacant Buildings at Alameda Point. The Division Manager gave a brief presentation. Discussed squatters accessing the building; stated additional signage is needed; staff has promised to share testing results; the buildings need to come down; suggested hiring veterans to assist including patrol, litter clean up and graffiti removal: Doug Biggs, Alameda Point Collaborative (APC). Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she was distressed by the news story; she toured the buildings, including Building 78 which is adjacent to the former Veteran's housing; the Fire Department has been using buildings to practice; hazardous mitigation training is available; welcomed APC to email Council with problems; stated that she would rather hear directly from APC than on the news. Special Meeting Alameda City Council 1 April 7, 2015 | CityCouncil/2015-04-07.pdf |
CityCouncil/2015-05-05.pdf,19 | CityCouncil | 2015-05-05 | 19 | None. COUNCIL REFERRALS (15-315) Recommendation that City Council Establish a Procedure for Appointments to Regional Boards and Commissions, and Guidelines for How Appointees Reflect City Policy and City Council Directives. (Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft) Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft made brief comments about her referral. Councilmember Daysog stated he concurs with Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft. Vice Mayor Matarrese stated it is the prerogative of the Mayor to represent the City on the boards; expectations include staff making the City representative aware of agenda items which are of interest to the City and reporting back during Council Communications; the current practice has seemed to serve the City well. Councilmember Oddie concurred with Vice Mayor Matarrese; stated appointees should represent policies already adopted by the City; that he would like to see written policy of how appointees should represent the City with proper authority and positions. Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated regional bodies are significant to the City, especially regarding funding streams; the entire Council as a body would is held accountable for decisions; all appointments should be treated equally; the implications of service on regional bodies could be even greater than another body such as the Historical Advisory Board, which comes before the Council; concurred with Councilmember Oddie regarding policy; stated the appointed representative should carry out the will of the Council and the City. Mayor Spencer stated that she would not support asking Council to do more work at this time; she supports the prior practice. Vice Mayor Matarrese stated that he would like assurances that when regional bodies produce an agenda, the primary or alternate representative has to attend; a briefing should be done prior to the meetings; he would like the practice to continue. In response to Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft's inquiry, Mayor Spencer stated staff is sometimes sent to the meetings with the representative. The Interim City Manager stated th… | CityCouncil/2015-05-05.pdf |
CityCouncil/2015-05-19.pdf,19 | CityCouncil | 2015-05-19 | 19 | Vice Mayor Matarrese inquired whether the estimates used to set the special tax anticipate the same rate, which drives General Fund projections. The Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point responded the tax is anticipated to escalate at the Consumer Price Index (CPI) every year; the municipal service tax will escalate over time with the CPI; the inflation factor would be CPI as opposed to a municipal expenditure rate. Councilmember Oddie inquired whether the estimated impact on the General Fund could be broken out by fiscal year as opposed to by phase, to which the Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point responded in the affirmative; stated assumptions can be made by year; impacts were done by phase to avoid false precision. In response to Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft's inquiry, the Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point stated the tax burden is higher for residents than commercial because commercial uses tend to be more sensitive to special taxes; residential users can be burdened more without seeing an impact to value. Joe Ernst, Alameda Point Partners (APP), gave a brief presentation. Linda Mandolini, Eden Housing, made brief comments on affordable housing. Vice Mayor Matarrese inquired when the return to 415 units at North Housing will be codified and established, to which the Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point responded the item will come to Council on June 16th. Vice Mayor Matarrese stated affordable housing is separate and not included in the proforma numbers; he would like the risk to obtain financing be on the Developer and not the City; he would like inclusion of jobs in Phase 1 with milestones; building a ferry terminal with a low budget of $10 million is also a risk as there is no commitment from WETA for ferries; the project should consider a reality based TDM; bonafide numbers are necessary to project mitigation once units are populated; a Project Labor Agreement (PLA) is important to keep jobs local. In response to Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquiry, the Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Poin… | CityCouncil/2015-05-19.pdf |
CityCouncil/2015-06-02.pdf,19 | CityCouncil | 2015-06-02 | 19 | 288 On the call for the question, the motion carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. CITY MANAGER COMMUNICATIONS (15-370) The Interim City Manager discussed the City's progress in meeting regional housing requirements; stated Alameda scored second to last for the period 2007 through 2014; clarified the requirements for an Engineer to approve plans for City projects, including the Shoreline cycle track; discussed Public Works staff qualifications. Councilmember Daysog commended the Public Works Director for his work on the Main Library. Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the Interim City Manager would clarify the wireless telecommunications facility report [addressed on May 19]. The Interim City Manager stated the Radio Frequency (RF) study for 1777 Shoreline Drive was included in the Engineer's report, which was included in the staff report. Councilmember Daysog stated the report was 350 pages which included two RF studies for 1801 Shoreline Drive; it was reasonable for him to think the second RF study was the RF study for 1777 Shoreline Drive. Councilmember Oddie commended the Public Works Director. Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft expressed concern over personal attacks; urged decorum. COUNCIL REFERRALS None. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS (15-371) Councilmember Oddie announced that he attended a Stopwaste.org meeting and would be asking the Council for a position on the plastic bag ban. (15-372) Councilmember Daysog announced that he attend the League of California Cities Easy Bay Division meeting with Mayor Spencer and Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft at which the City's Community Development Director gave a presentation. Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated the Community Development Director gave the Walnut Creek Community Development Director a tour of Harbor Bay Business Park to help the renovation process of their old business park. (15-373) Vice Mayor Matarrese stated a delegation from Dumaguete, Philippines would be hosted this weekend. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council June 2, 2015 | CityCouncil/2015-06-02.pdf |
CityCouncil/2015-09-01.pdf,19 | CityCouncil | 2015-09-01 | 19 | 376 bid projects. (15-530) Dania Alvarez, Alameda, submitted a letter in support of revising the Board appointment process COUNCIL REFERRALS (15-531) Consider Directing the City Manager to Draft a Policy or Strategy to Increase the Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) Above the Current Rate of 10%, with a Portion, or All, of Revenues Attributable to the Rate Above the Original 10% Dedicated to Specified Visitor-Serving Activities. (Councilmember Daysog) Not heard. (15-532) Consider Directing the City Manager to Draft Policies with Regard to AirBnb and Related Temporary Lodging Activities in Residential Homes and Zoning Districts. (Councilmember Daysog) Not heard. (15-533) Consider Requesting an Update on Project Stabilization Agreements (PSA) and Consider Providing Direction on the Priority, Deadline and Parameters of PSA for Alameda Point and Public Works Projects. (Councilmember Oddie) Not heard. (15-534) Consider Directing Staff to Review the City's Process for Board and Commission Appointments. (Councilmember Oddie) Not heard. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS (15-535) Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft announced that Supervisor Wilma Chan will host a conservation workshop on September 12th from 11:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. at Alameda High School. (15-536) Councilmember Oddie announced he attended the Alameda County Lead Prevention Program meeting on August 27th (15-537) Consideration of Mayor's Nominations to the Commission on Disability Issues, Housing Authority Board of Commissioners and Library Board. Mayor Spencer nominated for Carol Gottstein and Tony Lewis appointment to the Commission on Disability Issues; John McCahan for appointment to the Housing Authority Board of Commissioners, and Gertrude Woods and Kathleen Kearney for appointment to the Library Board. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council September 1, 2015 | CityCouncil/2015-09-01.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]) );