pages
142 rows where page = 24
This data as json, CSV (advanced)
date (date) 142 ✖
- 2005-02-28 1
- 2005-05-17 1
- 2005-06-07 1
- 2005-06-13 1
- 2005-06-27 1
- 2005-07-19 1
- 2005-08-16 1
- 2006-06-20 1
- 2006-09-05 1
- 2006-09-19 1
- 2006-10-17 1
- 2006-11-21 1
- 2006-12-05 1
- 2007-01-02 1
- 2007-01-16 1
- 2007-03-26 1
- 2007-06-19 1
- 2007-07-17 1
- 2007-11-06 1
- 2007-12-04 1
- 2008-01-15 1
- 2008-02-19 1
- 2008-05-06 1
- 2008-06-03 1
- 2008-06-17 1
- 2008-07-15 1
- 2008-08-19 1
- 2008-10-07 1
- 2008-10-21 1
- 2009-01-06 1
- 2009-02-03 1
- 2009-02-07 1
- 2009-10-20 1
- 2009-11-03 1
- 2009-11-17 1
- 2010-03-16 1
- 2010-04-20 1
- 2010-05-04 1
- 2010-06-01 1
- 2010-06-15 1
- 2010-07-20 1
- 2010-07-27 1
- 2010-09-07 1
- 2011-02-15 1
- 2012-06-19 1
- 2013-07-23 1
- 2014-07-15 1
- 2014-12-02 1
- 2015-01-20 1
- 2015-01-21 1
- 2015-02-02 1
- 2015-09-15 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
- 2016-06-21 1
- 2016-07-05 1
- 2016-09-20 1
- 2016-10-18 1
- 2016-11-01 1
- 2017-04-07 1
- 2017-04-12 1
- 2017-04-18 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
- 2017-10-03 1
- 2017-10-17 1
- 2017-11-07 1
- 2017-12-05 1
- 2017-12-14 1
- 2017-12-19 1
- 2018-01-16 1
- 2018-02-14 1
- 2018-02-15 1
- 2018-03-06 1
- 2018-04-17 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
- 2018-10-16 1
- 2018-11-28 1
- 2019-02-05 1
- 2019-03-13 1
- 2019-03-19 1
- 2019-04-02 1
- 2019-05-07 1
- 2019-07-02 1
- 2019-07-16 1
- 2019-09-03 1
- 2019-09-12 1
- 2019-12-18 1
- 2020-02-18 1
- 2020-03-03 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
- 2020-07-07 1
- 2020-07-21 1
- 2021-01-05 1
- 2021-01-19 1
- 2021-02-02 1
- 2021-03-11 1
- 2021-03-16 1
- 2021-03-30 1
- 2021-04-05 1
- 2021-04-20 1
- 2021-05-04 1
- 2021-06-15 1
- 2021-07-06 1
- 2021-07-20 1
- 2021-09-07 1
- 2021-09-21 1
- 2021-10-19 1
- 2021-11-02 1
- 2021-11-16 1
- 2021-11-30 1
- 2021-12-07 1
- 2022-01-04 1
- 2022-01-18 1
- 2022-02-01 1
- 2022-02-15 1
- 2022-03-01 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,24 | CityCouncil | 2005-05-17 | 24 | Councilmember deHaan stated Council has been alluding to the inability to live off of billets being attrited down; cuts might not be appropriate; the City needs to be realistic; the easy way, such as 5% cuts, cannot be used; service needs to be reviewed. Mayor Johnson stated that she inquired about purchasing goods and contracting locally; creation of central purchasing was a suggested way to do so; requested other ways to ensure as much money as possible is spent in Alameda and not generating tax revenues for other cities if the budget does not allow for the creation of central purchasing. The Acting City Manager responded staff is addressing the matter the budget was prepared prior to the request; the matter would return separate from the budget perhaps a position could be converted. Councilmember Daysog stated the proposed budget is fabulous, particularly the page reflecting salaries and benefits by department and the statement that: "if adopted, there would be no impact on the General Fund reserve.' John Oldham, Acting President of the Management and Confidential Employees Association (MCEA) thanked the Acting City Manager, Finance Director and Human Resources Department for outlining what is happening with the City budget stated the MCEA membership is concerned about the proposed cuts and the impact on workload as jobs of association members are eliminated; employees are the foundation of what the City does, which is serve the citizens; the proposed budget requests that employees do more with less, which will erode the customer experience; that he started his career with the City in the Recreation and Park Department as a Park Director; the proposed budget eliminates the position that supervises park directors, which is a loss of a mentor who understands the operation; MCEA understands every position has a similar story and choices will be difficult; MCEA has had just over a week to review the budget and proposed reduction in force; MCEA would like to partner with the City to resolve the budget shortfall, wh… | CityCouncil/2005-05-17.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-06-07.pdf,24 | CityCouncil | 2005-06-07 | 24 | Department funds cannot cross pollinate into other activities; the overhead and staffing in the CIC budget is a little over 10%; there are very few bodies managing CIC projects Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funded staff cannot be moved to CIC projects because it is not eligible for them under the grant dollars; there is flexibility within ARRA and CIC staff; only four people are funded through lease revenues; one person will be eliminated; the Development Services Department will continue to morph throughout the year; almost all of the cash flows have been completed, which will provide a good picture of all obligations, pass-throughs, contractual arrangements, etc. Commissioner/Board Member Daysog stated there is a greater control over the operating costs for staff; the City will need to keep a close eye on projects. The Development Services Director stated there is not a lot of cushion built in for all of the capital projects. Commissioner Daysog stated that the $2 million earmarked for the Library might not go for the Library because the money might be needed for the redevelopment projects. The Development Services Director stated the cycle is very common; when large construction projects are started there is a slip period of 18 months to three years before the projects hit the tax rolls. Commissioner Daysog stated that it is important to be very cautious with the large budget projects; the Alameda Power & Telecom cable television project was estimated at $16 million and cost $29 million. The Development Services Director stated that construction costs continue to escalate. Commissioner Daysog thanked the Development Services Director for the leadership shown. Commissioner/Board Member deHaan stated the budget is fragile at the best; any Alameda Point glitches would be a major concern; noted he has deep concerns for the future years; stated that he would like to see budgeting for the retail recruiter position in the future. The Development Services Director stated that a retail recruiter has been fun… | CityCouncil/2005-06-07.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-07-19.pdf,24 | CityCouncil | 2005-07-19 | 24 | amount to get the ball rolling since Council meets every two weeks ; the empowerment lasts only until the next Council meeting and the matter is discussed if the amount would be higher, which is why he was asking about the $35,000; using said amount is acceptable if the amount can carry the day; the Council has to meet its Charter obligation to empower the City Attorney based on the threshold if there is a much larger case. Mayor Johnson stated that she does not have a problem with said suggestion; $35,000 [could be spent until the next Council meeting; at the next Council meeting, the Council would vote to hire the outside counsel inquired whether Councilmember Matarrese was making said suggestion. Councilmember Matarrese stated to use the language in the Charter, it empowers the City Attorney to employ outside counsel. Vice Mayor Gilmore inquired whether the City Attorney has $35,000 to spend; for example, a lawsuit comes in, the City Attorney can spend $35,000, notifies the Council by e-mail, etc. and at the next Council meeting, the Council gets a status report. Mayor Johnson stated the hiring of the attorney that the City Attorney is suggesting would be brought to Council at its next meeting. Vice Mayor Gilmore stated the City Attorney could not do so when the City is sued. Mayor Johnson stated that the City could always change attorneys; that she assumes the Council would approve the attorney that the City Attorney suggests. Vice Mayor Gilmore inquired whether said suggestion means that the attorney has not started work yet. Mayor Johnson responded in the negative; stated the City Attorney can spend $35,000 until the next Council meeting, when the hiring of outside counsel comes to the Council for approval. Councilmember deHaan noted said suggestion differs from the City Attorney's proposal in the staff report stated if the reporting segment is actively working, Council can monitor and get in the middle of things right off the bat if something goes astray; that he does not have enough questions to make dras… | CityCouncil/2005-07-19.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-08-16.pdf,24 | CityCouncil | 2005-08-16 | 24 | Counci lmember Matarrese moved approval [of upholding the Planning Board decision with the conditions outlined]. Vice Mayor Gilmore seconded the motion. Under discussion, Councilmember Daysog stated that he would not support the motion because he is concerned about the business deal; charging rent of $0.40 per square foot gets the City $3 million; charging rent of $0.80 per square foot would greatly increase the amount and is still below the $1.35 per square foot market figure. Mayor Johnson inquired whether the current colors of the historic theater are the original colors. The Development Manager responded the original colors are not known; however, the original colors were light. Councilmember deHaan stated that he is concerned about putting too much on a small parcel; that he would like to see downscaling to bring the project into some proportion; since downscaling is not occurring, he would not support the motion. On the call for the question, the motion carried by the following voice vote: Councilmembers Gilmore, Matarrese, and Mayor Johnson - 3. Noes: Councilmembers Daysog and deHaan - 2. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (05-409) Michael Robinson, San Francisco Bay Resort Club, submitted a letter to the Council; stated that he has been working with Fish and Wild Life, the Veterans Administration, and the Veterans Community Resource Federation (VCRF) to create a plan for Alameda Point that provides for the needs of said entities; requested the cooperation of City staff in submitting the resort plans as part of the upcoming environmental review. (05-410) Pete Clark stated the development of Alameda Point would include transit opportunities. (05-411) Connie J. Rozenkowski, VCRF, stated that there is a proposed plan to convert the Bachelors' Enlisted Quarters at the former Navy Base into a cultural center that would provide programs for veterans, low income families, college students, and foster care children leaving the foster care system; the programs would be funded by the resort development. (05-412) - Bill… | CityCouncil/2005-08-16.pdf |
CityCouncil/2006-06-20.pdf,24 | CityCouncil | 2006-06-20 | 24 | the ROI reduction is the reason that the franchise and in-lieu fees are down 11%, to which the Finance Director responded partially. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Daysog stated finding money under different shells is hard work; choices need to be made; thought should be given to applying future redevelopment revenues to positions and programs a plan is needed for dealing with the public safety shortfall. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Matarrese stated the City is taking a step in undoing some of the tangle with State takeaways; he is concerned with the direction of sales tax revenues and living on the bubble of the property and transfer tax; the City needs to be vigilant and careful; staffing, benefits, and deferred maintenance need to be reviewed in the ten-year forecast; evaluation should be done at mid-term; focus should be on the need first applying incoming revenues to the reserve should be discretionary; damaged infrastructure that provides the highest risk to individuals should be reviewed; sidewalk maintenance should be reviewed closely because of trips and falls. Mayor/Chair Johnson thanked the City Manager/Executive Director and staff for an informative and clear budget stated she appreciates that the budget was put together strategically; goals and long-term issues were addressed; she hopes that the residents learn that the budget is a matter of balancing employees' work is appreciated; employee's issues will be considered. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan stated the budget shows a positive movement the City is not completely out of the woods; the City Manager/Executive Director made some monumental steps to fill required positions and to address needs that have not been met in the last four years. Vice Mayor/Board Member/Commissioner Gilmore stated the last two-year budget addressed cutting programs and positions which would minimally impact services to the residents; the City is now looking at adding services and positions and has come a long way; thanked everyone for… | CityCouncil/2006-06-20.pdf |
CityCouncil/2006-09-05.pdf,24 | CityCouncil | 2006-09-05 | 24 | paper trail is needed for the file. Commissioner Daysog stated the Rutledge's had ample time to provide documentation. Chair Johnson stated the Rutledge's could continue to find ways to change circumstances in order to qualify. The Development Services Director stated the policy would need to be changed if applicants were allowed to change working status to become eligible. Commissioner deHaan inquired whether another home selection would occur, to which the Development Services Director responded in the affirmative. Commissioner deHaan inquired when validation would be initiated for the next draw. The Development Services Director responded as soon as the placement is complete for the current homes. Commissioner Matarrese inquired whether the application process allows applicants to provide evidence of a change in status during the evaluation period, to which the Development Services Director responded in the affirmative. Commissioner Matarrese stated individuals have no control over furloughs and overtime cuts; the current process is valid and allows people to appeal; verification is missing from the Social Security Administration and Peralta Community College District. Commissioner Gilmore stated the overtime calculation was used to disqualify the Rutledge's; now opportunities are not available to make half of the excess income. Commissioner Daysog stated the Rutledge's would be eligible for the next housing program because the application would be different based upon adding a fifth person to the household. Chair Johnson stated allowing individuals to continually change information on the application is unfair to other applicants; applicants could tailor information to meet the qualifications The Development Services Director stated the Rutledge's income was reviewed for a five-member family and the income was still slightly above the threshold. Special Meeting Community Improvement Commission 5 September 5, 2006 | CityCouncil/2006-09-05.pdf |
CityCouncil/2006-09-19.pdf,24 | CityCouncil | 2006-09-19 | 24 | Komorous-Towey Architects, Inc. by increasing the Contract amount by $5,000 to provide additional Architectural and Construction Administration Services for the Civic Center Parking Garage. [For discussion and motion, refer to the recommendation to approve the amended Contract with Architectural Resources Group paragraph no. 06-056CIC. ] (*06-461CC/06-058CIC) Recommendation to accept the Quarterly Financial Report for Fiscal Year 2006 Fourth Quarter. Accepted. AGENDA ITEMS (06-462CC/06-059CIC) Public Hearing to consider certification of a Supplemental Environmental Impact Report, approval of a General Plan Amendment, a Master Plan Amendment, a Development Agreement Amendment, two new Development Agreements, a Disposition and Development Agreement to replace 1,300,000 square feet of approved but not yet constructed office and research and development uses with 400,000 square feet of office use, 300,000 square feet of retail use, 20,000 square feet of health club, and up to 300 residential units in the Catellus Mixed Use Development i and adoption/introduction of related resolutions/ordinances. The project area if located south of the Oakland Alameda Estuary, north of the College of Alameda and the Bayport Residential Project, east of Coast Guard Housing and west of Webster Street. The site is in the MX (Mixed Use) Zoning District. Continued to October 17, 2006. (06-060CIC) Commissioner deHaan stated the Farmer's Market parking site is for sale; a top priority should be to obtain Webster Street parking; requested that the matter be discussed at a future date. Chair Johnson requested an Off Agenda Report on the matter; stated staff has been working with the owner to buy the property. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Mayor/Chair Johnson adjourned the Special Joint Meeting at 8:06 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger, City Clerk Secretary, Community Improvement Commission The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Alameda Reuse 3 an… | CityCouncil/2006-09-19.pdf |
CityCouncil/2006-10-17.pdf,24 | CityCouncil | 2006-10-17 | 24 | Transportation Element in the General Plan. Mayor Johnson inquired whether the intent would be not to amend the policies as part of the EIR process until the analysis is completed. The Public Works Director responded staff's opinion is that the General Plan amendment would need to be initiated in order to use the policies the associated analysis, with the General Plan amendment, is not expected to be complete until September of next year. Councilmember Matarrese inquired which guideline is in conflict with the General Plan. The Public Works Director responded the existing General Plan states that the level of service for intersections should be Level D; mitigation needs to be provided when a traffic analysis is run in an EIR and a level of service F is noted at an intersection; stated mitigation is done by adding lanes. Councilmember Matarrese stated another mitigation could be found other than adding lanes; he was referring to a conflict with the General Plan; the General Plan states that mitigation is necessary when a certain level of service is hit; widening roadways is only one way to mitigate the service. The Public Works Director stated the General Plan is only tied to level of service at intersections, which is measured by delay; the General Plan is very motor vehicle focused and all the policies tend to be motor vehicle focused; TDM is encouraged but there is no detailed information on deductions for TDM. Councilmember Matarrese stated the policies do not conflict with the General Plan; the General Plan requires a level of service. The Pubic Works Director stated that the General Plan also includes Capital Improvement Projects that add lanes. Mayor Johnson stated the Capital Improvement Projects do not need to be done; inquired whether the General Plan states that the only way to mitigate traffic is by adding lanes. The Pubic Works Director responded the General Plan states that the policy is Level D for intersections. Mayor Johnson stated there are countless ways to mitigate the problem; inquired whether… | CityCouncil/2006-10-17.pdf |
CityCouncil/2006-11-21.pdf,24 | CityCouncil | 2006-11-21 | 24 | The City Manager stated staff would check for consistency with the General Plan; the matter would be addressed if the General Plan does not reflect C-C. The Development Services Director stated separate land use maps for the CIC improvement areas would be done away with and default to the City's General Plan; the General Plan would become the dominant, guiding principle behind all land use evaluations for the CIC. In response to Mayor/Chair Johnson's inquiry regarding when said change would take place, the Development Services Director stated the amendment is being considered tonight. Mayo/Chair Johnson inquired whether the action tonight is the last step, to which the Development Services Director responded in the affirmative. There being no further speakers, Councilmember/Commissioner Matarrese moved approval of closing the Public Hearing. Vice Mayor/Commissioner Gilmore seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. (06-572CC/06-072CIC Joint Public Hearing to consider certification of a supplemental Environmental Impact Report (EIR) , approval of a General Plan Amendment, Master Plan Amendment, a Development Agreement Amendment, two new Development Agreements, a Disposition and Development Agreement Amendment and a new Disposition and Development Agreement to replace 1,300,000 square feet of approved, but not yet constructed, office and research and development uses with 400,000 square feet of a Health Club and up to 300 residential units in the Catellus Mixed Use Development. Continued to December 5, 2006. Mayor/Chair Johnson announced that the Hearing was continued to December 5, 2006. David Kirwin, Alameda, stated there are six different topics; noted that he would not have the ability to vote on one item with six different topics; stated the City should report out on closed session discussions on the matter. Mayor/Chair Johnson requested staff to describe the processi noted the agreement would be available to the public a certain number of days prior to the hearing. Special Joint Meeting A… | CityCouncil/2006-11-21.pdf |
CityCouncil/2006-12-05.pdf,24 | CityCouncil | 2006-12-05 | 24 | project should be designed to ensure high quality in amenities, open space, and friendliness; proactive work needs to be done with potential store owners to let them know that potential sales would be not just from the Alameda consumer but from Jack London Square residents. The Base Reuse and Community Development Manager stated the DDA references Chapter 3 of the retail impact update; Chapter 3 contains a table that lists sample tenants; Council would have the opportunity to require Catellus to go back to the EDC, and CIC if desired, to revise the tenanting strategy if there is tenant deviation. Mayor/Chair Johnson stated said requirement should be implemented and would ease a lot of concerns. The Base Reuse and Community Development Manager stated an EDC and CIC re-examination would be triggered if staff perceives that the list of tenants is strained. Councilmember/Authority Member/Commissioner Matarrese stated he would like to see a staff evaluation presented; he is concerned with the potential for an Orchard's with the existing Pagano's Hardware; the project is good and has broad support; the process has been great; the DDA should ensure that discussions happen. Vice Mayor/Authority Member/Commissioner Gilmore stated she is not satisfied with the TDM. Councilmember/Authority Member/Commissioner Matarrese stated different entitlements are given; there is a switch from an all commercial R&D entitlement to an entitlement that has retail and residential; the two entitlements have different impacts; the retail entitlement impacts Webster Street and the rest of the City's retail nodes; inquired whether the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between WABA and Catellus in the DDA. The Base Reuse and Community Development Manager responded the MOU is noted in DDA Section 13.33. louncilmember/Authority Member/Commissioner Matarrese stated the MOU is not mentioned in Section 4.10. The Base Reuse and Community Development Manager stated WABA is addressed in the DA and in the DDA on page 83, and acknowledges that both parti… | CityCouncil/2006-12-05.pdf |
CityCouncil/2007-01-02.pdf,24 | CityCouncil | 2007-01-02 | 24 | would be maintained by the developer and whether the MSD would be paid for by the project and would not be a burden of the City or residents, to which the Base Reuse and Community Development Manager responded in the affirmative. Councilmember deHaan stated a commitment has been made to reutilize some of the buildings even if Clif Bar is not a tenant. inquired whether there is a market for the buildings. The Base Reuse and Community Development Manager responded that Clif Bar is the identified tenant for the adaptive reuse; Catellus could continue the demolition of the warehouses if Clif Bar went away and there were not a replacement tenant ; currently, Catellus is not going in said direction but is looking at preserving more warehouses. Councilmember Matarrese stated that he would like to see some ensurance if the project performs better than expected; a trigger point needs to be established for getting additional funding if $425,000 is not enough; he would like to see some type of trigger point that shows an evaluation would be done against the agreed upon criteria after a defined period of time that allows additional money to be allocated up to a certain percentage for the TDM Program if the project is performing better than the Performa. The Supervising Planner stated the commercial development agreement could be brought back to Council in two weeks with Councilmember Matarrese's suggestion. The Base Reuse and Community Development Manager stated it is important for the motion to have as much specificity tonight for the purpose of having the ordinance adopted in two weeks. Mr. Marshall inquired whether Councilmember Matarrese was making a connection between the project being more successful than anticipated and some additional burden on the TDM Program or whether the thoughts were independent. Councilmember Matarrese stated the connection is that there will be more traffic if the project is wildly successful. Mr. Marshall stated the challenging aspect is how to measure the TDM Program; a cap was established t… | CityCouncil/2007-01-02.pdf |
CityCouncil/2007-01-16.pdf,24 | CityCouncil | 2007-01-16 | 24 | from the day the price was received from the Contractor, which was last week. Commissioner deHaan stated the steel galvanizing issue needs to be addressed now. The Development Manager stated the City's Architect does not feel that the project's integrity would be compromised by deleting the steel galvanizing. Chair Johnson stated the Commission would be able to make decisions when items are brought back. Commissioner deHaan requested that the Development Manager provide a list of items [value engineering add back ] to be considered along with a timeline. Commissioner Matarrese requested: 1) an Off Agenda Report on the value engineered items, 2) any Cineplex and parking garage exterior design changes be approved by the Commission, and 3) a timeline outlining when decisions need to be made for adding back value engineered items; stated a decision would need to be made prior to pouring concrete on whether to use galvanized steel versus painted steel. The Development Manager clarified that all the column bases have granite tile. ADJOURNMEN'T There being no further business, Chair Johnson adjourned the Special Meeting at 8:19 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger Secretary The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act. Special Meeting Community Improvement Commission 4 January 16, 2007 | CityCouncil/2007-01-16.pdf |
CityCouncil/2007-06-19.pdf,24 | CityCouncil | 2007-06-19 | 24 | needed; the City has an obligation to other arts and cultural groups also; the City did not pay rent for the months that the Museum was closed due to a flood; suggested that the City apply the rent savings to the budget cut for the year going forward. Councilmember deHaan stated that the Museum was not operational during the flood situation and did not receive funding all departments were making cuts in Fiscal Year 2004-2005; the 10% cut is not relevant at this time; the Museum and community arts bring a value to the City but have two different missions; he finds it bizarre to get caught up in a $50,000 line item; the Cultural Arts have needs like everyone else; $4,600 is not going to make or break the City; the City needs to work with all entities. Mayor Johnson stated the Alameda Civic Light Opera (ACLO) has not requested assistance in the past; the Public Arts Fund is an annual accumulation. Councilmember Matarrese stated the City has never allocated any money from the Public Arts Fund; the Fund has been growing for the past four years; a number of development activities will contribute to the Fund. Blake Brydon, ACLO Vice President, stated ACLO supports the Alameda Museum; all arts organizations need to work together he likes the idea of having money for the Museum and having a separate line item for the Cultural Arts; every arts organization should be able to apply for a grant every year; equity is needed between organizations; ACLO is constantly fundraising equity is needed among the various organizations; approximately $80,000 is raised through fundraising events and another $40,000 is received from general donations. Mayor Johnson inquired how many hours volunteers contribute. Teddy Tabor, ACLO, responded that she would not be able to count the number of hours; stated ACLO has a paid Director this year; solicitation efforts are necessary. Councilmember Gilmore stated solicitations raise community awareness. Councilmember deHaan stated the Kaufman Auditorium was one day away from a wrecking ball and would … | CityCouncil/2007-06-19.pdf |
CityCouncil/2007-07-17.pdf,24 | CityCouncil | 2007-07-17 | 24 | Commissioner deHaan moved approval of the minutes. Commissioner Gilmore seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. AGENDA ITEMS None. ADJOURNMEN'T There being no further business, Chair Johnson adjourned the Special Meeting at 8:23 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger Secretary, Community Improvement Commission The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act. Special Meeting Community Improvement Commission 4 July 17, 2007 | CityCouncil/2007-07-17.pdf |
CityCouncil/2007-11-06.pdf,24 | CityCouncil | 2007-11-06 | 24 | MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL JOINT CITY COUNCIL AND COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION (CIC) MEETING TUESDAY - -NOVEMBER 6, 2007- - -7:29 P.M. Mayor/Chair Johnson convened the Special Joint Meeting at 8:09 p.m. ROLL CALL - Present : Councilmembers/Commissioners deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese, Tam, and Mayor/Chair Johnson - 5. Absent : None. CONSENT CALENDAR Mayor/Chair Johnson announced that the recommendation to approve a Lease with Alameda Wine Company [paragraph no. 07-045 CIC] was removed from the Consent Calendar for discussion. Vice Mayor/Commissioner Tam moved approval of the remainder of the Consent Calendar. Councilmember/Commissioner deHaan seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. [Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk preceding the paragraph number. ] ( 07-515 - CC/*07-043 CIC) Minutes of the Special Joint City Council and Community Improvement Commission meeting held on October 16, 2007. Approved. (*07-044 CIC) Recommendation to approve a Contract with Ampco Parking, Inc. in the amount of $124,682 for the management and operation of the Civic Center parking structure. Accepted. (07-045 CIC) Recommendation to approve a Lease with Alameda Wine Company for 2315 Central Avenue in the Historic Alameda Theater. The Development Services Director provided a brief presentation. Commissioner Gilmore stated Section 7 of the Lease specifies how the winebar would be used; she would like to add specific language requiring that the winebar remain a winebar and not be allowed to convert to a wine store; the Commission did not intend to have a third wine store in the Park Street District the intent was to have a wine bar that serves food; inquired whether the winebar owner has filed for licenses. The Development Services Director stated the owner does not want to Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council and Community 1 Improvement Commission November 6, 2007 | CityCouncil/2007-11-06.pdf |
CityCouncil/2007-12-04.pdf,24 | CityCouncil | 2007-12-04 | 24 | improvements are estimated at $1 billion; the Cruise Terminal did not go forward because of a $144 million bill to retrofit the piers at the Cruise Terminal San Francisco's challenge is much bigger than Alameda Landing but is similar to the challenges of upgrading the wharf to current seismic conditions and Uniform Building Code as well as geotechnical issues. Councilmember/Commissioner deHaan inquired what the anticipated cost would be. The Base Reuse and Community Development Manager responded the cost would be approximately $15 million in order to accommodate Clif Bar. Councilmember/Commissioner deHaan inquired whether said cost was new compared to the original estimate, to which the Base Reuse and Community Development Manager responded in the affirmative. Councilmember/Commissioner deHaan inquired what was the original estimate. The Base Reuse and Community Development Manager responded that she would need to check; stated an additional $30 million to $35 was originally budgeted to retrofit the wharf and is cut back to $15 million to preserve the warehouse for Clif Bar; the developer states that it is infeasible to spend an additional $15 million to $20 million to preserve the remainder of the wharf; the developer believes that the redesign maintains a lot of the public amenities and benefits and is a better plan in some ways in that the entire waterfront experience is not seven feet above the water; there is the ability to step down and access the water at the water level. Councilmember/Commissioner Matarrese stated that he appreciates the history construction costs escalate; costs for preserving the warehouse and rest of the wharf are not worth holding up the project everything should be done to recycle materials if a couple of buildings are lost; historic significance can be preserved in photos and videos; the buildings are warehouses on a dock; he likes the idea of getting closer to the water's edge and getting millions of dollars in sales tax which helps to have a safe City and good parks; everything sh… | CityCouncil/2007-12-04.pdf |
CityCouncil/2008-01-15.pdf,24 | CityCouncil | 2008-01-15 | 24 | General Fund department expenses; the General Fund does not have extra money; General Fund department expenses will be cut to pay for increasing pension and retirement costs; the question is where cuts will be made. (08-036) Mayor Johnson stated that some public entities are distributing agenda packs via flash drives; inquired whether the option should be considered for Boards and Commissions; stated the CMA is thinking about using flash drives; she would get more information on the matter. (08-037) Councilmember deHaan inquired when the budget review process would start. The City Manager responded internally, the internal process has started; stated a timeline will be provided to Council. Councilmember deHaan inquired whether feedback has been provided regarding the reserve. The City Manager responded information would be provided. Councilmember deHaan inquired whether staff has any idea regarding projected cuts at the State level. The City Manager responded the Finance Director has done an analysis; stated impacts are more immediate for the School District than the City. (08-038) Councilmember deHaan requested interpretation of the Charter provision regarding the use of recreation land owned by the City that was raised during the Golf Course discussion at the January 2, 2008 City Council Meeting. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the Regular Meeting at 12:26 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 24 January 15, 2008 | CityCouncil/2008-01-15.pdf |
CityCouncil/2008-02-19.pdf,24 | CityCouncil | 2008-02-19 | 24 | The Finance Director stated the fourth quarter may be something entirely different. Councilmember Matarrese moved approval of the staff recommendation. Councilmember Gilmore seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Alameda Reuse 12 and Redevelopment Authority, and Community Improvement Commission February 19, 2008 | CityCouncil/2008-02-19.pdf |
CityCouncil/2008-05-06.pdf,24 | CityCouncil | 2008-05-06 | 24 | Housing. The Development Services Director gave a brief presentation. Vice Mayor/Commissioner Tam stated the staff report indicated that the City allowed a very limited number of adjustable, but amortizing loans that could not go negative for the Bayport project; inquired whether there have been any poor experiences with the adjustable loans. The Development Services Director responded in the negative. Councilmember/Commissioner Matarrese stated that he appreciates staff brining the item forward; there is no action at the State or federal level. Councilmember/Commissioner Matarrese moved approval of the staff recommendation. Vice Mayor/Commissioner Tam seconded the motion. Under discussion, Mayor/Chair Johnson stated the fact that the City has not had any foreclosures is indicative of the rational, high quality way the City has addressed the issue. On the call for the question, the motion carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Mayor/Chair Johnson adjourned the Special Joint Meeting at 8:08 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 3 Improvement Commission, and Housing Authority Board of Commissioners May 6, 2008 | CityCouncil/2008-05-06.pdf |
CityCouncil/2008-06-03.pdf,24 | CityCouncil | 2008-06-03 | 24 | The Finance Director stated budget increases would be needed otherwise. Mayor/Chair Johnson inquired whether the Library Fund is paid out of the General Fund. The Finance Director responded approximately 50-55% of Library expenditures are supported by the General Fund, stated the Police Building Bond would have been paid off in 2015, if not refinanced. Councilmember/Authority Member Gilmore stated the first year savings is approximately $600,000; inquired how much cash would not be spent the second year, to which the Finance Director responded $367,000. louncilmember/Authority Member Gilmore inquired how many more years the repayment would be pushed out, to which the Finance Director responded two years. Mayor/Chair Johnson inquired what are the fees. The Finance Director responded $150,000 for issuance; stated the underwriter's discount is $41,175. Mayor/Chair Johnson inquired whether the $41,175 is in addition to the $150,000, to which the Finance Director responded in the affirmative. Vice Mayor/Authority Member Tam stated fees would be rolled back into debt service. Mayor/Chair Johnson stated money would be borrowed to restructure borrowed money. Councilmember/Authority Member deHaan inquired what was the interest on the 1996 Police Building, to which the Finance Director responded 4% to 6%. Councilmember/Authority Member deHaan inquired what was the interest on the Golf Course, to which the Finance Director responded 3.9% to 5.75%. Councilmember/Authority Member deHaan inquired what the new interest rate would be, to which the Finance Director responded the all in true interest costs is approximately 5%. Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Alameda Public 10 Financing Authority, and Community Improvement Commission Meeting June 3, 2008 | CityCouncil/2008-06-03.pdf |
CityCouncil/2008-06-17.pdf,24 | CityCouncil | 2008-06-17 | 24 | Department grant and fee revenues would be allocated to the Crossing Guard program; the proposed rescheduling results in approximately 40% cost reduction; inquired whether the $93,000 is expected to offset the reduction. The Police Chief responded $93,000 would help to recover the additional cost not budgeted for the next fiscal year. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Gilmore inquired what would be the reporting procedure for Fire Department overtime. The City Manager/Executive Director responded the Fire Department would be monitoring the issue on a daily basis; stated monthly or quarterly reports could be presented to Council. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan inquired when the Public Works Capital Improvement Program (CIP) would be addressed. The Public Works Director responded the CIP would be adopted with the budget. Councilmember/BoardMember/Commissioner deHaan inquired what is the deferred maintenance; stated the report shows medium priority projects total $66.5 million. The Public Works Director responded the deferred maintenance report will be coming to Council in approximately four weeks; Council will see the Pedestrian Plan later in the year; high, medium, and low priority projects were identified for the Pedestrian Plan; appropriations will be reviewed this coming year; the only Pedestrian Project included in the next two year CIP is for access across the Estuary. Mayor/Chai Johnson stated the concern is that $4 million was spent from the General Fund to catch up on some of the deferred maintenance and this year $1.5 million will be deferred. The Public Works Director stated all Measure B funds are being used; staff was successful in receiving Proposition 1B funds. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Gilmore stated a funding stream has not been identified for other post employee benefits ; the proposed General Fund budget totals $75.4 million for the fiscal year; the accrued liability for post employment benefits was $75.4 million as of January 2007. Special Joint Meeting Alamed… | CityCouncil/2008-06-17.pdf |
CityCouncil/2008-07-15.pdf,24 | CityCouncil | 2008-07-15 | 24 | which Mr. Ratto and Ms. Moehring responded in the negative. Commissioner deHaan moved approval of the staff recommendation. Chair Johnson stated that a requirement should be added regarding spending a certain percentage of grant funding on marketing and promotion. Commissioner Matarrese seconded the motion with inclusion of a policy for promotion and evaluation for GABA [in addition to PSBA and WABA; stated the issue is a policy decision; a return is needed if the City invests approximately $225,000 in tax dollars; the return can be predicated on 50% of grant funding going to promotion; evaluations need to be performed. Commissioner Gilmore stated the measurement [of success) would be difficult for GABA because GABA is spread across the City. Chair Johnson stated customer surveys could be performed. Commissioner Matarrese stated business license fees are calculated on gross; increased performance could be reviewed. Councilmember deHaan concurred that an evaluation needs to be performed. Commissioner Tam stated sales tax revenue has been flat for many years; a better measurement would be the return to the City; business districts take care of the street maintenance and advertising, which the City cannot do; she does not want measurement tied directly to producing a business tax increment. Commissioner Matarrese stated that business license tax and sales tax revenues are a bottom line measurement. Commissioner Tam clarified that the motion is to fund recommended levels to all three business districts; inquired what would be the threshold for advertising and promotion. Chair Johnson responded 50%; stated GABA can advise how their success would be measured. Commissioner Gilmore stated GABA is different from PSBA and WABA ; PSBA and WABA are spending an incredible amount of money on advertising; GABA has never spent 50% of grant funding on advertising. Eric Kos, GABA President, stated that he has been GABA President Special Meeting Community Improvement Commission 5 July 15, 2008 | CityCouncil/2008-07-15.pdf |
CityCouncil/2008-08-19.pdf,24 | CityCouncil | 2008-08-19 | 24 | Board Member Matarrese stated the City needs to talk to its federal elected officials to find out why the City cannot get less acreage at no cost and receive money for cleanup. Chair Johnson inquired whether $100 million is enough to clean up the contamination. The Assistant City Manager responded the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) believes the amount is sufficient stated the Army would be liable for the waste. Board Member deHaan stated the [Fort Ord] Reuse Authority would be dissolved once the land is transferred. Chair Johnson stated cleanup would be privatized; working with the Army is different than working with the Navy. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Mayor/Chair Johnson adjourned the Special Meeting at 8:43 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 7 Reuse and Redevelopment Authority, and Community Improvement Commission August 19, 2008 | CityCouncil/2008-08-19.pdf |
CityCouncil/2008-10-07.pdf,24 | CityCouncil | 2008-10-07 | 24 | Councilmember deHaan stated a better name would be one that is historical in nature. Mayor Johnson concurred with Councilmember deHaan; stated a temporary name should be used. Vice Mayor Tam stated that the motion should also include assurance that the TDM addresses what would happen on the other side of the [Park Street ] bridge. Councilmember deHaan stated Council continually discusses sales tax leakage. the area provides an opportunity to capture sales tax leakage. On the call of the question, the motion carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. (08-413 CC/ARRA/08-53 CIC) Recommendation to approve the second amendment to the Exclusive Negotiation Agreement with SCC Alameda Point LLC . Debbie Potter, Base Reuse and Community Development Manager, gave an overview of the proposed Second Amendment to the ENA, stating that in June 2008, SunCal Companies, Alameda Point's master developer, requested authorization from the ARRA to secure a financial partner to assist in carrying out their obligations under the ENA. Pursuant to the ENA, a transfer requires approval of CIC, CC, ARRA. On Aug. 19th, the ARRA considered the transfer to the new entity: Cal Land Ventures, a joint partnership between D.E. Shaw Real Estate Portfolio Twenty, LLC and WM Development Group, a wholly-owned affiliate of SunCal. Discussion of the transfer was based on the following core principles - 1) any new entity must retain SunCal as the day-to-day manager of the project, 2) SunCal should retain equity interest in the new venture, and 3) new entity should commit to invest funds necessary to meet obligations under the ENA. The City/ARRA/CIC felt it was critical to amend the ENA to address these core principles, because City entities are not parties to an operating agreement between joint venture partners. The 2nd amendment to the ENA provides Approval of ownership transfer, establishes new termination date of July 20, 2010 - this date reflects SunCal's intention to seek voter approval of its proposed land plan in Nov. 2009 and anticipates concluding D… | CityCouncil/2008-10-07.pdf |
CityCouncil/2008-10-21.pdf,24 | CityCouncil | 2008-10-21 | 24 | along with a revenue source by detail. Mayor/Chair Johnson stated the amount charged needs to include the amount of time a Captain spends overseeing contract overtime. In response to Mayor Johnson's inquiry regarding the Meyers House, the City Manager stated the amount was removed from the Recreation budget and was not funded. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Matarrese moved approval of the staff recommendation. Vice Mayor/Board Member/Commission Tam seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Mayor/Chair Johnson adjourned the Special Meeting at 8:54 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 7 Redevelopment Authority, and Community Improvement Commission October 21, 2008 | CityCouncil/2008-10-21.pdf |
CityCouncil/2009-01-06.pdf,24 | CityCouncil | 2009-01-06 | 24 | MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY- - -JANUARY 6 , 2009- - - -7:31 P.M. Chair Johnson convened the Special Meeting at 8:08 p.m. ROLL CALL - Present : Commissioners deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese, Tam and Chair Johnson - 5. Absent : None MINUTES (09-02) - Minutes of the Special Joint City Council, Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority and CIC Meetings held on December 16, 2008. Approved. Commissioner deHaan moved approval of the minutes. Commissioner Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. AGENDA ITEM ( 09-03) Recommendation to maintain the current façade of the northern elevation of the Civic Center parking garage and re- allocate funds to other redevelopment priorities, including improvement of the appearance of the Bill Chun Service Station. The Redevelopment Manager gave a brief presentation. Commissioner deHaan inquired how much of the planting area is within the City's jurisdiction. The Redevelopment Manager responded the entire area; stated the area is narrow; trees are not a viable option; the City would need to acquire some of Long's property to plant trees; Long's uses the area for delivery. Commissioner deHaan inquired whether drainage is an issue, to which the Redevelopment Manager responded in the negative. Commissioner deHaan inquired whether the Redevelopment Manager reviewed the letter from Jennifer Bowles. The Redevelopment Manager responded in the affirmative; stated Ms. Bowles expressed concerns regarding bamboo; the Architect noted a number of examples where bamboo has worked in the Bay Area. Special Meeting Community Improvement Commission 1 January 6, 2009 | CityCouncil/2009-01-06.pdf |
CityCouncil/2009-02-03.pdf,24 | CityCouncil | 2009-02-03 | 24 | was in the red and in danger of folding the business is profitable and is almost a year ahead of projections. Commissioner deHaan stated the theatre developer was going to open a wine bar in the theatre and that has not happened; hours of operation would be limited. The Development Services Director stated the theatre developer discussed opening a wine bar at the same time; the lease does not require a wine bar be built upstairs. On the call for the questions, the motion carried by the following voice vote: Ayes : Commissioners Gilmore, Matarrese, and Chair Johnson - 3. Noes: Commissioner deHaan - 1. Abstentions Commissioner Tam - 1. (ARRA) Recommendation to approve a Five Year Lease and Repayment Plan/Write-of: with AC Hornet Foundation. [Note: The minutes for this item are part of the ARRA record] (ARRA) Recommendation to approve an amendment to Consultant Contract with Harris & Associates for On-Call Services for Review of Land Development Entitlement Applications for Redevelopment of Alameda Point. Continued. ORAL REPORTS (ARRA) Oral Report from Member Matarrese, Restoration Advisory Board (RAB) - Highlights of January 8th Alameda Point RAB Meeting. [Note: The minutes for this item are part of the ARRA record] ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Chair Johnson adjourned the Special Joint Meeting at 1:22 a.m. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger Secretary, Community Improvement Commission The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act. Special Joint Meeting Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority 4 and Community Improvement Commission February 3, 2009 | CityCouncil/2009-02-03.pdf |
CityCouncil/2009-02-07.pdf,24 | CityCouncil | 2009-02-07 | 24 | the fund balance is $1. 1 million less should be made clear. Councilmember Gilmore stated that she is recommending that the fund balance reflect the true amount, not that the amount be taken out of the General Fund and the ISF deficit be zeroed out she prefers the three year repayment plan. Mayor Johnson inquired why the IT amount is reflected if it has not been spent, to which the City Manager responded the number represents the amount projected to be spent by the end of the Fiscal Year. Mayor Johnson requested a breakdown of the IT number. Councilmember Gilmore stated the plan is good; the amount will be accounted for on the front page of the fund balance; departments would be charged for three years to catch upi staff would account for future costs; Council reprioritized IT funds years ago; requested that IT give a presentation breaking down how the $600,000 would be spent and the plans going forward to modernize the City, including cost. The Interim Finance Director suggested the information be presented as part of the Finance budget. Mayor Johnson inquired whether the Council has ever made cuts in the amounts departments pay to the IT ISF. Councilmember Gilmore stated IT was a separate department when Council cut the budget. The City Manager stated that the IT ISF started a year ago. Mayor Johnson stated that she does not recall IT being cut. Vice Mayor deHaan stated that he could not support paying off the [ISF] deficit without knowing the history, which should be provided. Councilmember Matarrese stated IT is the ideal situation to contract out; server farms can be maintained by companies offsite; that he wants separate direction given; the Council seems to be in consensus that the fund balance on the front page of the budget should be the true number; separate direction should be given about whether the debt should be repaid over three years or zeroed out now. Mayor Johnson stated money should not be taken out of the fund Special Meeting Alameda City Council 24 February 7, 2009 | CityCouncil/2009-02-07.pdf |
CityCouncil/2009-10-20.pdf,24 | CityCouncil | 2009-10-20 | 24 | The Planning Services Manager responded staff has been working with the Collin's representatives on a wide range of issues; stated some initial requests have been made for concessions which are not acceptable, such as waiving all fees; the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) is underway. Mayor/Chair Johnson stated a formalized process is needed to determine whether or not a project is within the density bonus ordinance based upon the economics of the project. The Planning Services Manager stated staff would have to make a recommendation to the Planning Board regarding the project's concessions, and incentives. Mayor/Chair stated the first determination should be whether the project qualifies under the density bonus ordinance. Vice Mayor/Commissioner deHaan stated the issue seems to be open ended in the decision processi controls are needed so that staff ensure consistent decisions are made. Councilmember/Commissioner Gilmore inquired how a density bonus project would be handled. The Planning Services Manager responded an applicant would request a meeting with staff to negotiate and review exceptions that would be considered; staff would not approve an applicant's request for a density bonus plus being twenty-five or thirty feet above the height limit; a more reasonable request would be ten feet over the height limit. Councilmember/Commissioner Gilmore inquired what would happen after the negotiation process. The Planning Services Manager responded plans would be developed and submitted; stated the process is similar to variance requests. Councilmember/Commissioner Gilmore stated the noticing should state that the applicant is requesting a density bonus so that everyone is aware that the project is different; developers should be aware that there would be heightened scrutiny within the community. The Planning Services Manager stated the Council/Commission seems to want some type of pre-application process. Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority, and Community Improvemen… | CityCouncil/2009-10-20.pdf |
CityCouncil/2009-11-03.pdf,24 | CityCouncil | 2009-11-03 | 24 | Vice Mayor/Commissioner deHaan stated the State take away is going to be a major concern. The Economic development Director stated everyone is frustrated by the situation; rules seem to change or get developed along the way with respect to State payments; a lawsuit has been filed regarding the legitimacy of taking money; the lawsuit would be appealed if successful; the money will sit in a bank account or trust and not be put to productive use in the community. Councilmember/Commissioner Matarrese moved approval of the staff recommendation. Vice Mayor/Commissioner deHaan seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business Mayor/Chair Johnson adjourned the Joint Meeting at 11:11 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 and Community Improvement Commission November 3, 2009 | CityCouncil/2009-11-03.pdf |
CityCouncil/2009-11-17.pdf,24 | CityCouncil | 2009-11-17 | 24 | MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL JOINT CITY COUNCIL AND COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION (CIC) MEETING TUESDAY - -NOVEMBER 17, 2009 -7:31 P.M. Mayor/Chair Johnson convened the Joint Meeting at 12:27 a.m. ROLL CALL - Present : Councilmembers / Commissioner deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese, Tam and Mayor/Chair Johnson - 5. Absent : None. MINUTES (09-477 CC/09-52 CIC) Minutes of the Special Joint City Council and CIC Meeting held on November 3, 2009 and the Special CIC Meeting held on November 4, 2009. Vice Mayor/Commissioner deHaan moved approval of the minutes. Councilmember/Commissioner Gilmore seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. REGULAR AGENDA ITEM (09-478 CC) Public Hearing to Consider Introduction of Ordinance Amending Municipal Code by Adding Subsection 30-17 (Density Bonus Regulations) to Article I (Zoning Districts and Regulations) of Chapter XXX (Development Regulations) to Allow Density Bonus Units and Incentives or Concessions to Developers that Voluntarily Provide for Affordable Housing Units as an Element of Their Residential Development Project. Amended and introduced: and (09-53 - CIC) Resolution No. 09-163, "Amending Resolution No. 04- 127 to Reduce the Inclusionary Unit Requirement Policy for Residential Developments in the Business and Waterfront and West End Community Improvement Project Areas from at Least 25% to at Least 15%. " Adopted. The Planning Services Manager gave a brief presentation. Councilmember/Commissioner Tam inquired whether reducing the inclusionary unit requirement from 25% to 15% would provide longer term affordable housing. Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council and Community Improvement Commission November 17, 2009 | CityCouncil/2009-11-17.pdf |
CityCouncil/2010-03-16.pdf,24 | CityCouncil | 2010-03-16 | 24 | Vice Mayor deHaan stated that he understands Councilmember Matarrese's motion. On the call for the question, the motion carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Councilmembers deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese, and Mayor Johnson - 4. Abstentions: Councilmember Tam - 1. (10-127) Resolution No. 14432, "Supporting the City's Response to Google Inc.'s Request for Information Regarding the Google Fiber for Communities Initiative and Authorizing the Interim City Manager to Designate a Single Point of Contact and to Establish a Google Streamlining Task Force for the Project.' Adopted. The Deputy City Manager - Development Services gave a brief presentation. Speakers: Howard Ashcraft, Wire Alameda; and Jim Meyer, Wire Alameda. Councilmember Matarrese moved adoption of the resolution. Councilmember Tam seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. Vice Mayor deHaan stated that he is very impressed with the community coming forward regarding Google Wireless and the American Cup. On the call for the question the motion carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA None. COUNCIL REFERRALS (10-128) Consider Pursing the Establishment of a Task Group to Promote, Market and Support Businesses, Educational and Technology Resource Opportunities. Continued to April 6, 2010. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS None. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the meeting at 1:43 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 24 March 16, 2010 | CityCouncil/2010-03-16.pdf |
CityCouncil/2010-04-20.pdf,24 | CityCouncil | 2010-04-20 | 24 | transportation mitigation for each unit up to 1,000 units, which is described as the first phase of the project; in return, Chinatown agreed that they would not submit a lawsuits for the first phase. Mayor/Chair Johnson inquired how the matter fits with current discussions, to which the Planning Services Manager responded the mitigation payment still applies; mitigation required for units beyond the first 1,000 is unresolved with Chinatown. Mayor/Chair Johnson stated the Alameda Point Community Partners (APCP) plan was for 1,800 units; inquired how the proposal for more units fits into the agreement. The Planning Services Manager responded the agreement requires that the City coordinate with Chinatown through the entire environmental process, allows for a pre- determined mitigation payment for the first 1,000 units, and does not limit what the City can do in terms of an ultimate development envelope for Alameda Point; the City understood that there would be more than 1,000 units; the key is to coordinate the EIR process with the Chinatown process. Mayor/Chair Johnson inquired whether there have to be mitigation measures after first 1,000 units. The Planning Services Manager responded in the affirmative; stated the Planning Board representative on the Chinatown committee does wants to start conversations now and does not want to wait until the EIR is published. Mayor/Chair Johnson inquired what number is being used as the basis for discussions. The Planning Services Manager responded Chinatown work with whatever number the City puts out; until recently, Chinatown was working with the Measure B number; Chinatown will be working with the new application number once the Notice of Preparation is released. Speakers: Frank Faye, SunCal; and Rosemary McNally, Alameda. Following Mr. Faye's comments, Vice Chair/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan inquired whether costs that SunCal wishes to recover could be broken down. Mr. Faye responded in the affirmative; stated SunCal is not seeking to recover costs; the arrangement with … | CityCouncil/2010-04-20.pdf |
CityCouncil/2010-05-04.pdf,24 | CityCouncil | 2010-05-04 | 24 | development and does not provide a larger variety of home opportunities for different lifestyles. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Matarrese stated in 2007, the idea was to plug SunCal into the Preliminary Design Concept (PDC) which includes a certain number of residential units; [the number of] units increased; inquired whether the numbers are driven by financials first, to which Mr. Brown responded said statement is fair. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Matarrese stated a financial balance is trying to be struck; 4,000 units are not for the sake of getting transit but are for financial return; that he would like some counter to staff's comments regarding revenue being overstated; real numbers need to be provided regarding a unreliable public financing stream via redevelopment funds; the next meeting should include a reminder of the milestones and explain where negotiations should be in terms of the milestones. Vice Mayor/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan stated that he does not doubt that the process is being driven by economics; inquired whether the PDC has been revisited, to which Mr. Brown responded that he has only seen the general write-ups. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Tam stated sixteen years of work has been done by various groups, consultants, and community meetings; economics and density drive the project; density has a play into ridership; ridership determines whether transit is viable or not; discussions have involved having amenities on the island to reduce vehicle trips off the island; the City does not want sales tax revenue to go off the island; a transit oriented development provides public and private amenities; Harbor Bay can barely get 40% fare box return on the ferry because of insufficient ridership. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Matarrese stated the commercial aspect would be further studied; that he hopes the commercial aspect would include job replacement and not just involve retail; jobs were eliminated when the Base closed. Mr. Brown stated the desig… | CityCouncil/2010-05-04.pdf |
CityCouncil/2010-06-01.pdf,24 | CityCouncil | 2010-06-01 | 24 | The Public Works Director stated the matter is being fine-tuned. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Gilmore stated that she assumes there would be a similar process with AC Transit. The Public Works Director stated a similar process would be done with AC Transit eventually. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Tam stated everything takes time; inquired whether there is enough time to gather information for the June 21st Planning Board Meeting. The Public Works Director responded the exact ferry terminal location is less important than the idea of what to have; stated the traffic model would not be that sensitive and the Board could see how to interrelate transit and land development density. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Gilmore inquired whether the ferry terminal would be somewhere in the seaplane lagoon. The Public Works Director responded the seaplane lagoon is being proposed; stated the proposal is a transit hub in the seaplane lagoon with a ferry terminal at the northeast corner; staff has had discussions with WETA regarding whether there will be enough ridership to bifurcate from Oakland and move the ferry to the seaplane lagoon; that he would like to discuss adding Harbor Bay; WETA only wants to take on new ferry service out of the seaplane lagoon if it is financially feasible and the ridership is there; otherwise, the ferry terminal would remain at the Main Street terminal; there would be shuttles from Alameda Point to the seaplane lagoon by the end of the 3rd phase. In response to Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan's inquiry, the Public Works Director responded WETA's boats accommodate 119 and 159 passengers. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan stated other options need to be reviewed; other options are getting few and far between; today's generation will change employers many times; the vast majority of employees are in the south bay; Concord does not have any bus service; BART is available in Dublin but is limited in other areas; the City had three years of comm… | CityCouncil/2010-06-01.pdf |
CityCouncil/2010-06-15.pdf,24 | CityCouncil | 2010-06-15 | 24 | Mayor Johnson - 2. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (10-299) Michael Johnson Torrey wished Vice Mayor deHaan and Councilmember Matarrese Happy Father's Day. * * (10-300) Vice Mayor deHaan moved approval of continuing the meeting past midnight Councilmember Tam seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. COUNCIL REFERRALS (10-301) Consideration of Addressing Parking in Impacted Residential Neighborhoods around Alameda High School. Councilmember Matarrese gave a brief presentation. Speaker: Robb Ratto, PSBA. Councilmember Gilmore encouraged staff to look at St. Mary's High School in Berkeley; stated students get parking permits, but priority is given to students who carpool; St. Joseph's High School would be another place to look. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council June 15, 2010 | CityCouncil/2010-06-15.pdf |
CityCouncil/2010-07-20.pdf,24 | CityCouncil | 2010-07-20 | 24 | to review, to which Mr. Brown responded in the affirmative. Vice Mayor/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan inquired why the last, best, and final offer was provided five days before the meeting. Mr. Brown responded SunCal has had weekly meetings with staff on the entire Alameda Point project; stated numerous issues have been addressed; the DDA had to be written to meet the schedule and the schedule was achieved; two or three drafts have been shared with staff. Vice Mayor/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan inquired whether Mr. Brown has been privy to concerns regarding the job/housing imbalance, economic development strategy, traffic, and endangered species prior to the staff report going out; stated SunCal knew what needed to be tackled; that he does not know whether a requested commercial study has been provided; SunCal's mode of operation has been the 11 th hour. Mr. Brown responded the traffic study has been an on-going effort for the last four years; recently, the public has been engaged. Vice Mayor/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan inquired what is different from the traffic study developed from the Preliminary Development Concept (PDC). Mr. Brown responded that he does not know, but SunCal's Transportation Consultant would know. Vice Mayor/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan inquired when SunCal hired its Transportation Consultant. Jim Daisa, SunCal Transportation Consultant, responded he was hired approximately 9 months ago or longer. Vice Mayor/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan inquired when the traffic study was prepared. Mr. Daisa responded that he has not prepared a traffic study; however, he has developed a transportation strategy. Vice Mayor/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan inquired how the PDC traffic study differs. Mr. Daisa responded the PDC study was an impact study, which is not what SunCal prepared; SunCal's transportation strategy is consistent with, and has some level of Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Alameda Reuse and 12 Redevelopment Authority, and Community Improvement Commission July 2… | CityCouncil/2010-07-20.pdf |
CityCouncil/2010-07-27.pdf,24 | CityCouncil | 2010-07-27 | 24 | property which generated approximately $200,000; at the time, her recommendation was to put the money into a facility maintenance reserve; the policy is to take one-time property sale revenues and put the money into an open space fund; a small amount was used to pay for the final purchase of the Beltline property; the question is what to do with the money when the City decides to liquidate property. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Tam inquired whether the $400,000 [set aside for a fire station] is in the General Fund. The Interim City Manager/Executive Director responded the $400,000 is in a reserve fund in the General Fund and is not included in the $12 million General Fund balance. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Gilmore stated the City is paying a lot of rent to house fire fighters next to a fire station that is not earthquake safe; a lot of money would be needed for expensive repairs in order to use the fire station; the City could spend money on something that could be constructed and City owned instead of putting money into something that the City does not own and would not use long term; that she is trying the nudge the process along. The Interim City Manager/Executive Director stated site location is not easy, especially because location impacts response time. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Gilmore stated a letter has been received from SunCal regarding a development program; there have been disagreements on how things have been charged; that she assumes staff would come back with explanations when discrepancies are reconciled. The Interim City Manager/Executive Director stated that she would review the accounts and ensure that everything is reconciled. Vice Mayor/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan inquired whether the City needs to get some answers from SunCal also. The Deputy City Manager - Development Services responded the City would need to get information on eligible pre-development expenses; however, the point is moot now. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Matarrese mov… | CityCouncil/2010-07-27.pdf |
CityCouncil/2010-09-07.pdf,24 | CityCouncil | 2010-09-07 | 24 | The Deputy City Manager - Development Services stated some Commissioners want to know the financial aspects, which would be pretty far along in the study. Commissioner Tam inquired whether knowing how much the land would sell for would be important. The Deputy City Manager - Development Services responded what the land is worth versus relocation costs are two separate issues. *** Councilmember/Commissioner Tam left the dais at 11:47 p.m. and returned at 11:50 p.m. Commissioner deHaan stated a lot of loose ends exist; that he does not think the Commission is ready to go forward; costs could be calculated on the back of a napkin; the ENA does not have to be done immediately. The Deputy City Manager - Development Services stated concrete answers would not be known until the relocation study is done. Commissioner deHaan inquired what would be the square footage of the Animal Shelter, to which the Deputy City Manager - Development Services responded staff would hire someone to answer said question. Commissioner Matarrese stated the idea of the ENA would be to sit down with Warmington Residential to see their valuations and what they can do to build houses in the area; the output would be a Development Agreement (DA); the DA would need to be compatible with uses, including the Packers Building, and would have to account for relocating two City operations; moved approval of directing the Interim Executive Director to come back with an updated ENA for the Commission to discuss, to define a timeframe in the ENA for the CIC and Warmington Residential that would point to the parallel work that has to be done exclusively, including existing operations around the Alaska Packers Building, and to look at other rules and benefits for the City, including a labor agreement, appropriate zoning, and all public hearings necessary to ensure that the public knows the intent and milestones in between. * (10-431 CC/10-68 CIC) Councilmember/Commissioner Matarrese moved approval of continuing past 12:00 midnight. Vice Mayor/Commissioner de… | CityCouncil/2010-09-07.pdf |
CityCouncil/2011-02-15.pdf,24 | CityCouncil | 2011-02-15 | 24 | Year 2009-2010 and was in the norm for projections. In response to Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Johnson's inquiry regarding the Community Development positions, the Deputy City Manager - Development Services stated the Community Development Department is doing much better than in the last three years; currently, Community Development funds are $40,000 in the black; staff expects to break even by the end of the year even with budget adjustments; permits have increased by 37% with a 70% increase in construction value; two code enforcement inspectors have been converted to permit positions; code enforcement generates over $260,000 in revenue and expenditures are at $179,000; a temporary, part-time counter planner has been doing a tremendous job; staff would like to change the position to a full-time, permanent position. The Building Official stated the part-time counter planner has provided consistency and improved customer service. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Johnson stated some of the revenue from the sale of the Alameda Towne Centre sale should be set aside for capital improvements; the money is one-time revenue. The Acting City Manager/Executive Director stated most of what is in the General Fund are one-time expenses. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Johnson inquired whether the $2.1 in property transfer tax [from the sale of the Alameda Towne Center] would be spent through June. The Controller responded in the affirmative; stated some payments are required versus discretionary; the City cannot get out of the $860,000 EMS payment and $575,000 in labor settlements; the cable studio upgrade expenditure is optional. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Johnson stated cable studio upgrading needs to be done; maintaining fiscal discipline in Internal Service Funds is important. The Controller stated all funds are contributing to Internal Service Funds; staff wants to bring up the fund balance in the unemployment insurance fund. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Johnson stated d… | CityCouncil/2011-02-15.pdf |
CityCouncil/2012-06-19.pdf,24 | CityCouncil | 2012-06-19 | 24 | Councilmember deHaan started the matter is a continuing step in the review process. Mayor Gilmore stated having five members makes having a quorum easier. In response to Vice Mayor Bonta's inquiry regarding other Boards and Commissions with five members, the City Clerk listed seven bodies: Civil Service Board, Historical Advisory Board, Housing and Building Code Hearing and Appeals Commission, Library Board, Open Government Commission, Public Art Commission and Public Utilities Board. Councilmember Johnson stated the two open spots have made having a quorum difficult. Councilmember Tam noted the Recreation and Park Commission President was directed to have the Commission consider the matter and come back to Council. Councilmember Tam seconded the motion, which carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Councilmembers Bonta, deHaan, Tam and Mayor Gilmore - 4. Noes: Councilmember Johnson - 1. (12-330) Introduction of Ordinance Amending the Alameda Municipal Code by Adding Section 2-67 Relating to Prevailing Wages. The Assistant City Attorney gave a brief presentation. Speaker: Andy Slivka, Carpenters Union/Building Trades, stated that the one thing he disagrees with is the staff report indication that there would be 15% increase in cost; urged adoption of the ordinance. Vice Mayor Bonta moved introduction of the ordinance. Councilmember Tam seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. (12-331) Ordinance No. 3048 "Amending the Alameda Municipal Code by Repealing Subsections 18-5.10 (Lateral Testing Upon Sale). 18-5.11 (Private Sewer Lateral Testing Procedures and Requirements), 18-5.12 (Failure of Test), 18-5.13 (Lateral Certification), 18-5.14 (Condominium and Cooperative Apartment Buildings) of Section 18-5 (Abatement of Improper Sewer Connections) in their Entirety, and by Adding Section 18-6 (Sewer Lateral Testing) to Article 1 (Sewers) of Chapter XVIII (Sewer and Water). Finally passed. The City Engineer gave a brief presentation. Vice Mayor Bonta moved final passage of the ordinance. Council… | CityCouncil/2012-06-19.pdf |
CityCouncil/2013-07-23.pdf,24 | CityCouncil | 2013-07-23 | 24 | Vice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated the City would be flexible. * (13-370) Councilmember Daysog moved approval of the meeting continuing after 11:00 p.m. Vice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft seconded the motion which carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Councilmembers Daysog and Ezzy Ashcraft and Mayor Gilmore - 3. Noes: Councilmembers Chen and Tam - 2. * Councilmember Tam stated that she likes the plan overall, including the revisions and suggestions; the Figure 7.A and 7.B cross sections are premature and should probably be eliminated, as well as the Zoning Designations which might be too confusing; said issues would be discussed at some point in the future; a phasing schedule or plan for the EIR, zoning, and infrastructure plan should be reviewed at the joint City Council and Planning Board meeting; the joint discussion should also address the disposition strategy and the various land which was conveyed at no cost. Councilmember Chen stated that he enjoyed reading the draft Guide; inquired whether a lawsuit from the Chinatown Merchant Association is pending, to which the Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point responded there is a settlement agreement. Councilmember Chen inquired whether the City is reaching out to the Chinatown community, to which the Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point responded in the affirmative; stated staff met with the group and has another meeting scheduled; staff intends to continue having meetings to discuss the project and work with the group over the next six months and probably a lot longer. Councilmember Chen suggested outreaching to Asian organizations, such as the Alameda Chinese Club. Mayor Gilmore stated the pictures being used in reports have greatly improved over the last two years; reading the Guide is very enjoyable; Section 4.2 calls attention to the waterfront area; a limited number of restaurants in Alameda overlook the water, which is unfortunate; Alameda Point is the last waterfront area to be developed; getting the development right is essential; she is really happy to se… | CityCouncil/2013-07-23.pdf |
CityCouncil/2014-07-15.pdf,24 | CityCouncil | 2014-07-15 | 24 | When the building was sold and the rents were raised to ""market value" those two units were raised to $1600 while the other two units, one of them mine, were only raised to $1400. This seemed unfair to me, we all had the same rental descriptions when we moved in. My unit went up $350 theirs went up $475 One other (a studio) had to vacate due to pending construction. I cannot find anywhere else to live and will have to stay during a foundation replacement and feel it may be unsafe, but what are you going to do? This island is railroading existing tenants out with huge rent increases and pulling in the highest bidders. The two tenants who just left chose to leave the state and I am considering the same option. In the last 90 days I've only seen two decent units at the $1200 price point, I and many others applied, there just aren't any vacancies at a reasonable price. Who can afford a 30 to 60 percent housing price hike on short notice? Gotta love gentrification, I thought you should have a record of this situation here as part of your case file. Although my rent is reasonable, they are now renting these units for nearly $1,700-1,800. I cannot afford my place (barely), but I cannot move because I will lose this rate. Investigating nearby options, the price appears to have SKYROCKETED. I have a decent deal since I am sort of a "On site manager" but there's no way I could stay in the bay area if I lost this place. That said I still think I pay way too much given the blue collar job situation these days. It's an unfortunate fact that the housing market is predicated on the idea that "The dumbest tool with more money than they can handle responsibly wins.". In a nutshell this means that whenever someone buys a home it's because they out bid a whole lot of much smarter people just because they could get more financing. That's bullshit and it creates homelessness meaning better people than them are living on the street. I think we need to lose the idea that property values and housing prices are one and the same. They ar… | CityCouncil/2014-07-15.pdf |
CityCouncil/2014-12-02.pdf,24 | CityCouncil | 2014-12-02 | 24 | The Assistant City Manager commended the former Finance Director, Fred Marsh. Discussed using technology to make revisions to staff: Kurt Peterson, Alameda. Mayor Gilmore stated that she appreciated Mr. Peterson's comments, however, 200 employees were laid off during the recession; the remaining employees work hard with less and maintain a full-service city; the City has not made investments in technology for ten years or more; technology is at the end of its useful life; the issue is not always about employees being more efficient, but software is failing. Vice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated Mr. Peterson mentioned Police Officers; that she has yet to hear any resident request fewer Officers on the street; there are compliments all the time regarding the Police Department; the citizens do not want to reduce the number of Officers patrolling the City. Councilmember Tam stated the Police Chief built efficiencies into the system and should be commended. Councilmember Tam moved adoption of the resolution. Councilmember Daysog seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. CITY MANAGER COMMUNICATIONS None. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (14-507) Kurt Peterson, Alameda, stated the Del Monte item should have been moved up; suggested planning the agenda more efficiently. COUNCIL REFERRALS None. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS (14-508) Consideration of Mayor's Nomination for Appointment to the Social Service Human Relations Board (SSHRB). Mayor Gilmore nominated Mark Sorensen for appointment to the SSHRB. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Mayor Gilmore adjourned the meeting at 2:36 a.m. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 23 December 2, 2014 | CityCouncil/2014-12-02.pdf |
CityCouncil/2015-01-20.pdf,24 | CityCouncil | 2015-01-20 | 24 | MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL JOINT CITY COUNCIL AND SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION (SACIC) MEETING TUESDAY--JANUARY 20, 2015- 7:01 P.M. Mayor/Chair Spencer convened the meeting at 1:06 a.m. Roll Call - Present: Councilmembers/Agency Members Daysog, Ezzy Ashcraft, Matarrese, Oddie and Mayor/Chair Spencer -5. - Absent: None. Oral Communications None. Agenda Items (15-067 CC/15-001 SACIC) Recommendation to Accept the First Quarter Financial Report for the Period Ending September 30, 2014. (Continued to February 3, 2015) (15-068 CC/15-002 SACIC) Recommendation to Accept the Fiscal Year 2013-14 Audited Financial Statements and Compliance Reports. The Interim Finance Director gave a Power Point presentation. Councilmember/Agency Member Daysog inquired whether the way in which the report was prepared is substantially different than past reports. Grace Zhang, Maze and Associates, responded in the negative; stated reporting has been consistent. Mayor/Chair Spencer stated the presentation was not online. The Assistant City Manager stated the presentation is a summary and was not posted online. Mayor/Chair Spencer stated that she prefers presentations be included in the packet so Council may see them in advance. Vice Mayor/Agency member Matarrese stated there is revenue and expense information included in the presentation that was not in the staff report. The Interim Finance Director explained staff became aware of the information as the Joint Meeting Alameda City Council and Successor Agency to the Community Improvement Commission January 20, 2015 | CityCouncil/2015-01-20.pdf |
CityCouncil/2015-01-21.pdf,24 | CityCouncil | 2015-01-21 | 24 | the public an opportunity to discuss the existing practices and protocols on the conduct of City business, which is a straight forward description; Council is going to discuss existing practices and protocols in the referenced ordinances; there is a frame of reference for discussion; his sense is that the mayor put the matter on a Wednesday night because there are not going to be any substantive outcomes. Stated that she was excited to see the matter on the agenda; expressed support for an open house; encouraged greater participation on boards and commissions: Carol Gottstein, Alameda. Encouraged the Council to impart an appearance of fairness; discussed calling speakers; stated important issues should not be addressed late: Elizabeth Tuckwell, Alameda. Mayor Spencer stated tonight is a workshop; she appreciates the audience informing the Council how meetings can be held to encourage participation and be transparent; she wanted the meeting on a special night because Council is not going on a retreat; a retreat would be a similar event; the Sunshine Ordinance limits the way business is done in front of the public [requires broadcast]; that she appreciates Councilmember Daysog and Ezzy Aschraft's comments; she worked with staff; quite a bit of time was spent drafting the information so that the public would be aware of what would be discussed; the objective is to help Council move forward; noted she calls speakers in the order submitted. Stated people watch meetings at home; Power Points should be shown on the broadcast and there have been audio issues: Richard Bangert, Alameda. The City Clerk stated staff is working on a split screen solution for Power Point presentations; addressed audio transmission issues; encouraged contacting the City Clerk's office when issues occur. Vice Mayor Matarrese noted the video went dark last night at 1:00 a.m. on Comcast; stated the open house presentations by departments should happen outside a regular meeting; adopting Robert Rules of Order to keep order could benefit the rules; … | CityCouncil/2015-01-21.pdf |
CityCouncil/2015-09-15.pdf,24 | CityCouncil | 2015-09-15 | 24 | Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated she would like an evaluation of how AirBnb rentals would impact the availability of rental housing. The Interim City Manager stated AirBnb impacts are included in the Housing Study which will come to Council in December. Vice Mayor Matarrese moved following the recommendation of the referral. Councilmember Oddie seconded the motion. Under discussion, the Interim City Manager stated it is important that the City Attorney review the language of the TOT; staff can do outreach, but does not have personnel to enforce the TOT. Mayor Spencer clarified the motion is to include TOT for AirBnBs. On the call for the question, the motion carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. (15-564) 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). Councilmember Oddie made brief comments regarding his referral; stated Council should get a status update. Provided an update; stated there were good negotiations with staff; that he would support a policy: Andy Slivka, Alameda and Carpenters Union and Alameda County Building Trades. Mayor Spencer stated she would like an update before providing direction. The Interim City Manager stated staff can present an update, then Council could give direction. Vice Mayor Matarrese moved that an update on the PSAs be provided to Council, at which time Council could give direction to staff. Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft seconded the motion which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. (15-565) Consider Directing Staff to Review the City's Process for Board and Commission Appointments. (Councilmember Oddie). Councilmember Oddie made brief comments regarding his referral. Discussed her interest in serving on the Commission on Disability Issues; outlined Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 23 September 15, 2015 | CityCouncil/2015-09-15.pdf |
CityCouncil/2015-10-20.pdf,24 | CityCouncil | 2015-10-20 | 24 | (15-629) Recommendation to Proceed with a New Development Strategy for the Enterprise District (Formerly Site B) at Alameda Point. The Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point gave a Power Point presentation. Mayor Spencer left the dais at 11:03 p.m. and returned at 11:05 p.m. Councilmember Daysog stated end users should pay their share of infrastructure costs; the overall infrastructure cost for Alameda Point is $566 million; Phase One which, at the time, included Site A and Site B, was estimated to cost $183 million predicated on land use and intensity of uses; now the City is not sure of the land use; inquired how the City is ensuring the end user will pay their fair share of infrastructure costs for Site B. The Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point responded the infrastructure burden is approximately $1 million an acre; stated it is codified in ordinances that any development which occurs in the district would have to pay a development impact fee equivalent to $1 million per acre; the City hopes to get land value in addition; the benefit of being a public owner is that the value of the land can be lowered to the value of the infrastructure; policy decisions can be made on a case by case basis. Councilmember Daysog stated infrastructure costs are important because one of the selling features for Alameda Point is that there will be a sports complex and a regional water ferry; sacrifices on the land sale would be worth it because would have amenities; inquired how cherry picking can be avoided at Site B; people will pick the sites closest to the water. The Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point stated the City is not marketing waterfront land; the City wants to benefit from land being developed; staff anticipates starting closer to Main Street; ultimately the Council decides whether or not a deal is good. Vice Mayor Matarrese stated that he likes the approach but would like a development agreement with a formalized description of the responsibilities of the City and the contractor Cushman and Wakefield; goals … | CityCouncil/2015-10-20.pdf |
CityCouncil/2015-11-04.pdf,24 | CityCouncil | 2015-11-04 | 24 | 504 The City Attorney responded staff can do so. In response to Councilmember Oddie's inquiry regarding a referendum, the Assistant City Attorney outlined the process. Councilmember Oddie stated that he would want to extend the moratorium if a referendum is filed. The City Attorney stated the moratorium could be extended until the new ordinance is in effect. The City Clerk read the definition of base rent to add to the ordinance: "Base rent' means the rental amount, including any amount paid directly to the Housing Provider for parking, storage or any other fee or charge associated with the tenancy (other than fees or charges for utilities paid directly to the housing provider), that the Tenant is required to pay to the Housing Provider in the month immediately preceding the effective date of the rent increase." Vice Mayor Matarrese stated since the moratorium is being conditioned with 8%, so he does not believe there should be an appeal process for hardships. The Assistant City Attorney noted a procedure should be provided if the moratorium is extended. Vice Mayor Matarrese stated the language should remain unchanged. Councilmember Oddie requested the wording be read back. The City Clerk read the language added to Section 2 (a) and (b). The City Attorney clarified the language added to evictions would be: "as authorized by State law." The City Clerk noted the definition of rent would also be added. Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft moved approval of the urgency ordinance as amended. Councilmember Daysog seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Mayor Spencer adjourned the meeting at 1:36 a.m. Special Meeting Alameda City Council November 4, 2015 | CityCouncil/2015-11-04.pdf |
CityCouncil/2015-12-15.pdf,24 | CityCouncil | 2015-12-15 | 24 | 534 MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL JOINT CITY COUNCIL AND THE SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION (SACIC) MEETING TUESDAY--DECEMBER 15, 2015- -6:59 P.M. Mayor/Chair Spencer convened the meeting at 7:08 p.m. A member of Boy Scout Troup 2 led the Pledge of Allegiance. Roll Call - Present: Councilmembers/Agency Members Daysog, Ezzy Ashcraft, Matarrese, Oddie and Mayor/Chair Spencer - 5. Absent: None. Oral Communications None. Consent Calendar Councilmember/Agency Member Ezzy Ashcraft moved approval of the Consent Calendar. Vice Mayor/Agency Member 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.] (*15-724 CC/15-016 SACIC) Recommendation to Accept the Treasury Report for the Quarter Ending September 30, 2015. Accepted. (*15-725 CC/15-017 SACIC) Recommendation to Accept the First Quarter Financial Report for the Period Ending September 30, 2015. Accepted. Adjournment There being no further business, Mayor/Chair Spencer adjourned the meeting at 7:09 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger, City Clerk Secretary, SACIC The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Sunshine Ordinance. Joint Meeting Alameda City Council and Successor Agency to the Community Improvement Commission March 17, 2015 | CityCouncil/2015-12-15.pdf |
CityCouncil/2016-01-05.pdf,24 | CityCouncil | 2016-01-05 | 24 | The City Attorney noted the threshold pertains to a RRAC hearing and is not a rent cap. Councilmember Oddie stated that he thought the threshold is the trigger for binding arbitration. The Community Development Director responded in the negative; stated landlords would be required to notify the Housing Authority and RRAC that they intend to raise the rents above 5%, which is a landlord driven way to go to the RRAC for mediation; then, if the RRAC makes a recommendation that a party does not like, the matter would go to binding arbitration. Mayor Spencer stated that she raised the suggestion because tenants have indicated that they are afraid to go to the RRAC; she is suggesting shifting the burden to the landlord, which addresses retaliation; there would not be a cap; instead, landlords would be required to attend the RRAC meeting to explain why they want an increase above 5%. Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated the further protection would be that the matter can go onto binding arbitration; there would be an incentive to resolve the matter at the RRAC knowing there is an extra step which is binding. Councilmember Oddie inquired whether there is a possibility that every increase above 5% sent to the RRAC could end up with none of the cases being mediated and all could end up being arbitrated, to which the Community Development Director responded in the affirmative. Councilmember Oddie stated a database should track every increase to determine if everyone is receiving a 4.99% increase. Mayor Spencer stated that she would like to resolve whether everyone agrees 5% should be the trigger point; everything above 5% would require the landlord to take the matter to the RRAC. The City Attorney clarified all increases over 5% would require the landlord to take the case to the RRAC; however, the only cases which could move up to binding arbitration are units subject to Costa Hawkins. The Community Development Director stated staff has heard consensus on the approach to rent increases; inquired whether landlords should be re… | CityCouncil/2016-01-05.pdf |
CityCouncil/2016-02-02.pdf,24 | CityCouncil | 2016-02-02 | 24 | the first time there is a notice of a first rent increase, whether it is a year from now or 24 months from now. Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether a tenant does not want to accept a one year lease and would like to go month to month they would not be penalized, to which the Community Development Director responded in the affirmative. Mayor Spencer inquired whether they would still need to pay the rent increase, to which the Community Development Director responded in the affirmative. Councilmember Oddie inquired if month to month tenants would still be protected for the next year. The Community Development Director responded that month to month tenants would get the same protections like the ones provided in a lease. Councilmember Oddie stated tenants that do not have formal leases or have oral agreements would get standardized terms. Councilmember Daysog inquired if staff is suggesting the Glendale model, to which the Community Development Director responded in the negative. Mayor Spencer stated that she agrees with staff's recommendation. Vice Mayor Matarrese stated he would like it to stay the same and not have the provision apply to the existing tenants. Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she agrees with staff's recommendation to offer the lease to existing tenants. Councilmember Daysog stated he needed more time. Councilmember Oddie stated that he agrees with staff recommendation. The Community Development Director stated a majority agree; she stated staff would capture the one time lease offer for prospective as well as in place tenants. Mayor Spencer clarified the in place tenants would be when there is a rent increase. The Community Development Director responded in place tenants with an existing lease would be offered a new lease 60 days before the current lease expires. Councilmember Oddie inquired whether it would be just once, to which the Community Development Director responded in the affirmative. Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated it is important to not have the tenant bear the cost … | CityCouncil/2016-02-02.pdf |
CityCouncil/2016-02-16.pdf,24 | CityCouncil | 2016-02-16 | 24 | Councilmember Daysog inquired how the 50% ownership would be verified. The Assistant City Attorney responded the housing provider needs to provide documentation that the person qualifies as a housing provider; a copy of the vesting deed could be used for the program administrator to verify it is a human being. Mayor Spencer inquired if everyone is in agreement. Councilmember Daysog inquired if in the case of a landlord wanting to move a relative into a granny flat or a cottage in the back of the house, who would be responsible for showing proof of being the owner, the landlord or the person moving in. Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft responded in said case, they would be just the enumerated relative and not need to show proof. Mayor Spencer stated that she is going to skip over the relocation part and come back to it because it seems complicated. Councilmember Oddie disagreed; stated what is stated is clear; if the housing provider has taken an action to terminate tenancy on the grounds set forth in Subsection 6- 58.150A, of no cause with the limitations. The Assistant City Attorney inquired if the concern is Subsection A does not cover the situation of a fixed term lease ending. Councilmember Oddie questioned why impose limits on no cause evictions if every person on a one year lease will be terminated; stated landlords wanted no cause evictions to let a bad tenant go without having to pay an attorney. The Community Development Director stated the language is drafted to cover one year leases that convert to month-to-month; then it becomes a no cause eviction which would be entitled to relocation benefits if it is a no cause eviction; a tenant would not be entitled to relocation benefits at the end of a fixed term lease because the term is agreed upon by the landlord and tenant. Councilmember Oddie stated anyone that has a year or six month lease can be evicted without cause without paying relocation fees and the City requiring everyone to have a one year lease, which is basically saying everyone is at risk of evictio… | CityCouncil/2016-02-16.pdf |
CityCouncil/2016-03-01.pdf,24 | CityCouncil | 2016-03-01 | 24 | Expressed support of jobs, not condos; urged council to consider Vice Mayor Matarrese's referral: Amy Rose, Alameda. Expressed support of the Alameda Marina; stated that he has experienced excellent service from Svendsen's Marine; he recognizes the value of Alameda's unique waterfront asset and opposes condominium development: Peter Butler, Alameda. Stated it is important the waterfront continues its tradition of providing a reference point for the maritime industry: Dwight Durant, Club Nautique. Urged Council to maintain Alameda's maritime infrastructure: Irma Marin-Nolan, Alameda. Stated the Marina is an underutilized asset; urged Council to support the referral: Andy McKee, Alameda. Stated that he is concerned about the loss of the shoreline access and historic use; light industrial jobs cannot be replaced by retail jobs: David Herrigel, Alameda. Expressed support of maintaining the Alameda Marina and boating community; provided a brief history of the marina: Tom Charron, Alameda. Showed a map; urged Council to preserve Alameda Marina which is valuable piece of property: Gretchen Lipow, Alameda. Stated that she teaches women and blind women sailboating; expressed support of preserving the marina: Dawn Chesney, Alameda. The Interim City Manager stated the Council and staff will be taking a tour of the waterfront on March 11th from 9:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m.; the referral gives the opportunity for Council to direct staff; a report would come back in April to discuss the tour and ask for direction from Council regarding Alameda Marina and the MX Zoning. Vice Mayor Matarrese stated his intent is to frame the discussion; the zoning details and guidance have flexibility built in; he would like to define the zoning goals, particularly in the northern waterfront and existing commercial activity that can be grown; he would like to include other MX zoning that may happen which is not in place now. Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated nothing is simple but Council always strives to achieve balance; preserving the maritime busi… | CityCouncil/2016-03-01.pdf |
CityCouncil/2016-06-21.pdf,24 | CityCouncil | 2016-06-21 | 24 | (16-314) Resolution No. 15182, "Relative to Workers' Compensation Benefits for Registered Disaster Service Worker Volunteers." Adopted. Vice Mayor Matarrese moved adoption of the resolution. Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft seconded the motion, which carried by a unanimous voice vote: Ayes - 5. CITY MANAGER COMMUNICATIONS (16-315) The City Manager announced that the Fire Chief had to leave the meeting to attend to a fire at the auto upholstery shop on Park and Clement Streets; that she, Mayor Spencer, and Councilmember Oddie attended a tour of the USS Hornet where 500 Army Reservists have been training for emergency preparedness. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA None. COUNCIL REFERRALS (16-316) Consider Directing the City Manager to Initiate and Begin the Process with the Planning Board to Propose Revisions to the Ordinance and Code Sections Defining Alameda's Inclusionary Housing for Residential Development. Not heard. (Vice Mayor Matarrese) (16-317) Consider Directing the City Manager to Schedule a Priority Setting Work Session. Not heard. (Mayor Spencer) COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS (16-318) Consideration of Mayor's Nomination for Appointment to the Golf Commission. Not heard. (16-319) Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft requested the meeting be adjourned in honor of the victims of the Pulse Nightclub shooting in Orlando, Florida. (16-320) Mayor Spencer thanked the Army for collaborating with the City; commended the USS Hornet for housing the Army during training; shared a proclamation for Juneteenth regarding freed slaves. (16-321) Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft announced the Relay for Life event would be on Saturday at Encinal High School. ADJOURNMENT Regular Meeting Alameda City Council June 21, 2016 | CityCouncil/2016-06-21.pdf |
CityCouncil/2016-07-05.pdf,24 | CityCouncil | 2016-07-05 | 24 | Supervisors meeting; the Board voted to place affordable housing bond on the November ballot. (16-353) Councilmember Oddie requested the Council adjourn the meeting in Robert Follrath's memory. ADJOURNMENT (16-354) There being no further business, Mayor Spencer adjourned the meeting at 12:04 a.m. in memory of Robert Follrath. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger City Clerk The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Sunshine Ordinance. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council July 5, 2016 | CityCouncil/2016-07-05.pdf |
CityCouncil/2016-09-20.pdf,24 | CityCouncil | 2016-09-20 | 24 | Vice Mayor Matarrese inquired if staff will come back with a plan with all the input; stated other decisions can be driven by the RFQ process; items can be addressed when talking to the developer. The Base Reuse Director responded items can be made explicit in the RFQ. Councilmember Daysog stated the project needs to be thought through; the City needs to have a clear plan from the get go and to decide what kind of units are needed; he cannot support the project. The Base Reuse Director responded the intent of the plan is not to micromanage the uses; the zoning is very flexible; the plan is to weigh all the different tradeoffs. Councilmember Oddie stated he is not comfortable going from 300 to 425 units; he believes keeping 125 units in reserves is a good idea; he cannot support adding the 125 units; he only supports sticking with the 300 units. Mayor Spencer stated her concern is the City never seems to build work force housing; doing only luxury and very low housing does not address the people in the middle, who have serious housing needs. The Base Reuse Director stated staff would come back and show Council if work force housing can be afforded within the 233 or if extra is needed; the analysis will come back. Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft questioned what is meant by work force housing. Councilmember Daysog stated work force housing for purposes of the Alameda County Housing Bond Program that Council supported is above moderate income which is 120 to 150% of the median. The Base Reuse Director responded the wording can be in the staff report when staff comes back with the RFQ. (16-474) Presentation on the Emergency Operations Center and Training Update. The Public Works Director gave a Power Point presentation. CITY MANAGER COMMUNICATIONS (16-475) The City Manager noted on September 27th, neighborhood meeting would be held to educate about Jean Sweeney homeless encampments and answer questions from the residents. Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated there are encampments not just at Jean Sweeney, they are in other … | CityCouncil/2016-09-20.pdf |
CityCouncil/2016-10-18.pdf,24 | CityCouncil | 2016-10-18 | 24 | other libraries, but it is a possibility. Mayor Spencer stated there is equity involved to have a station at the Harbor Bay and West End libraries. The Library Director stated the issue is finding a large enough space where someone could work on their bike and not impede the walking path. Mayor Spencer inquired whether Alameda Science and Technology Institute (ASTI) will be included in the Student Success Card program. The Library Director responded ASTI will not be included in the pilot phase. Mayor Spencer inquired how long will the pilot phase be, to which the Library Director responded one year. Vice Mayor Matarrese thanked the Library Director for keeping up with future needs. (16-540) Public Hearing to Consider Introduction of Ordinance Amending the Alameda Municipal Code by Amending Chapter 30 (Zoning Ordinance) to Streamline Improvements to Existing Residential Properties and Minor Administrative, Technical, and Clarifying Revisions to the Zoning Ordinance Regarding Chimneys, Accessory Buildings, Windows, Existing Driveways and Parking, Non-Conforming Setbacks, Home Occupation Signage, and Other Miscellaneous Amendments. [The proposed amendments are categorically exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15305, Minor Alterations to Land Use Limitations]. Introduced. The Planning Services Manager gave a brief presentation. In response to Mayor Spencer's inquiry, the Planning Services Manager listed the ten amendments. Mayor Spencer inquired whether there is any impact to the General Fund, to which the Planning Services Manager responded in the negative. Councilmember Daysog inquired whether the floor area under amendment number 5 has to do with an accessory unit in the back. The Planning Services Manager responded in the negative; stated the floor area refers to converted space that meets building space requirements. Councilmember Daysog inquired whether a homeowner add space in the attic does not trigger a parking change. The Planni… | CityCouncil/2016-10-18.pdf |
CityCouncil/2016-11-01.pdf,24 | CityCouncil | 2016-11-01 | 24 | Under discussion, Councilmember Oddie inquired whether there will be discussion on workforce or moderate income housing and work live housing; stated the reality is people cannot afford the lowest unit at Alameda Landing; inquired what is the City going to do for people making workforce housing wage; 33% of the AMI is $3,000; the issue is critical; the City needs to provide housing options for all levels of affordability, not just the higher end. Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she is confused about order of the issues. Mayor Spencer stated Council is addressing the referrals in the order they were submitted. Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated inclusionary housing should be addressed at a priority setting work session; inquired whether that is what the City Manager had in mind. The City Manager responded inclusionary housing will have its own meeting. Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she would like Council to direct staff to set the priority setting work session and the first item the Council would tackle would be the considered most significant. Mayor Spencer stated the priority setting workshop is separate; right now, Council needs to give direction on the referrals; stated that she would like to discuss the work/live, whether or not to count the units as dwellings and look at the work/live ordinance. Councilmember Daysog stated the issue with inclusionary housing is that Alameda Point needs to bring to life a revamped inclusionary housing policy; the City has to have a discussion about a local housing bond to supplement money; how the City sells land at Alameda Point can influence the affordable housing set asides; Council should contemplate a local housing bond. Vice Mayor Matarrese stated said points can be included in the discussion; the referral is to direct staff to look at changing the inclusionary ordinance and come back to Council with a report. The City Manager responded the referral states to start the process with the Planning Board; she prefers to start with the Council discussion to… | CityCouncil/2016-11-01.pdf |
CityCouncil/2017-04-07.pdf,24 | CityCouncil | 2017-04-07 | 24 | objectively reviewed is worth the money. The Community Development Director inquired how the Council might want to handle single family units, such as having the Hearing Officer make a non-binding decision; stated direction on exempt versus non-exempt units might be helpful. Mayor Spencer stated that she would be concerned about not offering relief to tenants in single family homes; she wants protection for all tenants. Councilmember Matarrese stated rather than the Council providing feedback, the consultant should analyze the distinctions and weigh the pros and cons; said information is what he expects from the consultant. Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated although rent control cannot apply to Costa Hawkins units, there is value in having mediation for said cases. Model Lease Councilmember Oddie inquired whether staff is clear on the model lease, to which the Community Development Director responded in the affirmative; stated staff will look into a model lease. Councilmember Oddie stated the process might be less expensive if there is a model lease. The City Manager stated a number of landlords have leases particular to their property; stated rather than having a model lease, there could be model lease provisions since the intent is education; all of the details of a lease would not need to be included. The Community Development Director concurred; stated there could be a model lease addendum similar to what was created for the City's smoking ordinance. Vice Mayor Vella stated the City of Davis prepared a model lease, which is a good way of ensuring Council's intent is correctly interpreted; she would want to see model lease provisions because there were interpretation issues during the past year. The Community Development Director summarized staff's objectives: 1) craft a draft ordinance dealing with administrative issues that would return to Council on May 16th; 2) research and study just cause evictions and a FMR formula for relocation benefits; 3) commission a third-party study on the RRAC process; and 4) w… | CityCouncil/2017-04-07.pdf |
CityCouncil/2017-04-18.pdf,24 | CityCouncil | 2017-04-18 | 24 | On the call for the question, the motion carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. (17-267) Consider Directing Staff to Provide Standards for Bird-Safe Buildings for Council to Adopt. Considered as part of the first bird-safe buildings referral. [paragraph no. 17-266]. (17-268) Consider Directing Staff to Prepare a Report on the City of Alameda Acquiring/Taking Title to the Uncompleted Strip of Shoreline Park next to Harbor Bay Parkway. Mayor Spencer made comments regarding the referral. Stated Council should clarify that the property is park land: Pat Lamborn, Alameda. Urged Council to move forward with the referral: Cindy Margulis, Golden Gate Audubon Society. Councilmember Matarrese moved approval of the referral. Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated the adjacent property owner should pay for developing the park land; she does not support the City taking on the responsibility that rightfully belongs to a developer. The City Attorney stated preliminary research of the documents and the strip of land indicates it is already to be dedicated to the City; there is a public access easement across the property; the idea is that when a developer develops the adjacent property, the City typically requires the developer to do some initial improvements to the strip of land, which is why the City has not yet taken the property. Councilmember Matarrese stated the original referral regarding the issue is to direct staff to bring back a report on the request; he would like to see a report on what steps need to be taken to acquire the property; Council does not need to decide tonight whether to take the property, but he would just like to know what are the considerations; a report would help make the determination. The City Attorney inquired whether the strip of land is the only consideration or if Council is interested in a broader piece of property, to which Mayor Spencer responded just the strip. The City Manager inquired whether Council would like cost estimates to purchase, to which Mayor Spencer responded she would like to kno… | CityCouncil/2017-04-18.pdf |
CityCouncil/2017-05-16.pdf,24 | CityCouncil | 2017-05-16 | 24 | MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING TUESDAY-MAY - 16, 2017- -5:00 P.M. Mayor Spencer convened the meeting at 5:00 p.m. Roll Call - Present: Councilmembers Ezzy Ashcraft, Matarrese, Oddie, Vella and Mayor Spencer - 5. Absent: None. Public Comment The meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider: (17-302) Conference with Real Property Negotiators (54956.8); Property: Chuck Corica Golf Complex, 1 Clubhouse Memorial Road, Alameda, CA 94502; City Negotiator: Jill Keimach, City Manager and Amy Wooldridge, Recreation and Parks Director; Organizations Represented: Greenway Golf Associates, Inc. Issue Under Negotiation: Real Property Negotiations Price and Term of Payment (17-303) Conference with Legal Counsel - Anticipated Litigation Significant Exposure to Litigation Pursuant to Subdivision (b) of Section 54956.9 of the Government code Number of Cases: One (As Defendant - City Exposure to Legal Action). (17-304) Public Employee Performance Evaluation Pursuant to Government Code § 54957 Positions Evaluated: City Manager - Jill Keimach, City Attorney - Janet Kern and City Clerk - Lara Weisiger Following the Closed Session, the meeting was reconvened and Mayor Spencer announced that regarding Real Property, discussion was deferred to allow staff to obtain additional information and direction was given to staff; regarding Anticipated Litigation and Performance Evaluation, direction was given to staff. Adjournment There being no further business, Mayor Spencer adjourned the meeting at 6:46 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 May 16, 2017 | CityCouncil/2017-05-16.pdf |
CityCouncil/2017-06-06.pdf,24 | CityCouncil | 2017-06-06 | 24 | Councilmember Oddie stated that he would like to bifurcate the vote also; even though he did not vote to put Measure L1 on the ballot, he stepped up to write a professional, easy to understand argument for Measure L1; the ordinance has a sunset and will eventually show if just cause and other provisions are working; he takes issue with a landlord saying Alameda renters are wanna be Alamedan's; rules are there not to punish good landlords, but to protect tenants; tenants can still be evicted with just cause evictions; requested staff to develop regulations on the program fee; he supports adopting the amendments. Mayor Spencer clarified to suggest that she is applying rules differently to people of color is not appropriate coming from a white man to a Mexican woman. Councilmember Oddie responded Mayor Spencer allowed Robert Sullwold exceed the time limit by 20 seconds. Mayor Spencer stated she has been very fair in how she runs the Council meetings. Councilmember Oddie responded that is a matter of opinion. Mayor Spencer stated race should not be brought up. Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether Councilmember Matarrese has any suggestions on an alternative to not give a false sense of security, to which Councilmember Matarrese responded in the negative. Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether Councilmember Matarrese believes any part of San Francisco's situation stems from the percentage increase amount allowed for rent control; stated San Francisco is not comparable to Alameda's ordinance. Councilmember Matarrese responded Alameda is very similar to San Francisco as a very desirable place to live, which drives up rents and gentrification; stated that he does not have an answer but he cannot support something that has been shown not to deliver what is being said it will deliver. Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated San Francisco allows a very small percentage increase on rent from one year to the next which is unlike what Alameda is doing. Councilmember Matarrese stated his comments are directed to just c… | CityCouncil/2017-06-06.pdf |
CityCouncil/2017-06-20.pdf,24 | CityCouncil | 2017-06-20 | 24 | Council with the options and the recommendation, Council would make the decision. Vice Mayor Vella clarified the Council is requesting staff to return with whether or not the current ordinance should be amended or if a separate ordinance should be created or if there could be a rule process. Mayor Spencer stated the easiest possible option. Vice Mayor Vella stated Council would make a determination and go through the necessary steps of a first or second reading, if needed. Mayor Spencer stated the proposed change should be in place as quickly as possible. Councilmember Matarrese stated the most effective option in a timely manner. The City Manager stated that she hears that Council would like an ordinance regardless; Stop Waste has informed the City that the most effective way to start the process is through education; inquired whether Council is directing staff to recommend one of two ordinances. Councilmember Matarrese stated his motion is recognizing that staff is already starting with the education; he wants an ordinance; if it is not written down, it does not count; his motion is to have an ordinance, there was a second with the conditions. On the call for the question, the motion carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Councilmember Matarrese, Oddie, Vella and Mayor Spencer - 4. Abstention: Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft - 1. (17-402) Consider Directing Staff to Propose Regulations to Authorize Convenient and Safe Cannabis Businesses in Alameda. (Mayor Spencer) Not heard. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS (17-403) Designation of Voting Delegates and Alternates for the League of California Cities Annual Conference. Not heard. (17-404) Consideration of Mayor's Nominations for Appointment to the Commission on Disability Issues (CDI), Golf Commission, Historical Advisory Board (HAB), Library Board, Planning Board, Public Art Commission (PAC) and Transportation Commission (TC). Mayor Spencer nominated Anto Aghapekian, Jennifer Barrett and Lisa Hall to the CDI; Ron Taylor and Joseph Van Winkle to the Golf Commission; Amber … | CityCouncil/2017-06-20.pdf |
CityCouncil/2017-07-05.pdf,24 | CityCouncil | 2017-07-05 | 24 | AUSD Board of Trustees. (17-433) Mayor Spencer stated a motion is needed to consider the remaining items: the Animal Shelter lease [paragraph no. 17-435], the Teleport Communications lease [paragraph no. 17-436], the cannabis referral [paragraph no. 17-438], and the League delegate [paragraph no. 17-439]. Councilmember Matarrese moved approval of hearing all remaining items. Councilmember Oddie seconded the motion, which carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Councilmembers Ezzy Ashcraft, Matarrese, Oddie, and Mayor Spencer - 4. Noes: Vice Mayor Vella - 1. *** Stated the developer is putting up all the risk, not the City; not going forward with the project risks losing the ferry and affordable housing: Laura Thomas, Renewed Hope. Stated that she supports the Site A development; if the developer succeeds, Alameda succeeds; urged Council to approve the project; stated the developer is a resident of Alameda and is committed to the project: Karen Bay, Alameda. Stated the project will help other businesses at Alameda Point; expressed support for the project: JP Frey, Alameda Point Studios. Councilmember Oddie stated the City has to decide whether to move forward with the developer or move on; the teacher housing created by the project is great; the commitment to labor and the jobs that will be created are critical; the risk is will the developer make the deadline and secure the financing; he is willing to trust the developer and support the project. Councilmember Matarrese stated that he will support the project for following reasons: the project will create a substantial amount of infrastructure; the potential for affordable housing; he is willing to gamble on not receiving the $4 million for the sports complex because it is off-set by the value added to the property by the infrastructure; he would like staff to ensure there is no right left to the developer if they cannot complete Phase 3; he would like the City to finish the commercial development; he does not want to be tied to the developer; he would like sta… | CityCouncil/2017-07-05.pdf |
CityCouncil/2017-07-18.pdf,24 | CityCouncil | 2017-07-18 | 24 | Mayor Spencer requested to hear from the current operator regarding what was requested. Mr. Bertoli and Mr. Voss responded that they were not specifically told to leave; stated they were told the use is not in the City's General Plan. Mayor Spencer inquired whether Mr. Garfinkle ignored condition two of the UP and did not feel the need to secure parking and have cars actually use the parking. Mr. Garfinkle responded once access to an offsite parking lot was secured, the Planning Board was to be notified to be considered in compliance; the current operator has been in compliance since 2015. Mayor Spencer inquired whether the current operator secured an offsite parking lot, to which Mr. Garfinkle responded the current operator has an offsite parking lot. Mayor Spencer inquired whether the current operator is still parking outside people's homes. Mr. Garfinkle responded that he does not know; stated that is what the City is reporting; the UP does not say the business cannot park cars in the area. Mayor Spencer inquired whether Mr. Garfinkle thought the condition did not prohibit Big Discount Tires from parking customer cars on the streets. Mr. Garfinkle responded the Planning Board did not put the language in the UP to prohibit parking cars on the streets; the prohibition states business vehicles, meaning vehicles with the business logo. Mayor Spencer inquired whether Mr. Garfinkle stopped parking business vehicles on the City streets. Mr. Garfinkle responded the City notified the franchisee that they were not to park business vehicles on the City streets. Mayor Spencer inquired whether language could be crafted to be clear; stated if the City does not want vehicles parking on the City streets, the language must be clear. Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether there is a problem with cars from the current occupant's customers parking in the neighborhood. The Assistant Community Development Director responded in the affirmative. Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the language is so confusing that the … | CityCouncil/2017-07-18.pdf |
CityCouncil/2017-09-05.pdf,24 | CityCouncil | 2017-09-05 | 24 | 388 Amended and Restated Lease Agreement with Mr. Hi Chi Chen and Mrs. Lena Muy Chiv, a Married Couple, dba Hometown Donuts for 1930 Main Street; and (17-519A) Introduction of Ordinance Approving a Grant of Non-Exclusive Easement and Authorizing the City Manager to Execute Documents Necessary to Implement the Terms of Grant of Non-Exclusive Easement to Alameda Boys & Girls Club (ABGC) and Alameda Unified School District (AUSD) for Access and Maintenance. Not heard. CITY MANAGER COMMUNICATIONS (17-520) Update on Tracking of Council Referrals. Not heard. (17-521) The City Manager stated one Firefighter and one Police Officer from the City of Alameda have gone to assist with Hurricane Harvey; the City did not apply for the Justice Assistance Grant for funds for Police Department equipment due to the application having requirements to give information about immigrant citizens to the federal government; items that are going on at the federal level which might impact the City: the Executive Order that prohibited military equipment to be sold to local Police Departments has been rescinded; the federal regulations to manage flood control have been revoked; a bill has been designed to drastically cut illegal immigration and revise the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) to allow immigrant children to have citizen status in the future. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA None. COUNCIL REFERRALS (17-522) Consider Directing Staff to Explore Offering Free Public WiFi Throughout the City. Not heard. (Mayor Spencer) (17-523) Consider: 1) Adoption of Resolution Condemning the Increased Incidents of Bias, Prejudice, Discrimination, Violence and Anti-Semitism; and 2) Direct Staff to Provide a Status Update on Hate Crime Training and Possible Training of Community Members; and Direct the City Manager to Provide Periodic Reports to Council on Hate Crimes. Not heard. (Vice Mayor Vella and Councilmember Oddie) COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS (17-524) Consideration of Mayor's Nominations to the Historical Advisory Board (HAB) and Public A… | CityCouncil/2017-09-05.pdf |
CityCouncil/2017-10-03.pdf,24 | CityCouncil | 2017-10-03 | 24 | Emeryville; she hopes Alameda can sponsor another training. (17-598) Councilmember Oddie stated that he enjoyed visiting the Sister City in Korea. (17-599) Mayor Spencer thanked staff for their efforts in putting the Sister City visit together. (17-600) Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she volunteered at the Alameda Food Bank and attended the League of California Cities implicit bias training. (17-601) Mayor Spencer stated tomorrow is coffee with a Police Officer from 10:00 am to noon at Starbucks. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Mayor Spencer adjourned the meeting at 10:59 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 22 October 3, 2017 | CityCouncil/2017-10-03.pdf |
CityCouncil/2017-10-17.pdf,24 | CityCouncil | 2017-10-17 | 24 | ASCA's recommendation to City Council for approval. Mayor Spencer inquired whether staff weighs in at all, to which the Community Development Management Analyst responded in the negative. Mayor Spencer stated that she would like to ensure staff has reviewed the itineraries and what ASCA is recommending. The Community Development Management Analyst stated staff is proposing that ASCA take the lead on all planning and execution of the visits; staff will still have a role in communicating with ASCA to ensure Councilmembers have all needed information. The City Manager stated staff will continue to be involved as they have been; staff does not have the time or resources to put more into the process unless the number of visits is limited. Mayor Spencer stated a sample itinerary of the trip should be added; expressed concerns from previous trips with not providing enough time to prepare for public events. Vice Mayor Vella stated staff should work with ASCA to ensure they know Council's commitments and when delegates come to visit, that it should be calendared on the Council's schedule. The Community Development Management Analyst responded staff will work with ASCA under the guidelines. Vice Mayor Vella inquired whether the guidelines cut back staff time due to the number of cities Alameda will be partnering with; expressed concern with changes in staff's response time to ASCA's questions. The City Manager responded staff scheduling and coordinating with ASCA. The Community Development Management Analyst stated staff will continue to support Council, the visits and review the itinerary; staff is requesting the first draft and redrafting of the itinerary be done by ASCA. Mayor Spencer stated staff has the connections for the delegates; ASCA needs support to come up with the itineraries. The Community Development Management Analyst stated staff will continue to support ASCA, contact companies and put together tours; staff is asking for support from ASCA. Mayor Spencer stated on the slide about ASCA's responsibilities, it… | CityCouncil/2017-10-17.pdf |
CityCouncil/2017-11-07.pdf,24 | CityCouncil | 2017-11-07 | 24 | Mayor Spencer inquired whether food can be legally added, to which the Community Development Director responded in the affirmative. Mayor Spencer stated a Council majority would like to add food. The Community Development Director stated the word food could be stricken. Mayor Spencer inquired whether Council would support delivery only businesses. Vice Mayor Vella stated that she would like data on the number of permits issued for delivery businesses. Mayor Spencer inquired whether Council would support one delivery business, Council did not agree. Mayor Spencer inquired whether Council would be interested in having the matter return at the beginning of the year. Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated there will not be enough meaningful data. Mayor Spencer expressed concern with having businesses outside of Alameda start deliveries before local business owners have a chance to open; stated that she is not agreeable to the 2 employees on labor peace. Councilmember Oddie stated that he thought the previous meeting was to provide direction; he can support 10 employees for labor peace. Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she supports 10 employees for labor peace; the local ownership clause needs to be removed from the general conditions for local businesses. Vice Mayor Vella stated that she would like language on the distances clarified. The Community Development Director stated she has a list and can recap the ordinance. The City Attorney stated staff needs to have the exact language if changes are going to be made. The Community Development Director stated the smoking ordinance language has been addressed and provided to Council. Councilmember Oddie moved introduction of the smoking ordinance. Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 24 November 7, 2017 | CityCouncil/2017-11-07.pdf |
CityCouncil/2017-12-05.pdf,24 | CityCouncil | 2017-12-05 | 24 | investigated. Mayor Spencer inquired whether online and the forms can indicate anonymous filing is allowable, to which the Police Chief responded said information is already included. Mayor Spencer requested staff to get the word out that anonymous reporting is allowed. The Police Chief noted third party complaints can also be filed. Mayor Spencer stated the data can be reviewed in the future. The City Manager noted data would be presented at an upcoming workshop. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS (17-742) Consideration of Mayor's Nomination to the Planning Board. Not heard. (17-743) Stopwaste Topic Brief for November 2017. (Councilmember Oddie) Councilmember Oddie stated that he provided the monthly update to share the information. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Mayor Spencer adjourned the meeting at 12:42 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 24 December 5, 2017 | CityCouncil/2017-12-05.pdf |
CityCouncil/2017-12-19.pdf,24 | CityCouncil | 2017-12-19 | 24 | (17-774) There being no further business, Mayor Spencer adjourned the meeting in memory of Ed Lee at 12:28 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 22 December 19, 2017 | CityCouncil/2017-12-19.pdf |
CityCouncil/2018-01-16.pdf,24 | CityCouncil | 2018-01-16 | 24 | Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger City Clerk The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Sunshine Ordinance. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 23 January 16, 2018 | CityCouncil/2018-01-16.pdf |
CityCouncil/2018-03-06.pdf,24 | CityCouncil | 2018-03-06 | 24 | The City Manager stated the cost would be reimbursed. The Community Development Director concurred; stated the process will pay for itself. Councilmember Matarrese stated the interviewing should not be done by regular staff because they already have work to do. Vice Mayor Vella stated the issue will return to Council; she would want to know what consultant staff would hire. The Community Development Director responded the current cannabis consultants, SCI Consulting Group, would be used,. Councilmember Oddie stated that he feels it should be someone with a planning background or the Community Development Department (CDD), not SCI. The Community Development Director stated CDD covers Planning, Building and Economic Development. Councilmember Oddie stated CDD can bring in consultants for each. Mayor Spencer inquired whether Councilmember Oddie is requesting law enforcement on the panel. Councilmember Oddie stated there are other options for the law enforcement area of expertise. Mayor Spencer stated clear direction needs to be provided. Vice Mayor Vella stated there are retired City employees with backgrounds in said areas and part time City staff in each area who could pick up extra hours. The Community Development Director stated staff can return with a five member panel composed of a range of City staff; there is not a majority support for a cannabis industry consultant; a rubric would be developed; the interview would receive less points; the same questions would be used for everyone and can be delivered ahead of time. Mayor Spencer inquired how staff will choose from the top proposals. The Community Development Director responded the balance would be placed on a waiting list. Mayor Spencer inquired whether only the one with the highest points would be selected. The Community Development Director responded the applicant may not successfully complete the permit process, so staff would then go to the next applicant on the waiting Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 24 March 6, 2018 | CityCouncil/2018-03-06.pdf |
CityCouncil/2018-04-17.pdf,24 | CityCouncil | 2018-04-17 | 24 | On the call for the question on the original motion, the motion carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. (18-237) Recommendation to Review Staff's Analysis and Provide Direction on Possible Next Steps, including Community Outreach, Determining Potential Fiscal Impacts, and Returning with a Minimum Wage Ordinance. The Economic Development Manager gave a Power Point presentation. (18-238) Mayor Spencer stated a motion is needed to continue the meeting past 11:00 p.m. Vice Mayor Vella moved approval of continuing the meeting. Councilmember Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Councilmembers Ezzy Ashcraft, Matarrese, Oddie and Vella - 4. Noes: Mayor Spencer - 1. *** The Economic Development Manager continued the presentation. Councilmember Matarrese inquired whether other ordinances have an age threshold. The Project Planner responded in the negative; stated some ordinances have exceptions for job training programs, but there was not a lower minimum wage for minors. Mayor Spencer inquired whether the 87% Recreation and Park employees and 5% library employees are all minors. The Economic Development Manager responded in the negative; stated they are part- time employees; some are minors and some are not. The Acting City Manager stated most minors work in the Recreations and Park Department; there are very few minors at the Library; all full-time employees are not at minimum wage. Mayor Spencer stated that she would like to find a way to survey residents who commute off island to go to a minimum wage job; community outreach could start with the Mayor's Economic Advisory Panel (EAP); the EAP could propose or tackle the issue and recommend an appropriate public engagement process. Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated the City needs to do it right; regardubg the community outreach, not too many of EAP folks would have minimum wage job Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 20 April 17, 2018 | CityCouncil/2018-04-17.pdf |
CityCouncil/2018-05-15.pdf,24 | CityCouncil | 2018-05-15 | 24 | MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL TUESDAY- - MAY 15, 2018- -6:59 P.M. AGENDA ITEM (18-274) Public Employee Performance Evaluation; Public Employee Dismissal/Release Pursuant to California Government Code Section 54957. Employee/Position: Jill Keimach, City Manager (Contingent upon the employee's request for a public session). Not heard. Lara Weisiger City Clerk Special Meeting Alameda City Council May 15, 2018 | CityCouncil/2018-05-15.pdf |
CityCouncil/2018-06-05.pdf,24 | CityCouncil | 2018-06-05 | 24 | The Public Works Director responded the infrastructure bond ordinance requires two readings; stated approval would be needed July 10th with a second reading on July 24th to make the deadline. Mayor Spencer inquired whether staff can come up with the specific language, do community engagement, and be ready for a first reading on July 10th. further inquired whether staff would do all of the community engagement between now and July 10th. The Public Works Director responded the community engagement has already occurred. Councilmember Oddie stated that he disagrees. The Acting City Manager stated more work needs to be done on the General Obligation (GO) bond; staff's preference is to do the sales tax measure which has less lead time; a lot more work needs to be done on the GO bond; staff wants to do more outreach; the matter was before Council in February; a lot of work has been done, but Council wants staff to do more; staff is suggesting going with the sales tax measure and doing the GO bond in the future. Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she would disagree with the Acting City Manager; her preference would be to go forward with the infrastructure bond; the City's infrastructure is deteriorating; repair costs increase the longer maintenance is deferred; the City is leaving itself vulnerable to a Houston situation; polling was done and it did quite well; the polling should determine the right amount; concurred with Mr. Bangert about Alameda Point potable water; questioned whether the sales tax increase can wait until a future election; the decision is not easy; expressed concern over putting off infrastructure. Councilmember Matarrese moved approval of directing staff to pursue the infrastructure bond taking into account the comments on removing the word "pothole" and "other" to make it specific to the list presented. Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft seconded the motion. Under discussion, Vice Mayor Vella stated that she is not prepared to support the infrastructure bond right now; adding and removing things chang… | CityCouncil/2018-06-05.pdf |
CityCouncil/2018-06-19.pdf,24 | CityCouncil | 2018-06-19 | 24 | ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Mayor/Chair Spencer adjourned the meeting at 9:06 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger City Clerk and Secretary, SACIC The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Sunshine Ordinance. Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council and Successor Agency to the Community Improvement Commission 7 June 19, 2018 | CityCouncil/2018-06-19.pdf |
CityCouncil/2018-07-10.pdf,24 | CityCouncil | 2018-07-10 | 24 | issues; stated the differences are down to 10%, which can be negotiated: Karen Bey, Alameda. Suggested the Council give direction on Clement Avenue; stated the segment of the Cross Alameda Trail is substandard; the City needs to be the broker to get a working boatyard: Brian McGuire, Bike Walk Alameda. Councilmember Matarrese inquired whether things not included in the document being approved tonight are not going to happen and things included can happen, to which the Assistant Community Development Director responded in the affirmative. Councilmember Matarrese stated the clarifying amendments addressed some of his concerns; he needs to clearly understand what is included to approve the matter tonight; having the Request for Proposals (RFP) come back to Council for an update is a little squishy; since the document does not have milestone, he wants to make sure there is a real effort to exhaust every possibility to get a boatyard, rather than leave it to chance; disincentives should be stripped out; the concierge service ships are a disincentive; the Master Plan can be amended if said service is the only alternative; the 50% homeownership/50% rental is a soft target; he wants any change to require Council action; the City should ensure there will be a boatyard in exchange for allowing only 15% of the project base to be affordable housing; the maritime business should be embedded in the Plan; expressed concern over future market driven opportunities being in the same zone as maritime parking; stated that he would like to see future market driven opportunities removed; an amendment can be made, if needed; he would like the ambiguities removed since the Plan is a governing document. The Assistant Community Development Director stated regarding the boatyard, the Master Plan says a permit will not be issued until the Request for Qualifications (RFQ)/RFP process is completed; the RFQ will be six months; having no one interested in running a boatyard on the site would be a major problem; after interested, qualified busin… | CityCouncil/2018-07-10.pdf |
CityCouncil/2018-07-24.pdf,24 | CityCouncil | 2018-07-24 | 24 | buffer zone for after school programs and 600 feet for learning centers; expressed concern over shifting the areas for every RFP. The Assistant City Attorney stated the sensitive use should be reviewed when the RFP is published to allow people submitting proposals to research the sensitive uses. In response to Vice Mayor Vella's inquiry whether sensitive uses could be from the last RFP, the Assistant City Attorney stated the uses should be identified the next time an RFP is issued since the last RFP has already passed. Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she agrees tutorial/learning centers could be 600 feet and others could not have a buffer; inquired whether or not Ruby's would be included. The Economic Development Manager responded that she would look into the matter and provide a response. Mayor Spencer stated a definition of tutorial/learning center should be provided when the matter returns. Vice Mayor Vella concurred. Mayor Spencer noted there are not three votes to eliminate the buffer zone. Vice Mayor Vella stated after the definition of tutorial center is clarified, she might be willing to eliminate the buffer zone. The Economic Development Manager inquired whether the current zoning districts should be maintained or expanded. Councilmember Oddie, Vice Mayor Vella and Mayor Spencer expressed support for allowing the use in C-1 and C-M, not Alameda Point (AP). Councilmember Matarrese expressed support for maintaining the current zoning districts. Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft expressed support for adding the C-M zoning district, but not C-1 or AP. Vice Mayor Vella inquired whether Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft would consider C-1 if the use had to be cleared with the neighborhood, to which Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft responded that she would consider a process that includes a neighborhood meeting; noted parking is a consideration. In response to Mayor Spencer's inquiry about the type of process legally allowed for C- 1, the Assistant City Attorney stated typically noticing happens at the Use Permit level;… | CityCouncil/2018-07-24.pdf |
CityCouncil/2018-09-04.pdf,24 | CityCouncil | 2018-09-04 | 24 | Alameda Records. The Recreation and Parks Director made brief comments and gave a Power Point presentation. Adam Gillitt, Alameda Museum, provided information; gave a Power Point presentation. *** Vice Mayor Vella left the dais at 11:22 p.m. and returned at 11:24 p.m. Mayor Spencer moved approval of the staff recommendation. Vice Mayor Vella seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. (18-487) Recommendation to Accept the Annual Report for the Rent Stabilization Program. The Community Development Director made brief comments. The Rent Stabilization Program Director gave a Power Point presentation. Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated the presentation addressed the burden on smaller landlords to pay relocation fees not being more important than the needs of the tenant; the landlord community is putting together an assistance fund that perhaps smaller landlords could use. The Rent Stabilization Program Director stated that he has heard about said effort, which is a good idea; a recommendation has been made in the past about certain financial breaks for smaller landlords; he is not in favor of a two tiered system. Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft requested clarification on the percentage of landlords included in the information reported; discussed the need for better data collection. The Rent Stabilization Program Director stated the most recent fee study allows demographic data to be voluntarily reported. Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired how good the data is if it is voluntarily produced. The Rent Stabilization Program Director responded the data is very limited; stated that he is trying to come up with ways to get more robust data, including a comprehensive database. Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated there is a goal to expand the range of translated materials, inquired what five languages are currently provided. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 22 September 4, 2018 | CityCouncil/2018-09-04.pdf |
CityCouncil/2018-10-16.pdf,24 | CityCouncil | 2018-10-16 | 24 | Councilmember Oddie suggested tabling the motion. Councilmembers Ezzy Ashcraft and Matarrese expressed support. Mayor Spencer stated she would not call the question. The Economic Development Manager inquired who is in favor of adding C1 to the zoning. Mayor Spencer, Vice Mayor Vella and Councilmember Oddie stated aye, Councilmembers Ezzy Ashcraft and Matarrese stated no. The Economic Development Manager inquired who is in favor of adding CM, Commercial Manufacturing, to the zoning. The Council expressed unanimous support. The Economic Development Manager inquired about eliminating the cap on testing labs. The Council expressed unanimous support. The Economic Development Manager inquired about removing the dispersion from the land use ordinance Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated if the dispersion is removed, it needs to be put somewhere else. Mayor Spencer concurred; revised the question to: remove dispersion from the land use and put it into the regulatory ordinance. The Council expressed unanimous support. The Economic Development Manager inquired about modifying the dispersion of a mile to adopt different language. Mayor Spencer inquired what language would be considered as the replacement. The Economic Development Manager stated the language would read: "overconcentration: in addition to the operational radius noted above, there should be no more than two.' The Assistant City Attorney stated the language presented mirrors Vice Mayor Vella's proposal; there would be no more than two dispensaries on either side of Grand Avenue; inquired the timing for dispensaries to open in specific locations; the language Regular Meeting Alameda City Council October 16, 2018 21 | CityCouncil/2018-10-16.pdf |
CityCouncil/2019-02-05.pdf,24 | CityCouncil | 2019-02-05 | 24 | MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING TUESDAY- - FEBRUARY 5, 2019- 7:02 P.M. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft convened the meeting at 10:56 p.m. Roll Call - Present: Councilmembers Daysog, Knox White, Oddie, Vella and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft - 5. Absent: None. The meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider: (19-085) Public Employee Appointment/Hiring; Pursuant to Government Code § 54957; Title/description of positions to be filled: City Manager Following the Closed Session, the meeting was reconvened and the City Clerk announced that direction was given to staff with no vote taken. Adjournment There being no further business, Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft adjourned the meeting at 11:18 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 February 5, 2019 | CityCouncil/2019-02-05.pdf |
CityCouncil/2019-03-19.pdf,24 | CityCouncil | 2019-03-19 | 24 | the OPEB liability. Councilmember Daysog stated the correct staffing expenditures is short-changing residents out of services needed in an effort to put reserves to OPEB payments. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated neither the Police Chief nor the Fire Chief have said that they will not hire staff members; open positions are attempted to be filled year after year. Councilmember Vella requested clarification of there being more retirees than active staff; stated the vacancies are in two departments that have a difficult time recruiting due to an involved process of academy training and background checks; inquired if the increases shown in the presentation are due to new discount rates from CalPERS. The Finance Director responded in the negative; stated CalPERS has changed assumptions including how long retirees live, demographics and investment types; outlined CalPERS new fee; stated the fee will grow over time; outlined the City's plan to pay down the upcoming debt; stated the goal is to drive the pension costs down. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated it is important for Council to monitor what CalPERS is proposing; monthly Board Meetings are held discussing investments and speakers are allowed; discussed a CalPERS 2018 conference and an upcoming session for elected officials. Councilmember Daysog stated that he was not implying department heads were purposely holding employment down; however, the effect of holding employment down should be considered. Councilmember Oddie stated as Council goes forward, the City will have more employees on PEPRA versus classic CalPERS; over time, the liability will drop; by putting the excess reserves to work, the City has saved a million dollars a year in PERS; in the event of an economic downturn, the liability can be paid versus cutting officers or closing a Fire Station; the revenues appear to be under estimated and expenses appear to be overestimated; he would prefer the budget be more accurate. Vice Mayor Knox White inquired whether or not work performed for the State is reimbursed. The Fi… | CityCouncil/2019-03-19.pdf |
CityCouncil/2019-04-02.pdf,24 | CityCouncil | 2019-04-02 | 24 | Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft requested Vice Mayor Knox White check-in the LWV and set-up a meeting. Vice Mayor Knox White stated that he has met with the LWV. Councilmember Vella requested any meeting with the LWV be agendized so that Councilmembers who wish to attend may do so; requested a staff presentation related to paid signature gatherers and what other cities have implemented. Councilmember Oddie stated that he too would like LWV meetings agendized so that he may attend. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (19-209) David Bradford, Alameda, discussed how he has changed moving from the East End to the West End. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft adjourned the meeting at 11:03 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 15 April 2, 2019 | CityCouncil/2019-04-02.pdf |
CityCouncil/2019-05-07.pdf,24 | CityCouncil | 2019-05-07 | 24 | sold and developed into something nice; the project will not be a catalyst for the Enterprise District; market studies were not provided. Councilmember Vella expressed concern with the project; stated there will be monitoring, but it will need to continue throughout the duration of the lease not just a short period of time; the applicant should bear the cost of monitoring, which should be done by someone else; expressed support for using Alameda Point consultants; expressed concern about the lease being for three buildings, not just one, for a total of roughly 85,000 square feet; stated there is little job creation over the long term; the lease options are not favorable. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft questioned if Councilmembers Oddie and Vella do not support the item. Councilmember Vella stated that she is laying out her terms for a lease agreement to be acceptable. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated that the Assistant Community Development Director noted the monitoring would be conducted by the Stated Water Board; stated that she supports monitoring longer than five years. Councilmember Vella stated that she would also like to utilize the Alameda Point biological consultants and allow for a community discussion; expressed support for only one lease extension; expressed concern about amount of pressure put on the current electrical system and the AMP staff workload increase. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft requested clarification that Councilmember Vella would support one option to extend. Councilmember Vella responded that she will support one five year extension; stated technology is rapidly expanding. Mr. Connaughton stated the extension is acceptable; the CEQA process will allow for consultant input. Vice Mayor Knox White stated that Councilmember Vella desires a City lead community discussion with the consultants and biologists, not just giving the community an opportunity to write letters as part of a CEQA process; inquired how a condition can be written to address Councilmember Vella's concern about AMP. Councilmember Vella expressed … | CityCouncil/2019-05-07.pdf |
CityCouncil/2019-07-02.pdf,24 | CityCouncil | 2019-07-02 | 24 | Board of Commissioners, Ronald Limoges for reappointment to the Recreation and Park Commission, and Scott Weitze for appointment to the Transportation Commission. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft adjourned the meeting at 11:42 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Ashley Zieba Deputy City Clerk The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Sunshine Ordinance. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council July 2, 2019 23 | CityCouncil/2019-07-02.pdf |
CityCouncil/2019-07-16.pdf,24 | CityCouncil | 2019-07-16 | 24 | Councilmember Daysog stated the people want more information; Council must recognize the implementation strategies resulting should offer language such as: "throughout this process, residents of Alameda have voiced a desire for not only transparency in the form of any information including electronic recordings being released, but also for strong remedies including censure as well as a City recall;" expressed support for reflecting the fact that the people have made requests. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated that the people have said a lot of things; the requests have been made by few, not all; the language is going beyond the scope of what the presiding judge is asking for; Council should be responsive to the findings; there is still time as matters come back to Council for implementation of what the people want; Council has completed its current task. Vice Mayor Knox White stated the addition from Councilmember Daysog is not an appropriate statement; the letter to the judge is not a letter to the community. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she would hate for the matter to come back in September due to lack of consensus for the first and last paragraph language. Councilmember Daysog stated people are upset about the Grand Jury report implying that some are above the law; Council has a process in place which is not transparent enough to gather information to demonstrate the extent which some are above the law; people have been frustrated by the inadequacy of remedies in 7-3; he would like to capture that in the letter to the judge due to the importance and historic nature. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated everything Council has done in agreement with the Grand Jury's findings and responses drafted does everything Councilmember Daysog has requested without specific interpretation; there is not a consensus to move forward with Councilmember Daysog's proposed language; the Council is ready to address the issue head-on; there are other ways to communicate to the people; it is time to put closure on the matter. Councilmember Dayso… | CityCouncil/2019-07-16.pdf |
CityCouncil/2019-09-03.pdf,24 | CityCouncil | 2019-09-03 | 24 | Councilmembers Knox White, Oddie, Vella and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft - 4. Abstention: Councilmember Daysog - 1. (19-487) Recommendation to Approve Adding a Prosecution Unit to the City Attorney's Office and to Provide for Facilities Upgrades to Accommodate New Staffing; (19-487A) Resolution No. 15584, "Approving Workforce Changes in the City Attorney's Office to Add Two Positions: Assistant City Attorney and Paralegal, and Upgrade an Administrative Services Coordinator Position to Management Analyst." Adopted; (19-487B) Resolution No. 15585, "Amending the Fiscal Year 2019-20 General Fund Operating Budget by Increasing City Attorney's Office Appropriations by $172,000.' Adopted; and (19-487C) Authorize the City Attorney to Enter into Any Agreements Necessary with the Alameda County Superior Court and Alameda County District Attorney's Office to Effectuate the Implementation of the Program; and Provide Direction on Whether the City Attorney's Office Should Work with the Charter Revision Subcommittee on a Potential Charter Amendment Authorizing Prosecution of State Law Misdemeanors. The City Attorney gave a brief presentation. Expressed concern over the funding; discussed other more important, critical things that could be funded: Alan Teague, Alameda. Councilmember Vella stated laws without enforcement are meaningless; the item helps the City enforce laws to the full extent, including some that go toward Climate Action goals; many things resulting from State law have been impacting the City Attorney's office; the item will allow growth and enforcement of laws in working with the District Attorney's office; the City Attorney has had experience with enforcement; expressed support for the proposal. Councilmember Vella moved approval of the staff recommendation [including adoption of the resolutions]. Vice Mayor Knox White seconded the motion, with a friendly amendment to include direction to have the Charter Review Subcommittee review Charter language for consideration. Councilmember Vella accepted amendment to the motion.… | CityCouncil/2019-09-03.pdf |
CityCouncil/2019-12-18.pdf,24 | CityCouncil | 2019-12-18 | 24 | City Council Workshop Workshop Report Management Partners Understand and respect the city council/city manager plan of governance: It is critical for you to understand why your city is organized under this plan of governance and how it should operate. It is important to understand and appreciate- ate the distinction between policymaking and implementation and the different roles played by individual councilmembers, the city council as a whole, the city manager and the city staff. Allow time for you and the city manager to get to know each other and develop a working relationship: Try not to overly rely on what you have heard from others regarding what it will be like to work with the manager-others views may or may not be accurate. Most city managers understand the need to work very hard to adjust to the issues, concerns and priorities of the new city council. Try to be open-minded to your ability to establish a productive and effective working relationship with the manager. City managers will do their best to carry out the policy direction of the city council (even when there is a major change in policy direction): Professional city managers are committed to carry out the policy direction of the city council regardless if they personally agree or disagree with the policy as long as what they are asked to implement is: - Legal. - Ethical. - Within their/the city's authority. It is often misunderstood that when a city manager effectively implements a city council's policy, the manager personally agrees with the policy or can only implement city services consistent with that policy. City managers can change the organization's approach to an issue as may be directed by a new city council. Avoid overly associating the city manager with the policies that the city has previously implemented at the direction of the previous council. Take your role seriously, but not yourself: This common advice is particularly important for mayors and councilmembers. While you are doing important and serious work on behalf of the commun… | CityCouncil/2019-12-18.pdf |
CityCouncil/2020-02-18.pdf,24 | CityCouncil | 2020-02-18 | 24 | Councilmember Vella stated the authority to not hear the items in closed session was not previously available; $25,000 is a low amount; expressed concern for Councilmembers intervening with personnel matters and violating the Charter; expressed support Council be informed about settlements, but not the dollar amount. Councilmember Oddie stated that he is convinced no cap amount is needed. Councilmember Daysog stated that he is in support; withdrew his motion. Councilmember Vella moved introduction of the ordinance as drafted, with direction that Council be informed within a week of a settlement, with updates at the mid-year and annual budget. Councilmember Daysog seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. CITY MANAGER COMMUNICATIONS (20-107) The City Manager made an announcement regarding a planned signal outage and a new text 9-1-1 program. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA None. COUNCIL REFERRALS (20-108) Consider Modifications to the Art in City Hall Program. (Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft) Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft made brief comments regarding the referral. Councilmember Oddie inquired whether the request should go through the Public Art Commission (PAC), to which Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft responded in the negative. The Public Information Officer stated in its pilot stage, the program was presented to the PAC for feedback; final approval came to Council. Councilmember Oddie inquired whether censorship should be considered. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft responded criteria must be followed. The Public Information Officer stated there can be no violence, nudity, or hate speech. Councilmember Oddie expressed concern about content based regulations. The Public Information Officer stated a call for proposals was issued; roughly 40 Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 22 February 18, 2020 | CityCouncil/2020-02-18.pdf |
CityCouncil/2020-03-03.pdf,24 | CityCouncil | 2020-03-03 | 24 | The City Manager stated some of the scenarios to be brought forth from the consultant are recession as well as unfunded liabilities up to 7% to see impacts of both. Councilmember Daysog stated that he appreciates looking at the Other Post- Employment Benefits (OPEB) liabilities; the cumulative amount set aside as a result of the policy is astounding; noted that he understands the need to pay down unfunded liabilities; stated that there are other service needs that current residents are demanding; it is imperative to review the OPEB policy currently in place; the numbers presented on Slide 15 show a negative balance of $3 million; outlined Slide 15 figures; expressed concern over stocking away reserve money; stated that he believes many reserves are phantom reserves due, in part, to not having fully staffed departments; the reserve is a function of not fully staffed departments. Councilmember Vella stated there are baby changing stations coming into parks, which is a big expenditure; inquired which bargaining unit the Building Inspector Compaction position is in, to which the Human Resources Director responded Alameda City Employees Association (ACEA). In response to Councilmember Vella's inquiry, the Human Resources Director stated staff previously worked on adding classifications to the unit and missed that the true 5% had not been completed between classifications; it is an internal compaction issue needing to be fixed and allowing people to promote. Councilmember Vella inquired whether the position is currently vacant, to which the Human Resources Director responded the position is currently filled. In response to Councilmember Vella's inquiry, the Human Resources Director stated the adjustment has been made within the last year. Councilmember Vella inquired what work was included in the Finance Department wear and tear cost of $175,000; stated the space also included other office space; inquired whether the cost includes the City Attorney's office. The City Manager responded there is a variety of things to lo… | CityCouncil/2020-03-03.pdf |
CityCouncil/2020-04-21.pdf,24 | CityCouncil | 2020-04-21 | 24 | not be a strong part of criteria; stated financial needs and viability should still be reviewed. The City Manager stated that he has made note of each Councilmember's input; staff has been given direction with some consistencies; a proposal can be brought back to Council for discussion. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the 90-day timeframe works. The City Manager responded that he supports the timeframe. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether enough direction has been provided. The City Manager responded staff can bring a proposal back for consideration. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft adjourned the meeting at 9:55 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 April 21, 2020 14 | CityCouncil/2020-04-21.pdf |
CityCouncil/2020-05-05.pdf,24 | CityCouncil | 2020-05-05 | 24 | The City Manager stated staff can look into the strategy. Councilmember Oddie stated 49 of the applicants are restaurants; noted all residents can apply for the Great Plates State project; expressed support for City restaurants benefitting from the program and putting more money into the program. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether applicants are being asked about other forms of assistance they have applied for; inquired whether applicants are solely relying on City grant funds; noted some restaurants have stayed open for take-out and delivery; inquired whether the businesses open status could be a funding consideration; stated some consideration should be given to businesses trying to keep employees on staff and serve the community; inquired whether said considerations can be factored into the process. The Economic Development Manager responded staff is requesting applicants apply for loans, grants and other program information as part of their application; staff is not factoring whether a restaurant is open; noted there are many considerations for a restaurant to open or not open; stated applicants are being requested to certify under penalty of perjury that they plan to open after the shelter in place order; staff is factoring whether the business projects a closure within six months after reopening. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired the enforcement for such assurances. The Economic Development Manager responded a lien could be placed. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft questioned whether the process has been approved by the City Attorney's office, to which the Economic Development Manager responded in the negative. Councilmember Vella inquired whether it is possible to weigh a restaurant considering closure or bankruptcy to ensure funds are put toward keeping businesses afloat; inquired the application contents to ensure accurate information. The Economic Development Manager responded in the negative; stated staff is not asking whether additional businesses are owned; noted staff is asking whether or not the applicant has been … | CityCouncil/2020-05-05.pdf |
CityCouncil/2020-05-19.pdf,24 | CityCouncil | 2020-05-19 | 24 | The Assistant Community Development Director responded there are smaller businesses outside of Alameda Point; stated 25 employees is a reach for many tenants. Councilmember Oddie stated the 25 employee threshold could be just for rent forgiveness or conversion; expressed support for assisting as many tenants as possible. The Assistant Community Development Director stated not many landlords are offering rent abatement; the City is setting the pace by providing abatement; requested clarification on the threshold for allowing rent abatement. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated the City should not do something just because it can; Council should be prudent in helping people through difficult times and should be judicious with the criteria of who qualifies for rent abatement; expressed support for long deferral programs and allowing payments to be paid at the back-end of the lease; stated the criteria needs to be applied in a way that keeps areas viable; expressed support for a program which relies heavily on deferral; stated the time can be lengthened; abatement should only be allowed under specialized circumstances. Vice Mayor Knox White expressed support for rent abatement; stated Council needs to show leadership and encourage others to do so; inquired whether the 90-day deferral and the 90-day loan conversion becomes a six month loan conversion program; whether tenants still have to pay the 90-day deferral. The Assistant Community Development Director responded everything is mixed in together; stated after six months, the tenant has proven that they have overcome and met some of the set benchmarks; staff will offer a 50% abatement and the tenant will be subject to the original deferral program. The City Manager stated the original three months will be combined with an additional three months; should a tenant not abate for three months, another month could be added at some point; noted all six months could be wrapped into a loan. The Assistant Community Development Director expressed support for the length of the program b… | CityCouncil/2020-05-19.pdf |
CityCouncil/2020-05-20.pdf,24 | CityCouncil | 2020-05-20 | 24 | On the call for the question, the motion passed by the following roll call vote: Councilmembers Daysog: Aye; Knox White: Aye; Oddie: Aye; Vella: Aye; and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye. Ayes: 5. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft adjourned the meeting at 11:35 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 24 May 19, 2020 | CityCouncil/2020-05-20.pdf |
CityCouncil/2020-06-02.pdf,24 | CityCouncil | 2020-06-02 | 24 | Councilmember Vella inquired whether a hold for an agenda item will be placed for future Council to either affirm, amend or deny the ballot measure, should any be placed on future election dates. The City Attorney responded there is no legal requirement to offer an agenda item to a new Council; staff can perform the request if desired or the new Council can direct staff to bring an item forward. Councilmember Vella inquired whether Council can indicate the item is currently being declined, but request to have the item return. The City Attorney responded Council may choose to not take action and direct staff to bring the item back at a date specific. Councilmember Oddie inquired the reason Section 22-7 and 22-8 are included; questioned whether the item is related to Council pay. The City Clerk responded the Sections were selected as general cleanup; noted per- diem amounts are set by the State and hours listed in Section 22-8 are not what the set City hours have been. Councilmember Vella expressed support for bifurcating the discussion; expressed support for moving cleanup language forward; suggestion Council to take a vote on each item. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether each item could be taken as: A [Cleanup], B [City Prosecutor], C [Council pay], D [Section 7-3], and E [Article 26], to which the City Clerk responded in the affirmative; stated E was the previous agenda item and has been addressed. Vice Mayor Knox White moved approval of directing staff to return with language for section A, cleanup language, for the November 2020 ballot, with the direction to use "they and their." Councilmember Daysog seconded the motion. Under discussion, Councilmember Vella stated that she would like to ensure to include removal of "his/her" terms. Councilmember Oddie expressed support for staff to use the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Queer/Questioning (LGBTQ) caucus at the League of Cities' model language for gender neutral language samples. On the call for the question, the motion carried by the following roll… | CityCouncil/2020-06-02.pdf |
CityCouncil/2020-06-16.pdf,24 | CityCouncil | 2020-06-16 | 24 | ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA None. COUNCIL REFERRALS None. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS (20-434) Vice Mayor Knox White expressed gratitude for the budget process. (20-435) Councilmember Daysog encouraged visiting the farm near Target at Alameda Landing. (20-436) Councilmember Oddie expressed support for outcome-based budgeting. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft adjourned the meeting at 12:03 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 June 16, 2020 22 | CityCouncil/2020-06-16.pdf |
CityCouncil/2020-07-07.pdf,24 | CityCouncil | 2020-07-07 | 24 | ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Mayor/Chair Ezzy Ashcraft adjourned the meeting at 7:22 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger, City Clerk Secretary, SACIC The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Sunshine Ordinance. Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council and Successor Agency to the Community Improvement Commission 2 July 7, 2019 | CityCouncil/2020-07-07.pdf |
CityCouncil/2020-07-21.pdf,24 | CityCouncil | 2020-07-21 | 24 | (20-539) Recommendation to De-Name Jackson Park and Direct the City Manager to Remove the Park Sign. The Recreation and Parks Director gave a brief presentation. In response to Councilmember Vella's inquiry regarding timing, the Recreation and Parks Director stated the matter should return no later than December; the matter could return to Council sooner than December pending the timing of approvals and committee presentations. Councilmember Oddie inquired who will comprise the committee. The Recreation and Parks Director responded the direction from the Commission is to create a diverse committee; noted that she has reached out to local organizations and associations to ensure diversity. Expressed support for renaming of Jackson Park; stated the decision is swift and easy; Council is acting quickly: Erin Fraser, Alameda. Expressed support; questioned the committee selection process; stated the selection process is critical for transparency; urged Council provide a clear selection process: Melodye Montgomery, Alameda. Expressed support for changing the name of Jackson Park; noted that she will not take her child to a park which marginalizes members of the community in any way; stated steps must be taken now to eliminate systemic racism in Alameda: Meredith Hoskin, Alameda. Expressed support for renaming Jackson Park; stated renaming is the right thing to do and is consistent with other recent actions from Council; this is another decision for Council to move the ball forward on greater equality: Josh Geyer, Alameda. Expressed support for renaming of Jackson Park; stated people need to be honest about the real history of America and Alameda: Alexia Arocha, Alameda. Expressed support for renaming Jackson Park and removing the park sign; urged Council to focus on Black, Indigenous, People Of Color (BIPOC) in the conversation; the matter is simple to push forward: Amy Chu, Alameda. Expressed support for a memorial to commemorate those killed under Jackson's rule; stated a memorial has not been discussed; urged Counci… | CityCouncil/2020-07-21.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]) );