pages
113 rows where page = 25
This data as json, CSV (advanced)
Suggested facets: body
date (date) 113 ✖
- 2005-02-28 1
- 2005-05-17 1
- 2005-06-07 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
- 2007-11-06 1
- 2007-12-04 1
- 2008-01-15 1
- 2008-02-19 1
- 2008-06-03 1
- 2008-06-17 1
- 2008-07-15 1
- 2008-10-07 1
- 2009-01-06 1
- 2009-02-07 1
- 2009-10-20 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
- 2016-01-05 1
- 2016-02-02 1
- 2016-02-16 1
- 2016-03-01 1
- 2016-06-21 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
- 2017-06-06 1
- 2017-06-20 1
- 2017-07-05 1
- 2017-07-18 1
- 2017-09-05 1
- 2017-10-17 1
- 2017-11-07 1
- 2017-12-05 1
- 2018-02-15 1
- 2018-03-06 1
- 2018-04-17 1
- 2018-05-09 1
- 2018-06-05 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
- 2019-03-13 1
- 2019-03-19 1
- 2019-05-07 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
- 2020-05-05 1
- 2020-05-19 1
- 2020-06-02 1
- 2020-06-16 1
- 2020-07-21 1
- 2021-01-19 1
- 2021-02-02 1
- 2021-03-11 1
- 2021-03-16 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
- 2022-01-04 1
- 2022-01-18 1
- 2022-02-01 1
- 2022-02-15 1
- 2022-03-01 1
- 2022-04-19 1
- 2022-05-03 1
- 2022-05-17 1
Link | body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
CityCouncil/2005-05-17.pdf,25 | CityCouncil | 2005-05-17 | 25 | (05-247) Presentation on the City's infrastructure investment challenges. Mayor Johnson stated that she considers infrastructure the part of the City's budget deficit; the maintenance of infrastructure has declined in the last several years; although money was saved, it creates a bigger deficit that must be dealt with in the future; the Council needs to decide whether to continue to allow the infrastructure to continue declining or to deal with the deficit and prevent it from growing. The Public Works Director gave a Power Point presentation on the City's infrastructure. Mayor Johnson inquired whether the Public Works Director had information on the percent of streets and sidewalks not in good condition, to which the Public Works Director responded that he included said information for streets. Mayor Johnson stated the information was needed for sidewalks; sidewalks are in bad condition; sidewalks should be made a priority in addition to streets. Councilmember Daysog inquired whether the annual funding shortfall is $2 million. The Public Work Director responded in the affirmative; stated currently $4 million is funded and $6.6 million should be funded; the $2.7 million shortfall does not take into consideration the $33 million deficit; under-funding each year continues to add to the deficit. Mayor Johnson stated the economic result of under-funding would be more than $2.7 million; not completing maintenance causes greater damage. The Public Works Director concurred; stated there is an optimum point when resurfacing should be completed to be cost effective. many streets are beyond the cost effective point, which results in more costly repair, such as a repair which would have cost $1 three years prior would now cost $4. Mayor Johnson requested pie charts showing the condition of infrastructure other than streets, such as sidewalks and sewers. Mayor Johnson inquired whether only spending $750,000 on street resurfacing during the next fiscal year would add to the deficit, Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 25 May … | CityCouncil/2005-05-17.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-06-07.pdf,25 | CityCouncil | 2005-06-07 | 25 | Mayor/Chair Johnson stated that if recruiter benefits are realized, funding can be added for the future years re-emphasized that 2005, 2006, and 2007 will be extremely lean years ; stated that she appreciates the complex and difficult work done by the Development Services Department; efforts will help to bring Alameda back to the viable community and good business center of 20 to 50 years ago. Commissioner/Boar Member Gilmore thanked the Acting City Manager/Acting Executive Director and Department Heads for an extremely useful budget presentation; requested additional information on the COPS Unit and additional staffing of the DARE Program. Councilmember Daysog requested an Off Agenda Report providing up to date information on the issue of telephone tax for public safety. Vice Mayor Gilmore inquired whether the proposal to fund infrastructure included an increase in the property transfer tax and the legality of using the funds for streets and sidewalks. The Acting City Manager responded that he would include the property transfer tax increase in the proposal; the City Attorney will look into the legality of the matter Proposition 218 addresses what can and cannot be done. Mayor/Chair Johnson stated that she would like to continue to look at attorney and risk management costs; she would like to spend as little as possible on attorneys so that the money could be spent elsewhere; stated that it is important to be efficient with money and not cut in ways that eventually lead to spending more; stated that the Council needs to exercise some oversight over the litigation contingency budgets; the total amount budgeted for Risk Management is approximately $470,000 and approximately $350,000 for Alameda Power & Telecom; suggested that the money be allocated as proposed in the budget but that the City Attorney bring requests to hire outside counsel to the City Council; the City Attorney could be authorized to spend around $2500 for emergencies until the approval to hire outside counsel can be brought to Council. stated she … | CityCouncil/2005-06-07.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-07-19.pdf,25 | CityCouncil | 2005-07-19 | 25 | Mayor Johnson stated said suggestion is greater micromanagement. Council would have to keep up to date on all litigation matters the City Attorney is responsible for management once outside counsel is hired; Council cannot be responsible for monitoring litigation and bringing the matter to the Council if a Councilmember does not like something; the Charter states the Council is supposed to approve the hiring of outside counsel; Council needs to make the approval; then, the City Attorney would handle the matter. Vice Mayor Gilmore requested clarification of how the process would work and an example be provided. Mayor Johnson stated the main responsibility of the Council is the Charter requirement to consent to hiring [of outside counsel] ; read Charter section; stated the issue is how the Council consents to the employment of special legal counsel. Councilmember Matarrese stated it is how the Council empowers the City Attorney the control is telling the City Attorney to go forward with hiring outside; the tier is the City Attorney can hire outside counsel for up to $35,000; $35,000 would take care of a minor matter or accommodate [Council meetings) every two weeks ; once the [$35,000] threshold is met , then the empowerment has to come back to the City Council for a vote. The City Attorney stated that if the additional estimate is in excess [of $35,000] the matter would always go to Council under the proposal; anything $35,000 or less will go to Council, if the Council desires; anything estimated to be $35,000 or more for the total litigation cost will automatically go to Council for approval. Mayor Johnson inquired what would be done in the interim period for larger cases, to which the City Attorney responded the matter would be placed on the agenda as soon as possible. Mayor Johnson inquired what if immediate action was needed. The City Attorney responded the system is two tiered; stated the City Attorney would be authorized to spend up to $35,000 without prior Council approval ; for matters estimated to cost le… | CityCouncil/2005-07-19.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-08-16.pdf,25 | CityCouncil | 2005-08-16 | 25 | (05-413) The following speakers addressed the Theater Parking Structure Public Hearing : Valerie Ruma, Citizens for Megaplex Free Alameda; Ani Dimusheve, Alameda; Jan Schaeffer, Alameda; Rosemary McNally, Alameda; Robb Ratto, PSBA; and Jay Levine, Alameda. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS (05 -414) - Consideration of Mayor's nominations for appointment to the Civil Service Board, Economic Development Commission, Golf Commission, Historical Advisory Board, Housing and Building Code Hearing and Appeals Board, and Recreation and Park Commission. Mayor Johnson nominated Marilyn Ezzy Ashcraft and Robert F. Kelley to the Economic Development Commission and Anthony M. Santare to the Golf Commission. (05-415) Councilmember deHaan stated that he received an announcement for a Krusi Park Open House regarding an application by Cingular Wireless to install a new wireless cell site at the Krusi Park tennis courts; the announcement states that Cingular does not own the existing site. Mayor Johnson inquired who was sponsoring the Open House, to which Councilmember deHann responded the Development Services Department. Councilmember deHaan stated that he thought that Cingular developed the first cell towers at Krusi Park. The Business Development Division Manager stated that she would investigate the matter. (05-416) - Councilmember Matarrese stated that the Harbor Bay Ferry has exceeded the 40% fare box for July; stated that advertisement needs to continue; alternate fuel buying options may need to be considered in the future. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the Regular Meeting at 2:40 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 25 August 16, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-08-16.pdf |
CityCouncil/2006-06-20.pdf,25 | CityCouncil | 2006-06-20 | 25 | should be applied to Lincoln Avenue between Eighth Street and Grand Avenue if the purple line on the Public Works map is for streets the streets are covered with tar and are not attractive. Mayor/Chair Johnson stated staff should make assessments on the greatest need, not cosmetics. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Daysog stated streets are paved along Grand Avenue from Lincoln Avenue to Park Street; streets are unpaved west of Grand Avenue. Vice Mayor/Board Member/Commissioner Gilmore stated Public Works identified the streets that need the most attention; she would prefer to drive down tarred streets rather than streets with potholes. Mayor/Chair Johnson stated Interim City Manager Bill Norton started the crack sealing program. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Daysog stated money has been dedicated to repair unused streets. The Public Works Director stated the Pavement Management Program prioritizes the needs based on the street condition and not traffic; a resurfacing Contract has already been authorized. Councilmember/Boaro Member/Commissioner deHaan inquired whether crack sealing is still done, to which the Public Works Director responded slurry sealing is done. Mayor/Chair Johnson stated crack sealing should continue in order to prevent further damage until slurry sealing can be done. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Daysog stated he is not opposed to crack sealing. The Public Works Director stated some streets are crack and slurry sealed to extend the life longer sealing is the most cost-effective way to spend the money. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan stated the City has crack sealing equipment. Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Alameda Reuse 11 and Redevelopment Authority, and Community Improvement Commission June 20, 2006 | CityCouncil/2006-06-20.pdf |
CityCouncil/2006-09-05.pdf,25 | CityCouncil | 2006-09-05 | 25 | Legal Counsel stated the overtime issue is relevant and the testimony is very good for the record; the past standard allowed a written letter from someone in authority stating there would be no overtime ; an applicant taking a sabbatical has never been accepted in order to disallow income; she is not sure whether a sabbatical would resolve the issue. Chair Johnson stated taking a sabbatical would be a voluntary act. Commissioner Gilmore inquired whether the snapshot covers the period from March 2006 to March 2007, to which the Development Services Director responded the snapshot covers a projection moving forward to March 2007. Commissioner Gilmore stated January 2006 through March 2006 was used to project the Peralta College income. Chair Johnson clarified that January 2006 through March 2006 was used to project the Peralta College income from March 2006 to March 2007; inquired whether fall and winter Peralta College income was not assumed. The Development Services Director responded in the affirmative. stated Mr. Rutledge would be obligated to advise the City if he were going to teach. Commissioner Daysog stated Mr. Rutledge had every expectation to teach if enough students enrolled; reasonable assumptions were made from the best available information. Commissioner Daysog moved approval of the staff recommendation. Chair Johnson seconded the motion. Under discussion, Commissioner deHaan inquired when the evaluation period for the next phase of houses would take place, to which the Development Services Director responded the evaluation is going on now. Commissioner deHaan inquired whether the Rutledge's could be placed in the next evaluation process. Chair Johnson responded other applicants have been disqualified and have not been put back into the process. On the call for the question, THE MOTION FAILED by the following voice vote: Ayes : Commissioner Daysog and Chair Johnson - 2. Noes: Commissioners deHaan, Gilmore, and Matarrese - 3. Special Meeting Community Improvement Commission 6 September 5, 2006 | CityCouncil/2006-09-05.pdf |
CityCouncil/2006-09-19.pdf,25 | CityCouncil | 2006-09-19 | 25 | Act. Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Alameda Reuse 4 and Redevelopment Authority, Community Improvement Commission, and Housing Authority Board of Commissioners September 19, 2006 | CityCouncil/2006-09-19.pdf |
CityCouncil/2006-10-17.pdf,25 | CityCouncil | 2006-10-17 | 25 | service by expanding lanes. The Supervising Planner responded balancing and thinking about all modes of transportation are needed, particularly with proposed mitigations; stated the policies will go through a rigorous study ; the community would be involved. Mayor Johnson stated she does not see an inconsistency with the General Plan; inquired whether other mitigations can be proposed. The Supervising Planner responded in the affirmative; stated for an impact at Central Avenue and Eighth Street, mitigation could be done by taking out parking, adding travel lanes, and taking out trees; the analysis might say that the mitigation should not be done. Mayor Johnson stated General Plan inconsistencies need to be addressed when the policies come back. Councilmember Matarrese stated the policies could be applied as written with the condition that unless there is a specific reference in the General Plan that requires the widening of a roadway, the policies could be used as a guidance or the policies could be used if there is a specific intersection that will be widened beyond the width of the approaching roadway specifically called out in the General Plan in text; he is betting that there are very few instances in the General Plan that state traffic lanes would be added. The Supervising Planner stated the project goal is to come back with a General Plan amendment to adopt a Transportation Element. ; inconsistencies may be found. Councilmember Matarrese stated a secondary goal is to apply the principles to EIR'S that are coming before Council. Councilmember deHaan stated Council is looking at the policies as guidelines and not accepted policies per se. Mayor Johnson stated the guidelines would be tested and analyzed in long-range plans and would become policies that would become part of the General Plan; the idea is to use the policies as guidelines in considering EIR'S in the short term. Councilmember Matarrese stated he interprets a guideline as an initiation point; making the project work or taking care of the situation… | CityCouncil/2006-10-17.pdf |
CityCouncil/2006-11-21.pdf,25 | CityCouncil | 2006-11-21 | 25 | The Assistant City Manager stated State law requires that the DDA be published fourteen days prior to being considered for adoption. Mayor/Chair Johnson inquired whether the document has been made public, to which the Assistant City Manager responded in the affirmative. The Assistant City Manager noted that there would be one agenda item with eight actions. Vice Mayor/Commissioner Gilmore inquired whether the existing agreement with Catellus is also available, to which the Assistant City Manager responded the document would be made available. Councilmember/Commissioner Daysog noted that the meeting to adopt the Catellus DDA was held in the Elks Lodge. Councilmember/Commissioner Matarrese noted there is a nice overflow room at the library. Mayor/Chair Johnson stated the public needs to know the proposed agreement has not been approved by the CIC; the draft is coming to the CIC at a public hearing. uncilmember/Commissioner Matarrese stated the speaker's request for an outline of the closed sessions seems appropriate. Mayor/Chair Johnson inquired whether the documents could be posted online, to which the Assistant City Manager responded in the affirmative. Bill Smith, Alameda, commented on meetings. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Mayor/Chair Johnson adjourned the Special Joint Meeting at 11:04 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger City Clerk The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act. Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council and 13 Community Improvement Commission November 21, 2006 | CityCouncil/2006-11-21.pdf |
CityCouncil/2006-12-05.pdf,25 | CityCouncil | 2006-12-05 | 25 | the MOU could be attached to the DDA. Mayor/Chair Johnson stated the MOU should be attached as an exhibit. i the DDA notes WABA's desire to limit smaller retailers. Councilmember/Authority Member/Commissioner Matarrese stated the retail and residential entitlements have different transportation patterns he can see residential commuters trying to head out of the Webster Street Tube at commute time he is happy with the water shuttle; he would like the land shuttle and ride share described explicitly in the TDM; goals should be described; the goal is not to have a TDM program but is to reduce the number of vehicle trips, provide improved non-auto transit options, and implement metrics to measure successi land shuttle and ride share lots need to be called out but should not be limited. The Supervising Planner stated the Conditions of Approval include the land and water shuttle as required elements of the first phase of the TDM; the Master Plan also calls for an on-sight ride share lot. The Assistant City Manager stated the cross references are generally universal between the DA and the Conditions of Approval exhibits. The Base Reuse and Community Development Manager stated some of the documents, such as the DA and Master Plan, are City documents; the DDA is a CIC document. louncilmember/Authority Member/Commissioner Matarrese stated goals should be mentioned. Vice Mayor/Authority Member/Commissioner Gilmore stated she would like to see something that addresses the potential lag in Tinker Avenue and the alternatives as related to the TDM and capi she understands how Catellus would like to cap responsibilityi she would like some mechanism in place if the City gets into a situation where the project is roaring and then there is a lag between building Tinker Avenue or building an alternative; she would like to see an increase in the amount of money to shuttle people until the Tinker Avenue extension or alternatives are built. The Base Reuse and Community Development Manager suggested amending the language to have Council… | CityCouncil/2006-12-05.pdf |
CityCouncil/2007-01-02.pdf,25 | CityCouncil | 2007-01-02 | 25 | added burden. Councilmember Gilmore stated the City would not ask the developer to pay an additional amount if the project does not do well; milestones would need to be hit. Mr. Marshall stated a more palatable outcome for the developer would be not having both the escalator and percentage increase. Councilmember Gilmore stated the increase would not kick in for five years, if at all. Mr. Marshall stated possibly the escalator could kick back in if the increase does not happen; he does not want to end up doing both. Councilmember deHaan inquired whether the developer would prefer a higher cap. Mr. Marshall stated the reality is that some lose concepts are being navigated. Councilmember deHaan stated Council is trying to give staff and the developer an opportunity to craft something. Mayor Johnson inquired whether the water taxi cost is part of the TDM Program. The Base Reuse and Community Development Manager responded in the affirmative; stated the cost is capped at $125,000. Mayor Johnson inquired whether the water taxi would operate for one year and then the whole TDM Program would be reviewed for success. The Base Reuse and Community Development Manager responded in the affirmative; stated a decision can be administratively made by the TDM Program Executive Director to reallocate monies among the other components, if not feasible. Mayor Johnson inquired who would be the TDM Program Executive Director, to which the Base Reuse and Community Development Manager responded the staff person hired to run the TDM Program. Mayor Johnson inquired whether changes would come before Council. The Base Reuse and Community Development Manager responded everything is structured to go to the Planning Board; stated an amendment could be made if there is a desire to come to Council; Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 25 January 2, 2007 | CityCouncil/2007-01-02.pdf |
CityCouncil/2007-01-16.pdf,25 | CityCouncil | 2007-01-16 | 25 | MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING TUESDAY- - -JANUARY 16, 2007 - -6:00 p.m. Mayor Johnson convened the Special Meeting at 6:10 p.m. Roll Call - Present : Councilmembers deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese, Tam, and Mayor Johnson - 5. Absent : None. The Special Meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider: (07-018) Conference with Legal Counsel - Anticipated Litigation; Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to Subdivision (b) of Section 54956.9; Number of cases One. (07-019) Conference with Legal Counsel - Existing Litigation (54956.9 ; Name of case: Attari V. City of Alameda. (07-020) Conference with Labor Negotiators; Agency Negotiators : Craig Jory and Human Resources Director; Employee Organizations : Alameda City Employees Association and Police Association Non- Sworn. Not discussed. Following the Closed Session, the Special Meeting was reconvened and Mayor Johnson announced that regarding Anticipated Litigation, Council received a briefing from the City Attorney and no action was taken; regarding Existing Litigation, Council received a briefing and gave direction to the City Attorney. Adjournment There being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the Special Meeting at 7:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger City Clerk The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act. Special Meeting Alameda City Council January 16, 2007 | CityCouncil/2007-01-16.pdf |
CityCouncil/2007-06-19.pdf,25 | CityCouncil | 2007-06-19 | 25 | Arts; everyone should be supportive of one another. Mayor Johnson stated the Museum Board needs to show that businesses benefit from making donations to the Museum; ACLO convinces businesses that support makes sense. Councilmember Matarrese stated a condition should be to have a written agreement with the Museum and the City that includes liability issues and a component for escalating the contribution as a matching vehicle going forward. The City Manager stated the City has been working on an agreement with the exception of the matching component. Councilmember Matarrese stated that he does not support a cut in the existing allocation; a gap exists between the rent and the City's practice of paying the entire rent and the existing allocation; there should be some type of matching incentive to close the gapi a rent increase is guaranteed; a second condition should be to establish a business and fundraising plan. Councilmember deHaan stated the matter might not be resolved tonight. Councilmember Matarrese stated the budget resolutions should be adopted with the conditions that the Museum allocation not be reduced, the City establish a Cultural Arts Program with the difference, the Museum and the City come to a written agreement that would include the escalator to help close the gap with the matching fund, and that the Museum must have a business and fundraising plan within the next quarter. Mayor Johnson stated other arts organizations should have an annual budget amount that they can apply for on a grant basis; the City needs to support other organizations; City support should be on a matching grant basis. Councilmember deHaan requested clarification on whether Mayor Johnson is recommending not reducing the amount by 10% and the delta for rent would include $14,000 as a match. Mayor Johnson stated that she would recommend a 10% reduction and allow the Museum to earn another 10% to 20% on a matching basis. The City Manager stated the match could take up the entire $50,000. Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Counci… | CityCouncil/2007-06-19.pdf |
CityCouncil/2007-11-06.pdf,25 | CityCouncil | 2007-11-06 | 25 | file for the licenses until the lease is approved because of the fees. Commissioner Gilmore inquired what type of licenses are needed. The Development Services Director responded food and beverage licenses are not separate; stated the major issue would be the Use Permit for the exterior seating; the owner would need a full liquor license from Alcohol Beverage Control (ABC) i the facility will be an "over 21" establishment. Commissioner Gilmore moved approval of the staff recommendation with direction to add language to Section 7 of the lease requiring that the wine bar not be allowed to convert to a wine store. Commissioner Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. (*07-046 CIC) Recommendation to approve a Lease with BurgerMeister Management, Inc. for 2319 Central Avenue in the Historic Alameda Theater. Accepted. AGENDA ITEM (07-516 CC/07-047 CIC) Public Hearing to consider approval of a first addendum to the Alameda Landing Mixed-use Development Project Supplemental Environmental Impact Report, first amendment to the Development Agreement, and first amendment to the Disposition and Development Agreement for the Alameda Landing Mixed Use Project to modify the Public Waterfront Promenade; (07-516A CC) Adoption of Resolution Certifying the Addendum to the Alameda Landing Mixed-Use Development Project Supplemental Environmental Impact Report; (07-516B CC) Adoption of Resolution Approving and Authorizing Execution of a First Amendment to a Disposition and Development Agreement with Palmtree Acquisition Corporation (Successor by Merger to Catellus Development Corporation) for the Sale and Development of Certain Real Property at the Fleet Industrial Supply Center (FISC) ; (07-047A CIC) Adoption of Resolution Approving an Addendum to the Supplemental Environmental Impact Report for the Alameda Landing Mixed-Use Development Project Authorizing the Executive Director to Amend the Disposition and Development Agreement with Palmtree Acquisition Corporation (Successor by Merger to Catellus Dev… | CityCouncil/2007-11-06.pdf |
CityCouncil/2007-12-04.pdf,25 | CityCouncil | 2007-12-04 | 25 | delay in trying to get Clif Bar onto the site; conditions will change ; seventy-five percent of the piers are compromised. the recommended amendments accommodate changed conditions in a way that does not expose the City to additional financial obligations. Councilmember/Commissioner Tam moved adoption of the resolutions and introduction of the ordinance. Councilmember/Commissioner Matarrese seconded the motion. Under discussion, Councilmember/Commissioner Gilmore stated that she assumes that a future feasibility study would take into account the condition of the warehouse and piers and would be part of the question of whether or not the pier can be saved. The Base Reuse and Community Development Manager responded in the affirmative; stated new technology might be available in five years that would make pier replacement more cost effective; stated the feasibility study would address requirements to retain the building as well as the requirement to do what needs to be done to the pier. Mayor/Chair Johnson stated that it is time to move the project forward; the delay was unfortunate; opening up the waterfront and shoreline is great BCDC would not approve building a pier over the water today; exposing more of the shoreline is good; inquired whether there is a timeframe for Clif Bar, to which the Base Reuse and Community Development Manager responded fall of 2009. Councilmember/Commissioner deHaan stated that the phase is not going to be completely designed out within the next two to three years; his concern is how the waterfront office buildings are treated; he would be discouraged to see a five-story building flush on the shoreline; he hopes that the developer will look at other alternatives in the interim; the waterfront was always questionable and never thought to be something that could be saved; he is concerned with the amount of money that could be deferred from the project; he would like to see the money used in a better way to support the project and community. On the call for the question, the motion carried… | CityCouncil/2007-12-04.pdf |
CityCouncil/2008-01-15.pdf,25 | CityCouncil | 2008-01-15 | 25 | MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING TUESDAY- - -JANUARY 15, 2008 - -6:00 P.M. Mayor Johnson convened the Special Meeting at 6:10 p.m. ROLL CALL - Present : Councilmembers deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese, Tam, and Mayor Johnson - 5. Absent : None. The Special Meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider: (08-016) Conference with Legal Counsel - Anticipated Litigation Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 54956.9; Number of cases One (08-017) - Conference with Labor Negotiators; Agency Negotiators : Craig Jory and Human Resources Director Employee Organizations : All Public Safety Bargaining Units. (08-018) Workers' Compensation Claim (54956.95 ; Claimant : James Ritchey Agency Claimed Against: City of Alameda. Following the Closed Session, the Special Meeting was reconvened and Mayor Johnson announced that regarding Legal, Council received a briefing from Legal Counsel regarding a threat of litigation; no action was taken; regarding Labor, Council received a briefing from its Labor Negotiators on the status of labor negotiations within public safety; regarding Workers' Compensation, Council provided settlement authority to resolve the claim. Adjournment There being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the Special Meeting at 7:35 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger City Clerk The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act. Special Meeting Alameda City Council January 15, 2008 | CityCouncil/2008-01-15.pdf |
CityCouncil/2008-02-19.pdf,25 | CityCouncil | 2008-02-19 | 25 | ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Mayor/Chair Johnson adjourned the Special Joint Meeting at 9:37 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 13 and Redevelopment Authority, and Community Improvement Commission February 19, 2008 | CityCouncil/2008-02-19.pdf |
CityCouncil/2008-06-03.pdf,25 | CityCouncil | 2008-06-03 | 25 | Councilmember/Authority Member deHaan inquired whether the interest rate is fixed. The Finance Director responded the interest rate varies over time i stated everything is taken into account with an all in true interest cost. Mayor/Chair Johnson stated money would need to be found elsewhere if refinancing is not done; she does not view refinancing as a way to balance the budget. Councilmember/Authority Member deHaan stated refinancing would be a one-time fix and a deferral. The Finance Director stated the proposed refinancing was a potential solution for not having sufficient budget capacity to meet all needs. louncilmember/Authority Member Gilmore inquired whether timing would be impacted if Council and the Commission decide to made a decision to go forward at the end of June. The Finance Director responded missing the August 1 call date for the Police Building might cost more money, but could be done. louncilmember/Authority Member Matarrese inquired how much is owed on the police bonds. The Finance Director responded $1.5 million; stated Library and Golf is 3.5%; 63% is for Library and 34% is for Golf. Mayor/Chair Johnson stated $1 million needs to be spent on renovating the driving range the City is still paying off the construction debt. Councilmember/Authority Member Matarrese stated staff should look at paying early because there is no tax deduction for paying interest. The Finance Director stated the scenario could be reviewed; the net present value of the future debt service versus using the fund balance to pay it off can be reviewed. Councilmember/Authority Member deHaan inquired whether major refinancing was done in 2002-2003. Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Alameda Public 11 Financing Authority, and Community Improvement Commission Meeting June 3, 2008 | CityCouncil/2008-06-03.pdf |
CityCouncil/2008-06-17.pdf,25 | CityCouncil | 2008-06-17 | 25 | Mayor/Chair Johnson stated that deferred costs are between $75 million and $107 million for health and safety post employment benefits. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Matarrese stated that some of the fund balance could be used to seed the trust fund. Mayor/Chair Johnson opened the public portion of the hearing. Speakers Carol Quintal, Crossing Guard; Janet Crandall, Citizen Emergency Response Team (CERT) i David Baker, Alameda; Fred Blass, Alameda; Christine Novosel, Crossing Guard; Christopher Buckley, Alameda Rich Bennett, Alameda; Jeff DelBono, Alameda Firefighter Domenick Weaver, Alameda Firefighters; Steve Floyd, Local 689; Tim McNeil, Retired Fire Chief; Diane Coler-Dark, Alameda Chuck Millar, Alameda; Robb Ratto, PSBA; Kathy Moehring, WABA. There being no further speakers, Mayor/Chair Johnson closed the public portion of the hearing. * * (08-278CC) Councilmember/Authority Member/Board Member/Commissioner Matarrese moved approval of continuing the meeting past 12:00 midnight. Mayor/Chair Johnson seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. Mayor/Chair Johnson stated that the City will not be spending money on the Meyer's House; Greater Alameda Business Area (GABA) funding should not be approved until information is brought back; $50,000 is allocated to the EcoPass program. The Public Works Director stated the total program is approximately $36,000; $14,000 is from the General Fund; the AC Transit General Manager is allowed to reduce the passes by 15%. Mayor/Chair Johnson inquired whether there is a better to way to encourage people to take public transit, such as discount tickets for BART or other forms of public transportation; suggesting performing an employee survey. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan stated that open dialogue should be initiated regarding the Meyer's House; additional funding might become available. Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Alameda Public Financing Authority, Alameda Reuse and 15 Redevelopment Authority, and Community Improveme… | CityCouncil/2008-06-17.pdf |
CityCouncil/2008-07-15.pdf,25 | CityCouncil | 2008-07-15 | 25 | for four terms; grant funding was not provided in the first two terms; an attempt was made to provide a public event that benefited the community; a successful location was not available; educational roundtables are being proposed. Chair Johnson stated that having a public event would not be a requirement the intent is to use some of the grant funding on marketing and promotion; increasing membership would help. Commissioner Gilmore stated GABA is being requested to spend $6,000 on advertising. Mr. Kos stated most promotions are done on a volunteer basis. Chair Johnson stated dollar amounts could be assigned to in-kind donations. Commissioner deHaan stated GABA could provide its own measuring devise. Commissioner deHaan amended the motion to include that GABA would come back with a measuring devise showing fulfillment to their commitment. Commissioner Matarrese stated the motion should include that PSBA, WABA, and GABA spend 50% of CIC grant funding on advertising and promotion; the policy is that the City would get a return when contributions are made to business associations and requirements are in place. By consensus, the motion carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 12:33 a.m. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger Secretary The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act. Special Meeting Community Improvement Commission 6 July 15, 2008 | CityCouncil/2008-07-15.pdf |
CityCouncil/2008-10-07.pdf,25 | CityCouncil | 2008-10-07 | 25 | extended if Alameda hasn't acted on SunCal's land use approvals by that date. The 2nd amendment also establishes several new mandatory milestones : - SunCal's obligation to elect to pursue, or not, a ballot initiative by April 30, 2009 - Complete a final Navy Conveyance Term Sheet by July 31, 2009 - Complete a negotiated DDA by July 20, 2010. 2nd amendment provides Alameda with performance standards it needs to ensure timely progress on the redevelopment of Alameda Point. Failure to meet any mandatory milestone is a default of the ENA. In addition, SunCal will now be required to deposit $250,000 with the City to commence CEQA work by April 20, 2009. Failure to make the initial deposit or subsequent deposits for this work is a default under the ENA. The cure periods for all the defaults under the ENA have been shortened, so the ENA can be terminated more quickly as necessary. The city may request once every six months that the developer prove in writing that they are consistent with the obligations of the ENA regarding any transfer. These modifications protect Alameda's core interests and allows an addition of a new financial partner with the wherewithal to fund the necessary predevelopment activities to entitle a mixed-use project at Alameda Point. Member deHaan asked for clarification on the change of the ballot initiative. Ms. Potter explained that the only change would be whether SunCal elects to put their land plan on the ballot or not. They are not required to place it on the ballot, the mandatory milestone requires only that SunCal to inform us whether they will go on the ballot or not. Member deHaan asked Suncal if they would "stay the course" if modifications to the Measure A ordinance would not pass. Pat Keliher, Alameda Point Project Manager for SunCal, replied that, per the agreement, SunCal would like to continue to have an opportunity to stay the course. To date, they do not believe that there is any non-Measure A plan that would work. Their plan developed with community effort is a plan they will ta… | CityCouncil/2008-10-07.pdf |
CityCouncil/2009-01-06.pdf,25 | CityCouncil | 2009-01-06 | 25 | Commissioner deHaan stated bamboo is the least expensive option but requires maintenance. The Redevelopment Manager stated bamboo is very difficult to remove. Chair Johnson stated various options have been presented; inquired whether an option could be to reallocate the money to other façade programs, including the Chun property. The Redevelopment Manager responded the money could be reallocated to other CIC redevelopment priorities, including the Chun property. Chair Johnson stated fixing the Chun property is important because a lot of money has been spent in the area; the owners are committing to spend $200,000. The Redevelopment Manager stated the owners want to remediate before selling the site; plans include removing the chain link fence, repainting, and improving the interior; planters would be installed; the Park Street Business Association (PSBA) has agreed to maintain the planters. Chair Johnson inquired whether benches would be allowed. The Redevelopment Manager responded benches would be a liability during remediation. Commissioner Tam requested clarification on improvement costs for the Chun property. The Redevelopment Manager stated costs are approximately $75,000 to $110,000. Commissioner Tam inquired whether options include the northern façade landscaping and esthetic improvements to the Chun property, to which the Redevelopment Manager responded in the affirmative. Speakers : Christopher Buckley, Alameda (submitted letter) ; Richard Rutter, Alameda (submitted photo) ; and Robb Ratto, Park Street Business Association. Chair Johnson inquired whether staff is requesting funding re- allocation in general, not for specific projects. The Redevelopment Manager responded staff is requesting funding re- allocation for the Chun property; stated other funds would be Special Meeting Community Improvement Commission 2 January 6, 2009 | CityCouncil/2009-01-06.pdf |
CityCouncil/2009-02-07.pdf,25 | CityCouncil | 2009-02-07 | 25 | balance; the City needs to be disciplined and live within its means; inquired whether the equipment plan would be okay under the three-year repayment plan. The Interim Finance Director responded in the affirmative Mayor Johnson stated the amount going into the equipment reserve fund should be reviewed; perhaps too much money is going into said fund; that she supports the idea of the down payment and repayment during the next two years; inquired whether the down payment would be the first year and repayment would occur during the next two years. The Interim Finance Director responded the fund transfer would occur this year and repayment would occur in three years starting July 1. Mayor Johnson stated that she agrees that the actual fund balance should be reflected; inquired whether money is included for the East Bay Regional Communications System. The City Manager responded the amount was not included; stated the matter would be added to the issue bin. Mayor Johnson noted the City can withdraw before debt is incurred and might need to do so. Councilmember Matarrese inquired whether money being repaid each year by departments would be reflected in the figure that shows the fund balance available cash, to which the Interim Finance Director responded in the affirmative. The City Treasurer stated that he is concerned about the integrity of the equipment replacement budget, which is $1.6 million short this year. The Interim Finance Director stated equipment replacement appreciation is done based on present value; planning for future value can be done but has a cost. The City Treasurer stated the FSC is using future value; that he is curious how the equipment replacement fund has ended up with a surplus; $1.3 million of the workers' compensation deficit seems to have occurred this year; inquired how it happened; stated the City has historically low workers' compensation claims inquired whether the year was a fluke or a trend; inquired when a more accurate workers' compensation premium would be built into the system and … | CityCouncil/2009-02-07.pdf |
CityCouncil/2009-10-20.pdf,25 | CityCouncil | 2009-10-20 | 25 | Mayor/Chair Johnson stated a clear, defined application process is needed; a determination should be made as to whether the project would qualify for a density bonus first; a higher burden would be placed on the developer because economic feasibility needed to be provided. louncilmember/Commissioner Gilmore stated a developer would have to know project details, which would be included in the application. Mayor/Chair Johnson stated the developer could submit plans simultaneously. Councilmember/Commissioner Gilmore inquired whether an applicant would need to provide economic feasibility data when a density bonus is presented to the Planning Board. The Planning Services Manager responded in the affirmative; stated staff would need to provide documentation proving that the project is not economically feasible. The Planning Services Manager continued with the presentation. In response to Vice Mayor/Commissioner deHaan's inquiry regarding the Housing Element, the Planning Services Manager stated the Housing Element has been conditionally certified by the State; staff is working with the State to achieve some type of approval ; one requirement of the conditionally approved Housing Element is that the City adopt a density bonus ordinance. Mayor/Chair Johnson stated there is no assurance that the City would receive a certified Housing Element from the State if a density bonus is adopted. Vice Mayor/Commissioner deHaan inquired how long the State's density bonus ordinance has been around, to which the Planning Services Manager responded since 1979. Mayor/Chair Johnson stated the reason the City does not have a fully certified Housing Element is because the State wants the City to plan where to put units that would have been built at the former Naval base. Vice Mayor/Commissioner deHaan inquired what role Economic Development would play in obtaining funding. The Interim City Manager/Executive Director responded the 20% Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority, and Community Impro… | CityCouncil/2009-10-20.pdf |
CityCouncil/2009-11-17.pdf,25 | CityCouncil | 2009-11-17 | 25 | The Planning Services Manager responded the reduction would not provide longer term housing but would make the inclusionary housing requirement within the City consistent; stated applying the 25% inclusionary requirement would automatically entitle applicants to the density bonus requirements plus concessions, incentives, and waivers; staff did not want density bonus concessions and waivers to be automatically triggered; by rolling the percentage back to 15%, the applicant would have to make more affordable units within the development. In response to Councilmember/Commissioner Tam's inquiry, the Supervising Planner responded any inclusionary housing units count towards the density bonus units; staff does not want to create a situation where someone would automatically be entitled to a density bonus plus concessions and waivers. Mayor/Chair Johnson stated that she likes the idea of caps; perhaps the Planning Board should be requested to look at particular items. Vice Mayor/Commissioner deHaan stated one item would be open space; visuals should be provided in order to show what projects would actually entail. The Planning Services Manager stated visuals could be provided. Mayor/Chair Johnson opened the public portion of the hearing. Proponents (In favor of ordinance) : Robb Ratto, Park Street Business Association (PSBA) i Christopher Buckley, Alameda Architectural Preservation Society; Jamie Keating, Trailhead Ventures, LLC . There being no further speakers, Mayor/Chair Johnson closed the public portion of the hearing. Councilmember/Commissioner Matarrese stated that he would like to send the ordinance back [to the Planning Board] ; the two most important points are: 1) separating pure residential from other projects; 2) setback and height caps cannot be arbitrary or non- technical; Fire Department pictures show the hazard that could be used as the rationale for setting a cap; if the ordinance is sent back to the Planning Board, it should be time critical so that the process can be finished. Special Joint Meeting … | CityCouncil/2009-11-17.pdf |
CityCouncil/2010-03-16.pdf,25 | CityCouncil | 2010-03-16 | 25 | MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL JOINT CITY COUNCIL, ALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (ARRA) AND COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY--MARCH 16, 2010- -6:00 P.M. Vice Mayor/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan convened the meeting at 6:10 p.m. Roll Call - Present: Councilmembers/Board Members/ Commissioners deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese, Tam and Mayor/Chair Johnson - 5. Note: Mayor/Chair Johnson arrived at 6:40 p.m. Absent: None. The meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider: (10-107 CC) Conference with Labor Negotiators; Agency negotiators: Interim City Manager and Human Resources Director; Employee organizations: Alameda Fire Managers Association, Alameda Police Managers Association and Executive Management (10-108 CC/ARRA/10-12 CIC) Conference with Real Property Negotiator; Property: Alameda Point; Negotiating Parties: City of Alameda, ARRA, CIC, SunCal, Navy; Under Negotiations: Price and terms of payment. Following the Closed Session, the meeting was reconvened and Mayor Johnson announced that regarding Labor, the Council received a briefing on the status of labor negotiations; no action was taken; and regarding Real Property, the Council / Board / Commission received a briefing from the Real Property Negotiator; no action was taken. Adjournment There being no further business, Mayor/Chair Johnson adjourned the meeting at 7:20 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger, City Clerk Secretary, CIC The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act. Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority, and Community Improvement Commission March 16, 2010 | CityCouncil/2010-03-16.pdf |
CityCouncil/2010-04-20.pdf,25 | CityCouncil | 2010-04-20 | 25 | breakdown of the costs, to which Mr. Faye responded in the affirmative. The Deputy City Manager - Development Services stated staff was informed that there are costs that were not included in the escrow account. Mr. Faye stated that he does not have any problem providing any additional incurred costs that have not come from the escrow account. Vice Mayor/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan provided a handout outlining the various plans submitted; stated the Measure B plan has 4,500 homes; the modified plan shows the same density of 4,500 homes; [Measure B has] 3.5 million square feet for commercial; the density bonus is up 4.3 million square feet; inquired why the City went through Measure B and now SunCal is submitting something that has more than Measure B. Mr. Faye responded there are a couple of answers to the question assuming the numbers are correct; stated Measure B would never have been necessary had State law relative to promoting affordable housing with the corresponding density bonus been in place and had the City's Municipal Code been modified to address the promotion of affordable housing through density bonus; if State law and Alameda's changes arrived at a different time or if the ENA timeline were different, there never would have been an election; the density would have been at the discretion of the Council. Vice Mayor/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan stated references were made to density bonus in the Measure B dialogue, which is contrary to what Mr. Faye is saying. Mr. Faye stated the project proponent submitted signatures in September; State law changes went into affect shortly thereafter; the City implemented State law through changes to the Municipal Code in mid December. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Matarrese stated that he thought the density bonus State law was in place before. The City Attorney/Legal Counsel stated the State density bonus law has been in place for a couple of decades; the City was a little late in adopting its own ordinance, which is completely consistent with St… | CityCouncil/2010-04-20.pdf |
CityCouncil/2010-05-04.pdf,25 | CityCouncil | 2010-05-04 | 25 | all funds, the Deputy City Manager - Economic Development stated not necessarily; staff has requested SunCal to provide a statement of predevelopment expenses; part of the pro forma negotiations include what predevelopment costs have been put into the pro forma as eligible predevelopment expenses; typically, [developers] seek a return on expenditures. Mayor/Chair Johnson inquired whether the pro forma should include all known numbers. The Deputy City Manager - Economic Development responded the pro forma includes predevelopment expenditures; stated staff needs to determine whether the number is correct. Mayor/Chair Johnson inquired what is the [predevelopment expenditure] figure, to which the Interim City Manager/Executive Director responded $9 million. Mayor/Chair Johnson stated getting a breakdown should not be a problem. The Deputy City Manager - Economic Development stated staff would request said information from SunCal on Thursday. Mayor/Chair Johnson stated the timeline is short; staff should not spend time on the issue; that she hopes SunCal provides said information; the issue is administrative. The Interim City Manager/Executive Director stated the pro forma includes $9 million for predevelopment costs which covers staff costs, the escrow account, and other items expended for the ballot initiative; staff is just starting to get into the detailed pro forma; the previous pro forma was based on the Measure B project; numbers are driven by the type of project; the key is to have the numbers be more than the budgeting numbers and start cutting numbers down to the detail to get to a point that the IRR makes sense. Vice Mayor/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan inquired whether predevelopment costs have been received. The Interim City Manager/Executive Director responded in the negative; stated that staff is still waiting for the escrow account and staff costs to date. The Deputy City Manager - Economic Development stated the total current costs [for which documentation has been submitted] are $5.5 million. The I… | CityCouncil/2010-05-04.pdf |
CityCouncil/2010-06-01.pdf,25 | CityCouncil | 2010-06-01 | 25 | second item [Setting a Public Hearing for Decision on the SunCal Modified Optional Entitlement Application and/or Extension of the ENA from Governing Bodies of Alameda by July 20, 2010]; staff is looking at either July 6th or July 20th. Councilmember/Boaro Member/Commissioner Matarrese stated that he is puzzled why the matter is being addressed tonight when an ARRA meeting was scheduled for tomorrow but was cancelled; monthly ARRA meetings need to be reestablished. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Matarrese moved approval of setting a Public Hearing on July 6th 7th, or 20th to decide on the SunCal Modified OEA and/or extension of the ENA. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan seconded the motion. Under discussion, the Deputy City Manager - Development Services stated staff would come back with a recommendation on which date. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Matarrese stated that he prefers to have the public hearing at the regular July 7th ARRA meeting which would not conflict with Council business. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Tam inquired whether staff expects to have the submittal that occurred over the weekend, the determination of completeness, resolution of financial issues, and transportation plan issues available. The Deputy City Manager - Development Services responded a definitive answer on the incompleteness [of the application] can be provided by June 15th; stated follow up on the financial information could be provided in the next two weeks; staff would be reporting back on transportation questions on June 15th Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan stated the density bonus leaves a lot of question in his mind; 1,310 homes is low density; high density is 3,531; the project is not new development throughout but is adaptive reuse and infill; that he needs clarification on 29 areas on the reuse of the Batchelor's Enlisted Quarters (BEQ). The Deputy City Manager - Development Services stated the total number of units would increase by 30%; density, in terms of th… | CityCouncil/2010-06-01.pdf |
CityCouncil/2010-06-15.pdf,25 | CityCouncil | 2010-06-15 | 25 | Councilmember Tam inquired whether School District employees are offered a discount for using the parking structure. The Economic Development Director responded in the negative; stated the parking structure offers a reduced, monthly rate. Councilmember Tam inquired whether School District employees have participated in monthly passes. The Economic Development Director responded that she does not know; stated School District employees are welcome to participate. Vice Mayor deHaan stated teachers arrive early and take up parking spaces; offering teachers a different rate would be a good idea; the School District needs to be involved; at one point the School District was involved in discussions, but he does not know the outcome. The Economic Development Director stated the School District wanted to park free which would pose a problem on designated floors. Vice Mayor deHaan inquired how many teachers are at the School District, to which the Economic Development Director responded that she does not know. Vice Mayor deHaan stated the School District may have only fifty or so teachers; something could be worked out. The Economic Development Director stated the parking structure is not producing as much revenue as anticipated; the parking structure is offset by other lease revenues, citation collection, and parking meter enforcement. Councilmember Tam moved approval of directing staff to review the matter. Councilmember Gilmore seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS (10-302) Consideration of Mayor's nominations for appointment to the Civil Service Board, Housing Commission, Library Board, Planning Board, Public Utilities Board, Transportation Commission, and Oakland Chinatown Advisory Committee. Mayor Johnson made the following nominations: Jose Villaflor, Civil Service Board; Joy Pratt, Housing Commission; Catherine Atkin, Library Board; Eric Ibsen, Planning Board; and Philip Tribuzio, Transportation Commission. (10-303) Written Communication from the League of California… | CityCouncil/2010-06-15.pdf |
CityCouncil/2010-07-20.pdf,25 | CityCouncil | 2010-07-20 | 25 | change, from the City's 2008 transportation strategy, which has been based upon the evolution of Alameda Point over time; the City has hired other consultants; that he has worked on phase and stage implementation detail from a developer's prospective. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Gilmore stated lawsuits were mentioned in last week's Alameda Journal headlines; tonight's discussions have included lawsuits potentially being an outcome of tonight's decision; three or four letters were received last week and came too late for the staff report; that she is not sure whether the letters would have been included in the staff report if the letters were received in time; requested feedback from the City Attorney on the matter. The City Attorney/Legal Counsel inquired whether Councilmember / Board Member / Commissioner Gilmore is talking about the damages issue. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Gilmore responded in the affirmative; stated that she is a little disturbed about the matter; she had the opportunity to review the City Attorney's opinion for the first time today; the opinion's existence became known to her about a week ago; that she requested a copy of the opinion from the City Attorney and was told to read the opinion in the City Attorney's office; the opinion had to be left at the City Attorney's office because it would not be given out in advance of the meeting; that she asked the City Attorney why she would not give the opinion to her; the City Attorney cited concerns regarding the white elephant in the room; she is disturbed by allegations regarding Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Tam, the Interim City Manager, City Attorney, Mayor, and SunCal; the situation has created an unnecessary, adversarial atmosphere around City Hall and the City; at the end of the day, everyone is friends, neighbors, and colleagues' and everyone will have to learn to work together; that she has volunteered for the City for over fifteen years; she has never seen the situation get this bad; the situation has be… | CityCouncil/2010-07-20.pdf |
CityCouncil/2010-07-27.pdf,25 | CityCouncil | 2010-07-27 | 25 | impressed with the work plan; staff has come a long way; the rainy day is not over; the $12 million [General Fund reserve] is in jeopardy the longer the economy stays as is. Mayor/Chair Johnson complimented staff for continuing to refine the budget and make the budget more transparent and understandable; stated the budget [format] gets better and better each year. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Gilmore inquired whether all of tonight's Power Points would be posted to the website; further inquired whether a hard copy would be on file at the Library. The Deputy City Manager - Administrative Services responded a hard copy is already at the Library; stated staff is figuring out how to technologically break the budget into smaller pieces. Vice Mayor/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan stated tonight's meeting has been the most productive meeting in a long time. The Interim City Manager/Executive Director stated a year's worth of planning, concepts, and drafted policies have culminated into something tangible; agendas should be very active in the next year. The Deputy City Manager - Administrative Services requested that the Proposition 4 limit be adopted before the budget. Councilmember Gilmore moved adoption of the resolution. Councilmember Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. On the call for the question, the original motion carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. (10-391 CC) Resolution No. 14483, "Reappointing lan Couwenberg to the Housing Commission. Adopted. Councilmember Matarrese moved adoption of the resolution. Councilmember deHaan seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. (10-392 CC) Public Hearing to Consider Adopting a Report on the Collection of Sewer Service Charges on the Tax Roll for Fiscal Year 2010-2011. The Public Works Director gave a brief presentation. Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Alameda Reuse 25 and Redevelopment Authority, and Community Improvement Commission July 27, 2010 | CityCouncil/2010-07-27.pdf |
CityCouncil/2010-09-07.pdf,25 | CityCouncil | 2010-09-07 | 25 | Commissioner deHaan stated the Commission is not asking for a lot of detail; other elements need to be considered in order to be successful. Chair Johnson stated the Animal Shelter would be better off in another location. The Interim Executive Director stated that she has recommendations on where the Corporation Yard and Animal Shelter could go; this year's budget has funds for a very extensive feasibility analysis for rebuilding, constructing, and relocating the Corporation Yard and Animal Shelter; the process should not be started until the CIC knows what the property can be sold for in order to put more cash into the deal; the Commission's comments and Commissioner Matarrese's amendments to the ENA have seven different components which would be put into the ENA; staff would come back regarding getting consultants on board to start the feasibility analysis; the CIC does not have the cash or funds to buy property and build something; the cost estimate would be based on the type of building and landscape, as well as the physical relocation cost; staff has other recommendations for the Commission in terms of what could happen with Alameda Municipal Power; through an asset management strategy, the CIC could have more than enough to pay for the Animal Shelter and approximately 50% to pay for the Corporation Yard; a deal might be able to be struck in a DA to offset costs; the situation is sequential. Chair Johnson stated ensuring a benefit to the City is important in terms of the economy of scale. Commissioner Gilmore inquired whether a bunch of dominos need to fall in order to finance the Corporation Yard and Animal Shelter relocation; stated the Commission has a sense of unease because the Interim Executive Director has a clear idea of where to move the Corporation Yard and costs; that she is not privy to the information. The Interim Executive Director stated that she needs to have some discussion regarding selling the property in order to validate numbers and theories; the cart is before the horse. Commissioner Gi… | CityCouncil/2010-09-07.pdf |
CityCouncil/2011-02-15.pdf,25 | CityCouncil | 2011-02-15 | 25 | artificial and should be used for mandatory one-time expenses. * * (11-094 CC/11-020 ARRA/11-012 CIC) Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan moved approval of continuing the meeting past midnight. Vice Mayor/Board Member/Commissioner Bonta seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. Mayor/Chair Gilmore stated departments would come in over budget at the end of the year and look to the General Fund if the $2.1 million is not used for projected overages. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Johnson stated departments would need to explain why they are over budget; some of the $2.1 million is being used for mandatory expenses; the discretionary portion of the $2.1 million is probably $500,000. The Controller stated the discretionary portion is approximately $400,000. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan stated Other Post Employment Benefits went up 11%; inquired whether the Police and Fire Departments are fine with the projected overtime budget. The Acting Police Chief responded that he is comfortable with the bottom line; stated overtime has been projected; the Police Department has had more overtime than normal due to injuries; the Superior Court closure has had an impact; a significant incident, such as a homicide, is out the Department's control. The Acting Deputy Fire Chief responded the Fire Department anticipates overtime savings because of the Staffing for Adequate Fire and Emergency Response (SAFER) hiring. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan inquired what is the overtime budget for Police and Fire, to which the Controller responded overtime for Fire is $725,000 and Police is $400,000. The Controller stated overtime [overage] would be covered with savings in other categories. The Acting City Manager/Executive Director stated barring unforeseen major incidents, the projected overtime is a worse case scenario. Mayor/Chair Gilmore stated that she appreciates the heads up; the Council/Board/Commission would not have been happy hearing about projected Special J… | CityCouncil/2011-02-15.pdf |
CityCouncil/2012-06-19.pdf,25 | CityCouncil | 2012-06-19 | 25 | CITY MANAGER COMMUNICATIONS (12-332) The City Manager announced that two members of Council provided potential frequently asked questions regarding pension and labor issues, for a total of 16 questions ; requested the remaining Councilmembers submit questions. Councilmember Johnson suggested the City Auditor and City Treasurer be invited to submit potential questions. The City Manager agreed to do so. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (12-333) Dr. Carol Gottstein, Alameda, discussed the June 6th minutes and requested to view the A&B Tow contract. COUNCIL REFERRALS None. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS (12-334) Councilmember Tam made announced that she attended a League of California Cities meeting on June 14th ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Mayor Gilmore adjourned themeeting at 10:55 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 25 June 19, 2012 | CityCouncil/2012-06-19.pdf |
CityCouncil/2013-07-23.pdf,25 | CityCouncil | 2013-07-23 | 25 | different community segments; mitigations should be contemplated with social justice and economic angles; further stated the City Council should be more involved; the process needs to start and end with the City Council. Urged adoption of the Conceptual Planning Guide; addressed the sailing program and suggested the program be moved to the seaplane lagoon area; stated the program is run by a nonprofit with the goal of making sailing available for everyone: Kame Richards, Alameda Community Sailing Center. Stated the Base is an unprecedented opportunity; the Plan's vision needs more specificity and should have more clarity about how the next phase occurs; questioned what high environmental standards means; stated more process clarity and more public forums would be good to get the public at large join in: Chuck Kapelke, Alameda. Councilmember Daysog inquired about the next steps, to which the Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point responded the Council is considering endorsing the Plan with the potential modifications tonight; stated the final Conceptual Guide, including any modifications, would be produced and made available on the website; a number of documents would be released; hearings would be held with the Planning Board and City Council to present the documents; meetings are scheduled with Boards, Commissions and community groups; items would be presented to Council in January. Councilmember Daysog stated staff could deal with economic and social justice issues by talking to people who worked at the Oakland Army Base. The Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point stated now is the time for staff to meet with organizations and encouraged the Council to let her know if there are any others. Councilmember Tam moved approval of endorsing the Conceptual Planning Guide with the comments. Councilmember Daysog Seconded the motion which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. Councilmember Daysog inquired what would be done about the Council's comments. Mayor Gilmore responded the joint meeting with the Planning Board w… | CityCouncil/2013-07-23.pdf |
CityCouncil/2014-07-15.pdf,25 | CityCouncil | 2014-07-15 | 25 | apartment has not been painted inside except for once where the old landlord paid for the paint and I had to pay for the painters. My concern is that with the demand for housing and the proposed development of the del monte building just a stones throw away, my landlord will continue to raise the rents because of the willingness of people trying to move to the island to pay more than something is worth to move in. Being month to month and not on a lease, I fear that any day we can get another increase (that we won't be able to afford) in order for him to maximize his profits and because other people are willing to pay more. Knowing how the market has changed so quickly recently, my wife and I are terrified that we will then be unable to find affordable housing on the island and have to move somewhere less desirable. We are both small business owners trying to make something out of our lives. This is unfair. We couldn't afford to move anywhere else in Alameda or in a decent part of Oakland for that matter. We feel stuck and without options. Our landlord would be happy to have us leave because they can turn around and rent our $1000 one-bedroom for $1350 to new tenants I can't afford a private apartment for myself and my son in Alameda because I don't make enough money working as a teacher's aide for the school district. I'm concerned of future increases. I'm barely scraping by and an increase would cause me to find a smaller place or leave Alameda, which is something I don't want to do. I have lived here all my life. My husband and I are both on disability, we barely get $2k between the two of us. I'm not concerned about my rent increase. I understand that my landlord has expenses too. Our lease will be up in a few months are we are concerned about them raising the rent an unsustainable amount. I have heard horror stories about rents being raised by hundreds of dollars. My current landlord ha been completely fair and only raised the rent once in the past 5 years, my concern is if I have to find another rental in a… | CityCouncil/2014-07-15.pdf |
CityCouncil/2014-12-02.pdf,25 | CityCouncil | 2014-12-02 | 25 | 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 2, 2014 | CityCouncil/2014-12-02.pdf |
CityCouncil/2015-01-20.pdf,25 | CityCouncil | 2015-01-20 | 25 | presentation was being prepared. In response to Vice Mayor/Agency Member Matarrese's inquiry, the Interim Finance Director stated the disparity in the reserves is because revenues increased and expenses did not; in prior years, the percentage was already 30 to 35; the gain from this fiscal year brought the percent up to 40. The City Manager stated staff predicted a growth of under 3%; 3.6% went into the reserves one year; this year at 8.1% after having projected 2.9%; at the same time, employee cost sharing for healthcare and pensions began; there were cuts in costs at the same time as an unexpected growth in revenue. In response to Vice Mayor/Agency Member Matarrese's inquiry, the Interim Finance Director stated part of the amount is unrestricted, but part is restricted by previous Council actions. The City Manager stated staff manages a lot of other funds; pension and Other Post Employment Benefits (OPEB) must be characterized. Vice Mayor Matarrese stated clarification is important for the public and Council to understand the mid-year budget. The City Manager stated a systematic approach to the next budget will begin in March to reach a two-year budget resolution in early June; the issues will be decanted in significantly greater detail. Councilmember/Agency Member Daysog stated a key component driving the $29 million reserve is a one-time sale of property. Vice Mayor/Agency Member Matarrese stated one-time events cannot be relied upon for operating expenses. Mayor/Chair Spencer stated a recent presentation at a conference showed Alameda County Cities unfunded OPEB liabilities as a percentage of their General fund; the range was 7% to 140% and Alameda was at 140%. Councilmember/Agency Member Ezzy Ashcraft moved approval of the staff recommendation. Vice Mayor/Agency Member Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. The City Attorney noted that the First Quarter Financial Report [paragraph no. 15-067 CC/15-001 SACIC] could not be continued to tomorrow's meeting as it was not notice… | CityCouncil/2015-01-20.pdf |
CityCouncil/2015-01-21.pdf,25 | CityCouncil | 2015-01-21 | 25 | noted there are 10 members of the public present. The City Attorney stated staff pulled together a series of resolutions and ordinances that were adopted by previous City Councils addressing how business should be conducted; one of the resolutions references using Roberts Rules of Order as a guide; people use a condensed version of Roberts Rules of Order; if Council wants to establish a subcommittee, said things could be considered; the idea tonight was to review what is being done and determine if what is being done complies with previous resolutions and ordinances; guidance could be provided about where the Council wants to head and the desired way in which to proceed; staff could return with something if Council provides guidance or a Council subcommittee could be appointed; the Council can change ordinances and resolutions. Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft questioned whether there is a problem that is trying to be fixed; stated there has been a progression, for example Oral Communications is now at the beginning of the agenda and at the end if the speakers could not fit into the allotted 15 minutes; that she would be hesitant to change things, such as the order of business and meeting start times, because the procedures work well now and have been thought out by a number of Councils; she tries to be mindful of how much is being requested of staff; the rules of order could benefit from being consolidated, perhaps by a rules subcommittee; Council should be mindful of staff's time when considering scheduling Special Meeting Alameda City Council 25 January 21, 2015 | CityCouncil/2015-01-21.pdf |
CityCouncil/2015-09-15.pdf,25 | CityCouncil | 2015-09-15 | 25 | issues she would like the Commission to address: Carol Gottstein, Alameda. Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated she would like to be able to employ the collective judgment of each member of the Council; other cities have the practice of applicants attending a public interview session at a Council meeting; although applications are available for review, Alameda's Council just gets the list of names and vacancies; she would also like to see a possible change in the policy to apply to regional boards and commissions; suggested holding off on further appointments until staff brings back requested information and Council votes on it. Councilmember Oddie stated Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft's sugestions are good; he does not want to foreclose any options and would like to see what other cities do; Council does not need to choose an option tonight. Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated the options should be brought back in a staff report. In response to Mayor Spencer's inquiry, the City Clerk stated the Board nomination process is in the City Charter. The City Attorney clarified the difference between Boards and Commissions process: the Board nomination process is in the Charter, which states the Mayor nominates and the Council appoints; the nomination process for Commissions mimics the same language but is in the Alameda Municipal Code, not the Charter; any changes to the Charter requires a vote of the people; Municipal Code changes can be done by a vote of the Council. Vice Mayor Matarrese stated he is not interested in proposing any Charter changes; he does his own research on candidates and is fine with the current process; he does not support the referral because it is on the Council to exercise responsibility, not on staff. Councilmember Daysog stated many of the Boards have been in place for decades and some commissions are new; the process is not broken; he does not support the referral. Vice Mayor Matarrese stated process improvements could include clarifying the application submission window, and distributing each ap… | CityCouncil/2015-09-15.pdf |
CityCouncil/2015-10-20.pdf,25 | CityCouncil | 2015-10-20 | 25 | Councilmember Oddie stated it is a smart move to be the land banker as the value goes up. Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated her questions have been answered and she is convinced of the approach, which should be turned into a document for Council to approve. Mayor Spencer stated how much Cushman and Wakefield has been paid or the contract was not provided, which is critical information; the presentation indicated Cushman and Wakefield was involved in the VF Outdoor campus, which she thought it was Joe Ernst. The Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point responded Cushman and Wakefield were the broker for Joe Ernst; the City did a Request for Proposals (RFP) and the City Council selected Cushman and Wakefield and PM Realty; the current contractor includes a 5% commission on land sales. Mayor Spencer stated the report needs to include the contract, projects and how much has been paid; a statement cannot be made that it is cost efficient without numbers; how much Cushman and Wakefield has been paid in the past two years. John McManus, Cushman and Wakefield, corrected one comment; stated they represented VF Outdoor; the contract ends in 2018 and includes provisions if City is not happy with performance; the lease schedule is 5% the value of the lease for years 1 to 5 and 21/2% of years 6 to 10; tonight, Matson was represented by Transwestern Group; half of the fees would be paid to Transwestern and half to Cushman and Wakefield; in every case there are outside brokers; fees would be reduced if there are not outside brokers. Mayor Spencer stated that she was looking for the contract to be included; Matson is an existing customer; Cushman and Wakefield did not find them; inquired the percentage is the same whether or not Cushman and Wakefield finds tenant. Mr. McManus responded the schedule is 50% for a renewal if the tenant stays in the building; the fee is half for relocation. The Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point stated for the new lease Cushman and Wakefield will be receiving full commission, which is standard … | CityCouncil/2015-10-20.pdf |
CityCouncil/2015-11-04.pdf,25 | CityCouncil | 2015-11-04 | 25 | 505 Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger City Clerk The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Sunshine Ordinance. Special Meeting Alameda City Council November 4, 2015 | CityCouncil/2015-11-04.pdf |
CityCouncil/2016-01-05.pdf,25 | CityCouncil | 2016-01-05 | 25 | The Community Development Director responded Ordinance 1 is drafted to include the offer for new tenants; in place tenants would be offered a one year lease upon notification of a rent increase. Councilmember Daysog stated that he would not agree based on concerns from housing providers. The Community Development Director stated the California Apartment Association representative endorsed the requirement and cited Mountain View's ordinance, which goes into effect in a few days. Councilmember Oddie inquired whether a tenant could decline the offer and agree to something else, such as a 6 month or month-to-month lease. The Community Development Director responded in the affirmative; stated there would be no penalty for the tenant declining the offer. In response to Mayor Spencer, the Community Development Director stated Ordinance 1 has a provision that requires a landlord to offer tenants a one year lease one time; the offer would be when new tenants come in or when existing tenants receive a rent increase notice. In response to Mayor Spencer's inquiry, the Community Development Director stated the offers are different for new tenants versus in place tenants. Mayor Spencer inquired whether staff is referring to current tenants who do not have a lease, to which the Community Development Director responded in the affirmative. Mayor Spencer stated that she does not believe the requirement is necessary for current tenants, who have other protections; the requirement is only needed for new tenants. The Community Development Director stated existing tenants on a month-to-month term might like the opportunity to be offered a one year lease. Mayor Spencer stated existing tenants would not anticipate getting a one year lease after being month-to-month. Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated the California Apartment Association representative indicated 12 month leases provide stability; questioned why the City would not avail the opportunity for a one year lease, which is reasonable. Mayor Spencer requested the two be considere… | CityCouncil/2016-01-05.pdf |
CityCouncil/2016-02-02.pdf,25 | CityCouncil | 2016-02-02 | 25 | of arbitration; suggested the fee could be divided; stated the binding hearing process will be an onerous process; inquired on the time and cost for the entire binding hearing process. Vice Mayor Matarrese stated binding arbitration and binding hearings do not provide enough benefit for the cost and the problem; Alameda has a RRAC process that is non- binding. The Assistant City Attorney stated that the program fee would cover the cost of the hearing process; beyond that, the tenant or housing providers would cover cost to go through the judicial process. The Interim City Manager stated the process is not on the agenda; the program fee is not on the agenda and will be brought back to Council on February 16th Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated she was trying to give staff direction. The Interim City Manager stated it is not a part of the ordinance. Mayor Spencer inquired whether the item is separate, to which the Interim City Manager responded in the affirmative. Councilmember Daysog stated looking at another city's process might be helpful. The Community Development Director stated staff is focusing on what the proposed ordinance is and what the cost will be to administer it; there will be flow charts and a lot of information. Councilmember Oddie stated the fee will benefit tenants and landlords; it is fair to share the cost equally. Mayor Spencer stated she will hold off on comments per the Interim City Manager's request; requested to stay focused on what is needed to craft the ordinance. The Community Development Director requested direction on the cap for the next tenant's rent increase if there is a no cause eviction for an in place tenant. Mayor Spencer stated that she would like the cap to be the same as if that tenant was still in the unit. The Community Development Director inquired if there should be a 5% cap. Councilmember Oddie inquired whether the old tenant could not get a rent increase until the lease expires. The Community Development Director responded the landlord would be able to raise Regular M… | CityCouncil/2016-02-02.pdf |
CityCouncil/2016-02-16.pdf,25 | CityCouncil | 2016-02-16 | 25 | The Community Development Director noted in the State of California, the fixed term concept is highly unusual. Councilmember Oddie stated that he feels staff got the direction wrong. Mayor Spencer stated that she agrees with the staff recommendation; two parties should be able to enter into an arms-length agreement for a set term. Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired what if a tenant wants an evergreen lease. Mayor Spencer responded most tenants want a long term lease, which becomes month- to-month then all the benefits kick in. Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired if Councilmember Oddie's concern is that all leases might become fixed term. Councilmember Oddie stated that all leases are going to be one year leases that could be terminated without cause and would not be subject to relocation benefits, which defeats the purpose of the whole exercise. Mayor Spencer stated the issue can be reviewed at some point. Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated landlords prefer not to turn over units every year because there is a cost to do so; data will be collected on evictions; inquired whether the City will be able to capture the data on leases that are not renewed, to which the Assistant City Attorney responded in the negative. Mayor Spencer stated that she does not want to take away a landlord's right to offer a fixed term lease; people want said type of lease. The Assistant City Attorney stated Council could provide direction to require relocation benefits even if there is a fixed term lease. Councilmember Oddie stated the ordinance should be clarified to indicate the provision is for an evergreen clause. The Assistant City Attorney stated if there is an evergreen clause, the tenant is entitled to relocation benefits with a no cause eviction. Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether there is a way to ask tenants to report experiencing a one year lease or fixed term lease not being renewed. The Community Development Director responded the City could ask tenants to do so on a voluntary basis. Regular Meeting Alameda City … | CityCouncil/2016-02-16.pdf |
CityCouncil/2016-03-01.pdf,25 | CityCouncil | 2016-03-01 | 25 | maintained space; requested that staff incorporate concerns when the report returns to Council. Councilmember Oddie stated that he is fine with the Interim City Manager's recommendations on how to proceed with the referral; he is concerned about a formulaic approach to mixed-zoning; another approach could be similar to what was done at Packet Landing/Harbor Bay Club; he agrees that the maritime jobs should be preserved; any plan or developer should keep the jobs a priority; he hopes people will be flexible and open to creative solutions to fully utilizing the intent of MX zoning. Councilmember Daysog stated the industry cluster at the marina is intimately tied to the area; he looks forward to the discussion; he would like to maintain the jobs and industry that reflect the character and history of Alameda; Council should be actively engaged in preserving the maritime traditions, jobs, and connections with residents and businesses. The Interim City Manager stated staff is considering a process similar to the one regarding the Harbor Bay Club as a preliminary step. Mayor Spencer stated the referral speaks to the consideration of mixed use throughout the entire City, not just the Northern Waterfront site; inquired whether staff's response would be in regard to Citywide, or two-fold. The Interim City Manager stated the tour will be on the entire Northern Waterfront; there is a sense of urgency at Alameda Marina; conversations about other MX zoned areas could be included, including Alameda Landing; North Housing does not have MX zoning. In response to Mayor Spencer's inquiry, the Interim City Manager stated there are no projects pending at the Alameda Marina. Mayor Spencer stated that she would be agreeable to reviewing the mixed-use zoning Citywide, which could be done at any time; she has concerns about starting a preliminary process without a project pending; she would like more information on the current options regarding what needs to be included in mixed-use, such as percentage of housing. The Interim City Manage… | CityCouncil/2016-03-01.pdf |
CityCouncil/2016-06-21.pdf,25 | CityCouncil | 2016-06-21 | 25 | (16-322) There being no further business, Mayor Spencer adjourned the meeting at 11:16 p.m. in memory of the Orlando shooting victims. 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 21, 2016 | CityCouncil/2016-06-21.pdf |
CityCouncil/2016-09-20.pdf,25 | CityCouncil | 2016-09-20 | 25 | The City Manager responded Operation Dignity would figure out and document the issue and problem Citywide, focusing first on Jean Sweeney because of the construction. Councilmember Daysog stated people are concerned with High Street in Oakland also as you enter Alameda; inquired whether data would be collected at said location. The City Manager responded the City is not doing work in Oakland; Operation Dignity is already contracted to cover Oakland. Vice Mayor Matarrese stated the policy questions can be discussed when the referrals are discussed; inquired what is going to be done Citywide. The City Manager responded the plan is not relocation, the plan is to see what the City can do to get them out of homelessness all together. (16-476) The City Manager stated the City is doing an educational comparison of the two different rent measures and will send the information to all the residents. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA None. COUNCIL REFERRALS (16-477) 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. (Vice Mayor Matarrese) Not heard. (16-478) Consider Directing the City Manager to Schedule a Priority Setting Work Session. (Mayor Spencer) Not heard. (16-479) Consider Directing the City Manager to Immediately Hold a City Council Workshop on the Final Phase of the Bayport-Alameda Landing Disposition and Development Agreement (DDA)\Development Plan. (Councilmember Daysog) Not heard. (16-480) Consider Directing the City Manager to Have the Social Service Human Relations Board (SSHRB) Review City Policies and Procedures for Aiding Alameda's Homeless in Order to Make Recommendations to the City Council for Policy Revisions and Additions. (Vice Mayor Matarrese) Not heard. (16-481) Consider Directing the City Manager to Initiate Revisions to the Ordinances and Code Sections for Mixed-Use Zoning in the City of Alameda to Aid Retention of Regular Meeting A… | CityCouncil/2016-09-20.pdf |
CityCouncil/2016-10-18.pdf,25 | CityCouncil | 2016-10-18 | 25 | much new floor area triggers additional parking. Mayor Spencer inquired whether the credit for ceiling height is 7 feet, to which the Planning Services Manager responded in the affirmative. Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft moved 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. Councilmember Oddie seconded the motion. Under discussion, Councilmember Daysog stated he will support this motion but he would like to follow up on amendment number 5. On the call for the question, the motion carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. CITY MANAGER COMMUNICATIONS (16-541) The City Manager announced the Public Utilities Board refund a geothermal bond that Northern California Power Agency bonded for in 2009, which is saving $174,000 for Alameda Municipal Power; stated that she has asked Joe Ernst to give a presentation to Council and the public regarding the Building 9 and 91 leases. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA None. COUNCIL REFERRALS (16-542) 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. (Vice Mayor Matarrese) Not heard. (16-543) Consider Directing the City Manager to Schedule a Priority Setting Work Session. (Mayor Spencer) Not heard. (16-544) Consider Directing the City Manager to Immediately Hold a City Council Workshop on the Final Phase of the Bayport-Alameda Landing Disposition and Development Agreement (DDA)\Development Plan. (Councilmember Daysog) Not heard. (16-545) Consider Directing the City Manager to Have the Social Service Human Regular Meeting Alameda City Council October 18, 2016 | CityCouncil/2016-10-18.pdf |
CityCouncil/2016-11-01.pdf,25 | CityCouncil | 2016-11-01 | 25 | On the call for the question, the motion carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Councilmembers Daysog, Matarrese, Oddie and Mayor Spencer - 4. Noes: Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft - 1. (16-574) Consider Directing the City Manager to Schedule a Priority Setting Work Session. (Mayor Spencer) Refer to the first referral on inclusionary housing [paragraph no. 16- for City Manager comments on all the referrals. Mayor Spencer stated it is important to have the priority setting work session annually and have a public discussion on the work to be done throughout the year. Councilmember Oddie inquired how the priority setting work session would be facilitated and whether the session will be organized. The City Manager responded in the affirmative; stated she is open to any facilitator recommendations; staff would look at existing workload; there is a combination of staff that has to do the work; priority setting replaces the need to depend on referrals. Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated the priority setting work session is necessary and urged Council support. The City Manager stated a facilitator will meet with each Councilmember before the meeting to go over the process. Councilmember Daysog stated that he would be concerned if constituents come to him in June or July with issues and the priority setting session already occurred in January. Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated there should be some flexibility to address items that will come up throughout the year. The City Manager stated the process is not iron clad; the session is in addition to the referral process and is an opportunity for Council to look ahead; staff has to be flexible enough to respond to constituents. Mayor Spencer moved approval of calling the question to approve referral. Vice Mayor Matarrese seconded the motion. On the call for the question to approve the referral, the motion carried be the following voice vote: Ayes: Councilmembers Ezzy Ashcraft, Matarrese, Oddie and Mayor Spencer - 4. Noes: Councilmember Daysog - 1. Regular Meeting Alameda Cit… | CityCouncil/2016-11-01.pdf |
CityCouncil/2017-04-07.pdf,25 | CityCouncil | 2017-04-07 | 25 | (17-237) The City Manager outlined the numerous calls the City received related to the storm last night; noted the golf course is temporarily closed; stated every week there is a new federal list of sanctuary cities, so far the City is not on the federal list and the definition does not apply to Alameda; currently, the list focuses on cities and counties with jails. Councilmember Matarrese requested the City Manager to repeat the announcement at the next regular City Council meeting. The City Manager suggested everyone sing Happy Birthday to the Community Development Director at the end of the meeting. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA None. COUNCIL REFERRALS None. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS (17-238) Vice Mayor Vella commended Recreation employees who saved a life on the basketball courts at Alameda Point using one of the City's Automated External Defibrillators (AED). (17-239) Mayor Spencer stated the splash into spring egg scramble would be moved to next Saturday, April 15th, due to weather conditions. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Mayor Spencer adjourned the meeting at 9:03 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger City Clerk The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Sunshine Ordinance. Continued April 4, 2017 Meeting Alameda City Council 25 April 7, 2017 | CityCouncil/2017-04-07.pdf |
CityCouncil/2017-04-18.pdf,25 | CityCouncil | 2017-04-18 | 25 | status of the property. Vice Mayor Vella stated the report could be rolled into a presentation if a new application is submitted, rather than asking staff to address it now. Mayor Spencer stated that she is concerned the City having a right to the strip of land was not made clear at the Bay Conservation and Development Commission (BCDC). Vice Mayor Vella stated the City Attorney's interpretation of the property rights appears to be different than the developer's interpretation; it would be helpful to get guidance. Mayor Spencer stated that she does not want to wait until the developer submits an application; she would like the issue to be resolved so the Council and community know whether the property is the City's and how much it would cost. Vice Mayor Vella inquired whether the City Attorney has information readily available, to which the City Attorney responded in the affirmative; stated staff has started pulling together the documents so an analysis of the City's rights could be done relatively quickly. Councilmember Oddie stated he is concerned taking action on the referral so quickly would bump other referrals; he does not think the referral has a higher priority than some others. Councilmember Matarrese restated the motion to approve the referral, including receiving a report on the current status of the property and whether a future developer would still have to provide improvements as a public benefit if the City takes title to the property. In response to Vice Mayor Vella's inquiry regarding the referral's priority, Councilmember Matarrese stated the referral is medium priority; he does not think the Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 24 April 18, 2017 | CityCouncil/2017-04-18.pdf |
CityCouncil/2017-06-06.pdf,25 | CityCouncil | 2017-06-06 | 25 | Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft seconded the motion, which carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft, Matarrese, Oddie and Vella - 4. Noes: Mayor Spencer - 1. Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft moved introduction of the ordinance adopting the rent stabilization and limitations on evictions, as amended, and implementing policies. Councilmember Oddie seconded the motion, which carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft, Oddie and Vella - 3. Noes: Councilmember Matarrese and Mayor Spencer - 2. *** Mayor Spencer called a recess at 11:48 p.m. to call the joint meeting and reconvened the meeting at 12:32 a.m. *** CITY MANAGER COMMUNICATIONS (17-358) The City Manager stated the referral for affordable and inclusionary housing will come to Council after the Planning Board makes a recommendation; the State is reviewing Single Payer healthcare to meet objectives for local control and fiscal sustainability for rising medical costs and addressing the needs of those in need. Councilmember Matarrese inquired when a recommendation on healthcare would come to Council. The City Manager responded the Council already gave the staff authority to support the matter. In response to Councilmember Oddie's inquiry about climate change, the City Manager stated the Mayor and the City have been asked to join the U.S. Mayor's Climate Accord; the City will move forward with the Climate Action Plan regardless of what happens at the federal level and the Paris accord; Mayor Spencer signed on with staff endorsement. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA None. COUNCIL REFERRALS (17-359) Consider Directing Staff to Create a "Straws on Request" Ordinance. (Mayor Spencer) Not heard. (17-360) Consider Directing Staff to Propose Regulations to Authorize Convenient and Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 16 June 6, 2017 | CityCouncil/2017-06-06.pdf |
CityCouncil/2017-06-20.pdf,25 | CityCouncil | 2017-06-20 | 25 | of Ruth Belikove, former Library Board Member. Councilmember Matarrese noted Ms. Belikove played a major role in getting the new library funded. (17-406) Vice Mayor Vella requested the Council meeting also be adjourned in the memory of Michael Dunsmore, an activist at Independence Plaza. (17-407) Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft requested the movie on climate change, Time for Change, be shown at the Alameda Theater. (17-408) Vice Mayor Vella announced that she attended the Best of Alameda event. (17-409) Mayor Spencer stated the Council meeting would also be adjourned in memory of Loranne Talsh, a breast cancer warrior; announced the Relay for Life event would be at Encinal High School, at 10:00 a.m. Saturday; encouraged the community to come out and walk for cancer. ADJOURNMENT (17-410) There being no further business, Mayor Spencer adjourned the meeting at 10:50 p.m. in a moment of silence for the above mentioned individuals. 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 20, 2017 | CityCouncil/2017-06-20.pdf |
CityCouncil/2017-07-05.pdf,25 | CityCouncil | 2017-07-05 | 25 | *** (17-434) Mayor Spencer stated a motion is needed to continue past 11:00 p.m. Councilmember Matarrese moved approval of continuing the meeting past 11:00 p.m. Councilmember Oddie seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. *** Vice Mayor Vella stated there are risks; if Council votes against the project, the City will not receive all of the benefits, like infrastructure and the ferry; she is concerned for the feasibility of Phase 3 and the sports complex payment; she would like to work with staff to ensure the City meets the commercial goals; she is prepared to vote in support of the project. Mayor Spencer stated the charge when the U.S. Navy gave the City the property was to replace 14,000 jobs; without the guarantee that Phase 3 will happen, Phase 1 and 2 are housing projects, not a job project; she will not support the project; the financing should be for all three phases; Alameda needs jobs; the property is the people's property and Alameda needs the commercial project. Councilmember Matarrese moved introduction of ordinance amending the DDA between Alameda Point Partners, LLC and the City of Alameda. Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft seconded the motion, which carried by the following voice votes: Ayes: Councilmembers Matarrese, Ezzy Ashcraft, Oddie and Vice Mayor Vella - 4. Noes: Mayor Spencer - 1. Mayor Spencer called a recess at 11:03 p.m. and reconvened the meeting at 11:12 p.m. *** The Assistant City Attorney requested clarified from Council that the vote is on the second amendment as amended. Council responded in the affirmative. (17-435) Introduction of Ordinance Approving a Lease with Friends of Alameda Animal Shelter. Introduced. The City Manager stated the item is only an extension of the previous approval by Council; the second reading will happen in the next meeting. Councilmember Matarrese moved introduction of the ordinance. Councilmember Oddie seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 24 July 5, 2017 | CityCouncil/2017-07-05.pdf |
CityCouncil/2017-07-18.pdf,25 | CityCouncil | 2017-07-18 | 25 | The Assistant Community Development Director responded in the negative. Councilmember Matarrese inquired whether the conditions of the UP regarding not parking customer vehicles on the streets was explained to the franchisee and acknowledged in all the meetings that the City and Planning Board had with the operator, to which the Assistant Community Development Director responded in the affirmative. Councilmember Oddie inquired whether the notice alleged a violation of condition number three. The Assistant Community Development Director responded the language was sloppy; stated photographs accompanied the violation. Councilmember Oddie inquired whether a notice needs to comply with certain standards; stated the notice alleged a violation of one condition, but all the other evidence supports the violation of another condition. The Assistant Community Development Director responded the notice may have been done hastily; stated three public hearings were held to discuss the specific problem and everyone involved understood the violation. Councilmember Oddie stated someone could file a lawsuit arguing proper notice was not given. Vice Mayor Vella inquired whether there were communications from City staff after the initial notice was sent out, prior to the hearing, relative to the subject matter of the hearing. The Assistant City Attorney responded said communication is reflected in the Planning Board agenda material. Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she did a site visit and witnessed there were no parking spots available; the Park Street north of Lincoln Avenue Form Based Codes state active automotive uses are not to take place on the main gateway streets; she does not understand how a large, successful business could get confused with the terms of the UP; there are better uses for the property without the implications to the environment; there has been adequate notice and documentation; she supports the Planning Board's decision. Councilmember Oddie stated that he has not seen any evidence supporting what the … | CityCouncil/2017-07-18.pdf |
CityCouncil/2017-09-05.pdf,25 | CityCouncil | 2017-09-05 | 25 | 389 September 17th, , from 2:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m.; the Alameda Running Festival is also on September 17th. (17-526) Report Out from Stop Waste on the Fix It Clinic. (Councilmember Oddie) Councilmember Oddie encouraged having a Fix It Clinic in Alameda. Mayor Spencer inquired whether the Alameda Library will have an event like the Fix It Clinic. Jane Chisaki, Library Director, responded the Alameda Library does not do fix it clinics due to possible damage to carpeting; Mastic Center has expressed an interest in holding a fix it clinic. (17-527) Vice Mayor Vella stated that she that received emails regarding trying to diversify the Economic Development Strategic Plan Board; she also received emails questioning why cannabis is not included in the plan. The City Manager responded that she understood the direction for the Economic Development Strategic Plan is to be grassroots; additional citizens have been invited to participate to make the group more diverse. (17-528) Councilmember Matarrese stated that he and Mayor Spencer represented the City at the East Bay Regional Parks District (EBRPD) liaison committee; EBRPD is putting a lot of money into Alameda. (17-529) Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she attended the lead poisoning prevention commission meeting; noted that she is grateful that Alameda did not cede local control over cell phone towers to the telecommunications industry. (17-530) Mayor Spencer announced the Alameda Theater is showing the film Fallen, sponsored by the Police Officers Association, on Monday, September 11th. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Mayor Spencer adjourned the meeting at 10:52 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 September 5, 2017 | CityCouncil/2017-09-05.pdf |
CityCouncil/2017-10-17.pdf,25 | CityCouncil | 2017-10-17 | 25 | Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated the question is how many sister city relations the City of Alameda can afford to have due to limited staff and resources; inquired what the measurable results are of the sister city visits and how they relate to Alameda; suggested involving the Alameda Chamber of Commerce; stated that she would be conservative with the amount of staff time on the sister city program. Stated ASCA is very pleased with the guidelines and the support receive from staff; outlined different groups that support the sister city program: Michael Robles-Wong, Alameda Sister City Association (ASCA). Discussed the importance of having sister cities; stated sister cities promote peace through respect, understanding and cooperation: Cynthia Bonta, ASCA. Councilmember Matarrese stated the guidelines have been needed for some time; the resolution will help sustain sister city relationships; that he strongly supports the resolution and reporting back on the progress. Councilmember Oddie stated the City of Alameda needs to be able to show delegates the same courtesy and attention as they show Alameda representatives on visits; that he supports the resolution and is excited about the next sister city visit. Vice Mayor Vella stated that she is ready to support the resolution. Mayor Spencer expressed concern with staff time and the lack of support from Council with scheduling conflicts; stated Council should be willing to accommodate the Mayor and other Councilmembers who are attending the trips to sister cities; discussed the importance of showing respect to other cities and reciprocating the work the sister cities do to welcome elected officials to their city; all flights are paid for by Councilmembers; she will support the resolution with the hopes that Council supports visits in the future; suggested at least one staff member accompany and support the elected officials on the trips; stated staff should conduct outreach to the Alameda Chamber of Commerce to have more businesses involved. Councilmember Matarrese m… | CityCouncil/2017-10-17.pdf |
CityCouncil/2017-11-07.pdf,25 | CityCouncil | 2017-11-07 | 25 | The Community Development Director stated the ordinance regulating cannabis was also distributed to Council. The City Attorney stated there needs to be three votes on the entire ordinance. Councilmember Oddie stated only several things need to be changed: labor peace, food, provision about local ownership, the distance and redlines which staff provided to Council. The City Attorney stated one cultivation permit is allowed and there was discussion about changing it two permits. Mayor Spencer stated there were not enough votes for two permits. The City Attorney stated the next section is labor peace; inquired who is voting in favor of the requirement for labor peace being 10 employees, to which Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft, Councilmember Oddie and Vice Mayor Vella raised their hands. The Community Development Director stated the operational radius is the next provision. Vice Mayor Vella read the proposed language: "The distance shall be measured via a path of travel from the nearest door of the nearest sensitive use to the nearest door of the dispensary/retail/cultivation." and strike the rest of the sentence. The Assistant City Attorney inquired whether the word foregoing can be added before sensitive use, to which Vice Mayor Vella responded in the affirmative. Vice Mayor Vella stated the second paragraph after sensitive uses should read: "measured via a path of travel from the nearest door of the nearest foregoing sensitive use to the nearest door of cannabis business.' Mayor Spencer stated Section e does has already been addressed. The Community Development Director stated staff will sync the onsite consumption language to be consistent with the smoking ordinance. Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether Council agrees with the proposed language for Section f regarding onsite consumption, to which Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft Matarrese, Oddie and Vella concurred; Mayor Spencer stated that she will not vote. Mayor Spencer inquired whether Council would like to leave in the wording community benefit; stated that… | CityCouncil/2017-11-07.pdf |
CityCouncil/2017-12-05.pdf,25 | CityCouncil | 2017-12-05 | 25 | MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL JOINT MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION (SACIC) TUESDAY--DECEMBER 5, 2017--6:59 P.M. Mayor Spencer convened the meeting at 7:04 p.m. and led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL - Present: Councilmembers/Commissioners Ezzy Ashcraft, Matarrese, Oddie, Vella and Mayor/Chair Spencer - 5. Absent: None. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA None. CONSENT CALENDAR Councilmember/Commissioner Matarrese moved approval of the Consent Calendar. Vice Mayor/Commissioner Vella seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. [Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk preceding the paragraph number.] (*17-711 CC/17-14 SACIC) Minutes of the Special Joint City Council and SACIC Meeting Held on September 19, 2017. Approved. (*17-712 CC/17-15 SACIC) Recommendation to Accept the Fourth Quarter Financial Report for the Period Ending June 30, 2017. Accepted. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Mayor Spencer adjourned the meeting at 7:05 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 of the Alameda City Council And Successor Agency to the Community Improvement Commission December 5, 2017 1 | CityCouncil/2017-12-05.pdf |
CityCouncil/2018-03-06.pdf,25 | CityCouncil | 2018-03-06 | 25 | list. Mayor Spencer stated there needs to be a strong rubric. The Community Development Director stated staff hears the request for a strong rubric; inquired whether Council would consider creating a Council subcommittee to work with staff. Mayor Spencer stated if staff would like a Council subcommittee, she would like to serve with either Councilmember Oddie or Vice Mayor Vella. Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft suggested Councilmember Matarrese. Mayor Spencer stated that she does not think it is appropriate to have someone who voted against the matter on the subcommittee; inquired if a motion is needed to do so. Councilmember Oddie stated that he is already on a subcommittee; suggested Vice Mayor Vella and Mayor Spencer. The Community Development Director stated the idea would be that the subcommittee would work with staff and when the work is done, the RFP would be issued and not return to Council because there is the high level of direction. Mayor Spencer moved approval of having a subcommittee of Mayor Spencer and Vice Mayor Vella. Councilmember Oddie seconded the motion, which carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Councilmember Matarrese, Councilmember Oddie, Vella and Mayor Spencer - 4. Abstention: Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft - 1. Councilmember Matarrese stated that he would like the RFP to return to the full Council. Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft concurred. Mayor Spencer stated the matter would return to Council. The Community Development Director stated the goal is to return to Council by April 17, 2018. Vice Mayor Vella inquired whether the item can be on consent. Councilmember Matarrese stated the matter should be on consent. The Community Development Director stated staff will be returning to ask Council to adopt the regulations to implement the process. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 25 March 6, 2018 | CityCouncil/2018-03-06.pdf |
CityCouncil/2018-04-17.pdf,25 | CityCouncil | 2018-04-17 | 25 | sources; the Chamber of Commerce may be more likely to have sources for outreach; she would leave it for staff to do the most effective outreach; potential fiscal impacts to the City's budget need to be reviewed; she does not like seeing Alameda lag so far behind in the region; she would like to proceed as quickly as possible; inquired when an ordinance could come back for a first reading. The Economic Development Manager responded the earliest an ordinance can come back for a first reading is September 4th, but staff recommends late November or early December. Vice Mayor Vella stated that she feels Alameda is incredibly behind on the minimum wage issue; businesses are having a difficult time competing; neighboring cities already increased minimum wage; Alameda needs to plan a faster track and she would like an ordinance to come back in September; she would like an estimate relative to the budget; she does not disagree with the outreach strategy, but would like to be able to provide decent jobs within Alameda; the sooner fiscal impacts to the City are known, the better; both scenarios presented assume that Alameda moves to a certain year without bifurcating tiers; inquired whether or not Council recommended bifurcating the scenarios. The Economic Development Manager responded the scenarios were presented as two tiers for the Council, but could be done in another way, per Council direction. In response to Vice Mayor Vella's inquiry, the Economic Development Manager stated staff does not have a recommendation to do the scenarios one way or another. Mayor Spencer stated the scenarios were not part of the original Council referral. Vice Mayor Vella stated that she recommends proposing specific scenarios when conducting public outreach, rather than leaving it open. The Economic Development Manager stated there were more scenarios, but staff removed some from the staff report because it became convoluted. Vice Mayor Vella stated what she wants to know is if there is a strong feeling to bifurcate the small businesses ra… | CityCouncil/2018-04-17.pdf |
CityCouncil/2018-06-05.pdf,25 | CityCouncil | 2018-06-05 | 25 | Councilmember Oddie stated the City has discussed a storm water proposal; there has been extensive polling, but not extensive public outreach; the City does not have a climate plan so sea level rise is not clear; public safety infrastructure at the former Base is not being addressed; the public has not provided input at public meetings; he will not support a bond at this time. In response to Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft's inquiry, the Public Works Director stated there is $35 million for the first bond draw down. Mayor Spencer stated said amount is the first draw down, not the entire bond. Councilmember Oddie inquired what the other $60 million is going for. The Public Works Director responded there is certainty around the maximum spending in each of the three categories over the course of the entire $95 million. In response to Councilmember Oddie's inquiry, the Acting Assistant City Manager stated a slide shows where staff is proposing where the funds go under each category. Mayor Spencer stated Councilmember Oddie is asking for specificity. The Acting Assistant City Manager stated the percentages are shown. Councilmember Oddie stated specificity, such as paving five miles, is only within the first $35 million. The Acting Assistant City Manager stated staff does not have a list of the projects. Councilmember Oddie stated projects are not known for two-thirds of the bond. Mayor Spencer inquired regarding which five miles would be paved, to which the Public Works Director responded there is a five year paving plan; projects planned for later years would be advanced. Mayor Spencer inquired whether voters could go and see specific projects which are being funded for duration of the bond. The Public Works Director responded that he would be hesitant to specify which roads would be paved in a specific year because any plan changes would have to go back to voters. Mayor Spencer inquired whether the bond requires two-thirds to pass, to which the Public Works Director responded in the affirmative; stated the Council would… | CityCouncil/2018-06-05.pdf |
CityCouncil/2018-07-10.pdf,25 | CityCouncil | 2018-07-10 | 25 | both the Tidelands area as well as the non-Tidelands area; some historical buildings on Clement Avenue are in the commercial core; there has been a lot of talk about makerspace and artist studios; an artist studio probably is not going work in the Tidelands area based on Tidelands restrictions. Councilmember Matarrese stated the public open space west of Building 19 seems to be out of place with the boat launch and Harbor Master areas, as well as the commercial maritime activity in Building 19; the open space is 1,900 square feet. The Assistant Community Development Director stated the heavy commercial area is to the east of Building 19; there is a green area between the parking lot, Harbor Master and back side of Building 19 right on the Bay Trail; the piece was leftover, but could be part of the commercial maritime core area. Councilmember Matarrese stated having the area be part of the commercial maritime core area is appropriate. Mayor Spencer requested staff to show the area; inquired whether Councilmember Matarrese is proposing the open space be removed. Councilmember Matarrese responded in the affirmative; stated the open space should be moved somewhere else because it is right in the commercial core, next to the water and service building. The Assistant Community Development Director reviewed the area. Mayor Spencer inquired whether Councilmember Matarrese is requesting to add more commercial square footage in the area instead of the green space, to which Councilmember Matarrese responded in the affirmative. Mayor Spencer inquired whether the Bay Trail goes along the area, to which the Assistant Community Development Director responded in the affirmative. Mayor Spencer inquired whether commercial would be right up against the Bay Trail. The Assistant Community Development Director responded the idea is to make the area part of the commercial/boatyard; the Bay Trail runs by the dry boat storage and could run past a small maritime area; boatyard areas need yard space. Councilmember Matarrese stated workers … | CityCouncil/2018-07-10.pdf |
CityCouncil/2018-07-24.pdf,25 | CityCouncil | 2018-07-24 | 25 | that he would consult with staff and report back. Councilmember Oddie noted Community Commercial (C-C) abuts neighborhoods as well. The Economic Development Manager noted any zoning change would go to the Planning Board prior to coming to Council; inquired whether the dispersion requirement should be modified for dispensaries. Mayor Spencer responded that she thinks the dispersion requirement needs to be modified. Councilmember Oddie stated that he would be okay with modifying the requirement once there is a dispensary on both ends of town. Mayor Spencer stated Councilmember Oddie does not want a modification at this time. Vice Mayor Vella and Councilmembers Matarrese and Ezzy Ashcraft expressed support for not making any modifications at this time. The Economic Development Manager inquired whether adult use should be allowed. Mayor Spencer and Vice Mayor Vella responded in the affirmative. Councilmember Oddie stated that he would like staff to bring back a proposal for discussion. Mayor Spencer inquired whether Councilmember Oddie is a tentative yes, to which Councilmember Oddie responded that he thinks it needs to be done sooner rather than later, so that is a yes. Councilmembers Matarrese and Ezzy Ashcraft expressed support for not allowing adult use at this time. The Economic Development Manager inquired whether the cap on the number of dispensaries should be increased. Mayor Spencer inquired whether the current cap is two, to which the Economic Development Manager responded in the affirmative. Mayor Spencer stated the cap of two is a deterrent; stated that she would support allowing four dispensaries Councilmember Oddie stated that he would support four dispensaries with the dispersion to require one on both ends of town. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 21 July 24, 2018 | CityCouncil/2018-07-24.pdf |
CityCouncil/2018-09-04.pdf,25 | CityCouncil | 2018-09-04 | 25 | The Rent Stabilization Program Director responded the list is broken down in the report. Vice Mayor Vella inquired whether staff knows how many evicted tenants had to host fundraisers, and if said data is being tracked. The Rent Stabilization Program Director responded the data is only tracked if it is relayed to the Rent Review Advisory Committee (RRAC). Vice Mayor Vella stated relocation fees are not enough in some cases, which is causing the fundraisers to occur to make up the difference; requested confirmation that there is no way to track this information. The Rent Stabilization Program Director responded in the affirmative. Vice Mayor Vella inquired if she could forward fundraising postings to the Rent Stabilization Program Director. The Rent Stabilization Program Director responded there can be follow up on the information provided to ensure the tenant has been made aware of their rights and options available. Vice Mayor Vella expressed concern over the relocation benefit being insufficient versus actual costs; stated data regarding fundraisers occurring is valuable; that she is in favor of amending the Sunshine Ordinance for RRAC proceedings; inquired if the disclosures for different people appearing that serve on the RRAC have been properly updated. Councilmember Oddie discussed terminations of tenancies; inquired if there were any duplications. The Rent Stabilization Program Director responded in the negative. Councilmember Oddie stated that he believes the number of evictions over the two year period were "no-cause evictions" because tenants were drug dealers or prostitutes is zero. Stated the RRAC is working as well as possible, but the system cannot provide good results; expressed concerns with the 5% increase: Eric Strimling, Alameda Renters Coalition (ARC). Discussed statistics; expressed concern over a board member working with tenants and having confidentiality agreements: Catherine Pauling, ARC. Stated the report does not show relocation fees being a burden for small landlords; the designation s… | CityCouncil/2018-09-04.pdf |
CityCouncil/2018-10-16.pdf,25 | CityCouncil | 2018-10-16 | 25 | proposed is: "provided at least one such cannabis business is approved on either side before the second is approved." Mayor Spencer stated that she is agreeable to having two dispensaries opening up on either side of Grand Avenue, as long as the City ends up with two dispensaries on either side of Grand Avenue; expressed concern over negotiations causing delay in dispensaries opening as well as causing a monopoly; further stated her preference is an even balance of dispensaries on either side of Grand Avenue. Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she does not see a need to stipulate location timing on either side of Grand Avenue; inquired whether there would be dispersion between the two on either side. The Assistant City Attorney responded there would be no dispersion; stated under the language, two dispensaries could be next to each other. Mayor Spencer stated that she is okay with the language and agrees with the Planning Board's suggestion. The Assistant City Attorney inquired if Vice Mayor Vella's proposal is to require two the four dispensaries to have delivery. Mayor Spencer responded at least two must have delivery. The Assistant City Attorney inquired if there has to be a distribution on either side of Grand Avenue. Councilmember Oddie responded that all four could have delivery. Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired if a dispensary applies to be next to an existing dispensary, would the process go through the Zoning Administrator and the Planning Board, to which the Economic Development Manager responded in the affirmative. Mayor Spencer inquired at least three agree to the change. Mayor Spencer, Vice Mayor Vella, Councilmembers Oddie and Ezzy Ashcraft stated yes, Councilmember Matarrese stated no. The Economic Development Manager inquired whether a two-tier buffer system should be created; stated the buffer would be 1,000 feet for dispensaries, nurseries and cultivation to be located away from public and private schools. Mayor Spencer stated that she thought the buffer would only apply to dispensaries… | CityCouncil/2018-10-16.pdf |
CityCouncil/2019-03-19.pdf,25 | CityCouncil | 2019-03-19 | 25 | Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she would like the budget reviewed from a fiscally conservative side; there are other unfunded liabilities; she would like every vehicle purchased for the City's fleet to be an Electric Vehicle (EV) if possible. The Finance Director continued the presentation. Councilmember Daysog inquired whether the $7.9 million came from a one-time amount resulting from the agreed upon formula, to which the Finance Director responded in the affirmative and continued the presentation. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft requested clarification on the risk equity distribution. The Finance Director outlined the distribution payments. The Interim City Manager noted the insurance pools use an actuary. The Finance Director continued the presentation. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired about capital costs, who will maintain and repair the proposed modular restroom at Alameda Point. The Recreation and Parks Director responded all maintenance will fall under the Recreation and Parks Department. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the new restrooms would be used in lieu of the Alameda Point Gym restrooms to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The Recreation and Parks Director responded the modular restrooms will be in addition to the existing restrooms; stated the modular restrooms are meant to supplement. Councilmember Oddie stated that he would like to have the line items for Public Works and safety personnel working at special events, parades and festivals included. Vice Mayor Knox White inquired the process for adding items to be considered in the budget. The Finance Director responded Council decisions will be incorporated either in the upcoming budget item or brought back as a separate item. Councilmember Vella inquired if the cost of pool repairs is included in the mid-year budget, to which the Finance Director responded in the negative. The Recreation and Parks Director stated the cost is still unknown. The Human Resources Director continued the Power Point presentation. Regular Meeting Alameda City… | CityCouncil/2019-03-19.pdf |
CityCouncil/2019-05-07.pdf,25 | CityCouncil | 2019-05-07 | 25 | and a significant amount of overtime being needed for the project; stated that she would like AMP to provide a rollout plan at some point. The Interim City Attorney inquired whether Council wants the item to return for a vote. Councilmember Oddie inquired whether the item would come back with changes for the second reading. The Interim City Attorney responded the item should return with revisions for a first reading. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the item will be placed on Consent, to which the Interim City Attorney responded the item will be a Regular Agenda item, brought back as quickly as possible. In response to Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft's inquiry regarding Council voting availability, Councilmember Vella stated that she will be calling into meetings when needed and will still participate; expressed support to have the item come back for a first reading. The Interim City Attorney stated the item should come back for a first reading with the recommended changes. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether a vote is needed to proceed. The Interim City Attorney responded that a vote to direct staff to return to Council with revised lease language that encompasses Council discussion will be helpful. Councilmember Daysog moved approval of the recommendation. Councilmember Oddie seconded the motion. On the call for the question, the motion carried by the following roll call vote: Councilmember Daysog: Aye; Knox White: Aye; Oddie: Ayes; Vella: Aye; and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye. Ayes - 5. *** Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft called a recess at 11:45 p.m. and reconvened the meeting at 11:50 p.m. *** (19-281) Public Hearing to Consider Adoption of the Fiscal Year (FY) 2019-20 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG)/HOME Partnership Investment Program Regular Meeting Alameda City Council May 7, 2019 24 | CityCouncil/2019-05-07.pdf |
CityCouncil/2019-07-16.pdf,25 | CityCouncil | 2019-07-16 | 25 | Councilmember Daysog for a civil discussion. Councilmember Daysog stated that he does not believe the City of Alameda is ready to move on yet; the recommendations will allow healing to begin. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated the process takes time, but an important first step has been taken; Council has taken responsibility. *** Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft called a recess at 10:49 p.m. and reconvened the meeting at 10:57 p.m. *** *** (19-445) Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated a vote is needed to consider a new items after 11:00 pm suggested hearing the three remaining regular items [paragraph nos. 19-446, 19-447, and 19-448 not the referral [paragraph no. 19-450]. Councilmember Vella requested the speaker time limited be reduced to two minutes. Vice Mayor Knox White moved approval. Councilmember Oddie seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. (19-446) Selecting a Development Team for the West Midway Project and Authorize the City Manager to Negotiate and Execute an Exclusive Right to Negotiate Agreement (ENA) with the Selected Development Team. The Redevelopment Project Manager gave a brief presentation. Stated the Main Street Plan was developed two years ago; it is time to move forward; expressed support for Alameda Point Partners: Karen Bey, Alameda. Outlined the qualifications of Alameda Point Partners: Joe Ernst, Alameda Point Partners. Stated a Request for Proposals should be taken off the table; all four developers are capable; the questionnaire should only be done if the process is not delayed: Doug Biggs, Alameda Point Collaborative. Continued outlining Alameda Point Partners' qualifications: Bruce Dorfman, Alameda Point Partners. Councilmember Oddie stated development does not always happen quickly; outlined a Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 20 July 16, 2019 | CityCouncil/2019-07-16.pdf |
CityCouncil/2019-09-03.pdf,25 | CityCouncil | 2019-09-03 | 25 | CITY MANAGER COMMUNICATIONS (19-488) The City Manager introduced the new Assistant City Manager. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA None. COUNCIL REFERRALS (19-489) Consider Reducing the Number of Commission on Disability Members from Nine Due to Difficulty Achieving a Quorum for Meetings and Limited Staff Resources. (Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft and Vice Mayor Knox White) Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft and Vice Mayor Knox White made brief comments regarding the referral. Councilmember Oddie moved approval of the referral. Councilmember Vella seconded the motion. Under discussion, Councilmember Vella stated there are other boards that have quorum issues; expressed support for staff advising the board of the scope of the board's mission. On the call or the question, the motion carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. (19-490) Consider Providing Direction to Staff on Transportation Priorities in Advance of the Active Transportation Plan Work. (Vice Mayor Knox White and Councilmember Oddie) Councilmember Oddie and Vice Mayor Knox White made brief comments regarding the referral. Councilmember Vella moved approval of the referral. Councilmember Vella stated the item relates to the impact on existing neighborhoods as much as new developments focusing on being safe and accessible for cyclists and pedestrians. Councilmember Oddie seconded the motion, which carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Councilmembers Knox White, Oddie, Vella and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft - 4. Abstention: Councilmember Daysog - 1. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS Regular Meeting Alameda City Council September 3, 2019 23 | CityCouncil/2019-09-03.pdf |
CityCouncil/2019-12-18.pdf,25 | CityCouncil | 2019-12-18 | 25 | City Council Workshop Workshop Report Management Partners oftentimes controversial issues. It's a given that you will be criticized and there will be those who vehemently disagree with your decisions. That is unavoidable. Develop a thick skin and do your best to not take personally the conflicts and disagreements that are a normal part of your new role. If you don't develop a thick skin, you will overreact to criticism. Additionally, you are now part of an organization and will be blamed/criticized for the actions of the organization that you had nothing to do with That is the reality of your new role and you should keep that in mind. And remember, the city manager is not always to blame when things go wrong, though he/she should take appropriate responsibility for the organization's actions. It can be easy to focus your frustration on the city manager. You will be happier and more effective if you can experience the normal "ups and downs" of city life without needing to always find someone at fault. Whatever the issue or encounter, try not to take it personally. Try to keep personal likes and dislikes out of the equation Your fellow councilmembers and the city manager are not your family or personal friends; they are your "professional colleagues," and you need to work effectively with them even if you would not select them as friends. Lastly, always "live to fight another day.' There are always future issues to decide; focus on those versus the votes already taken. And always remember not to burn bridges due to a difficult defeat; you will need those "bridges" for future votes! Appreciate the legitimate difference between the "community perspective" and the "professional/technical' perspective: While you will primarily view issues from your perspective as a resident/citizen in a manner similar to the other residents of the community, the city staff will often have a more "technical/professional" perspective. What might make a great deal of sense to the staff looking at an issue from a purely "business" point of… | CityCouncil/2019-12-18.pdf |
CityCouncil/2020-02-18.pdf,25 | CityCouncil | 2020-02-18 | 25 | applicants have been screened; a public meeting was held and a lottery conducted to select artists for the 2020 calendar year. Councilmember Oddie expressed concern for violations of the First Amendment. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated the request is to change the venue to City Hall West. Councilmember Oddie moved approved of the item. Councilmember Vella expressed concern about content based regulation of speech; stated issues should be addressed; expressed support for feedback from the PAC for the 2021 calendar year. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she would prefer the art chosen for the third floor to be moved to City Hall West this year. Councilmember Vella stated the lottery has already been conducted; expressed concern about changing the venue without advising the artists of the process. The Public Information Officer stated when the lottery is conducted, the artists may specify a desired floor; an agreement has been executed with the artists. Councilmember Vella inquired how far out the selections have been made, to which the Public Information Officer responded through the 2020 calendar year. Councilmember Vella expressed support for enacting the change in 2021. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated many people are confused when traversing the third floor; that she would like the third floor to be user friendly; recommended the second floor be used instead of the third floor; noted there are concerns related to artwork depicting hate groups or symbolism. Councilmember Vella noted artists should not be slighted with an alternate location. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated the West End of Alameda is being slighted without art; the West End should have an opportunity to display art; it would be nice to give the West End the same opportunity. Vice Mayor Knox White stated that he is unclear of the Council direction; stated deciding what is allowed on City Hall walls feels outside of policy and problematic; City Hall West does not have many visitors; questioned how many artists would elect to display art at City Hall West due to lack… | CityCouncil/2020-02-18.pdf |
CityCouncil/2020-03-03.pdf,25 | CityCouncil | 2020-03-03 | 25 | Councilmember Vella stated the City Attorney's office is fairly compacted; expressed support for the City Prosecutor having a secure office space to conduct necessary calls and meetings; inquired whether the funding includes the City Prosecutor space. The City Manager responded staff is looking into office space. The Finance Director stated a new employee starts Monday and staff is trying to figure out office space. Councilmember Vella stated there is no fiscal impact to the PERS longevity requirement for Police Department; inquired whether the City gives a 5% differential for any Police Officer coming in that has a degree. The Human Resources Director responded in the affirmative; stated the number is not significant, therefore, not a huge impact; members with a degree would not have to wait as long. Councilmember Vella inquired whether there are officers without a degree, to which the Human Resources Director responded in the affirmative. Councilmember Vella inquired whether a degree is listed as part of the job specifications, to which the Human Resources Director responded not for Police Officer currently. In response to Councilmember Vella's inquiry, the Human Resources Director stated the language does state that both the Bachelor's and Master's degree need to have some relationship to the work performed; the degree is valued and looked at. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the $111,500 cost to repair Woodstock Park could be recovered by either insurance or subrogation action. The Finance Director responded the City has an insurance deductible; stated the cost did not reach the insurance level. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the self-insured provision prevents the City from seeking reimbursement from the responsible party. The City Attorney responded that he understands there was an arson at the park; stated that he does not know if an arrest was made; he does not know the prosecutorial status of the case. The Finance Director stated that the attempt can be made; however, it can be difficult based … | CityCouncil/2020-03-03.pdf |
CityCouncil/2020-05-05.pdf,25 | CityCouncil | 2020-05-05 | 25 | February financials. Councilmember Vella inquired whether the month prior will be used, to which the Economic Development Manager responded in the affirmative. Public Comment Read Into Record: Discussed issues on the policy and implementation of the program; stated not allowing publicly traded companies is a good step at limiting large businesses; urged the allowance of sole proprietors; stated a ranking system should be developed; urged discussion to ensure a simple and safe guarded program: Ronald Mooney, Alameda. Urged Council consider raising the loss level from 20% to a higher amount to target businesses most at-risk; stated those with a 50% or higher loss are more at risk: Text Message Submittal. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether a ranking system will be used. The Economic Development Manager responded a lottery system will be used. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft expressed support for finding the businesses which have been impacted most. The Community Development Director stated there is a lottery program; the minimum criteria must be met in order for applicants to be eligible; the criteria includes a minimum loss of income of 20%; sole proprietorships with one employee are not eligible for funding; noted staff has balanced ensuring expediency as well as reaching vulnerable businesses; stated Council approved the eligibility criteria at the previous meeting. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated more is known as time goes by; noted nuances should be considered due to businesses relying on the funds to survive; the requirement to include businesses with at least one employee came from the intention of helping more people; there is no easy way to say yes to some businesses and no to others; expressed concern about the survival of small businesses; inquired whether there is more the City could do. Vice Mayor Knox White stated that he is uncomfortable changing the criteria after it was approved at the previous meeting; applications close tomorrow; there is never a perfect way to move forward; $7,500 may not save a business which … | CityCouncil/2020-05-05.pdf |
CityCouncil/2020-05-19.pdf,25 | CityCouncil | 2020-05-19 | 25 | The Assistant Community Development Director responded the cap was considered at $300,000 per tenant; stated a few tenants pay $50,000 per month; the program is not based on a first come first served basis; each agreement will need to be negotiated; the criteria is strict and the City can offer deferrals, not abatement, in the event a tenant does not fully qualify; the applications will be looked at closely. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated the leases have high monthly rents. Councilmember Oddie expressed concern about offering a blank check to every tenant with a cap of $300,000; outlined monthly lease rents for various tenants. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether a capped amount for a certain category could be applied for small, medium and large businesses; whether Council can provide direction on the parameters. Councilmember Oddie stated rent should be abated for those locked out and shut down for the first three months; the second three months should be as generous as possible with deferrals and loan conversion; expressed support for staff returning to Council when the $300,000 cap in proposed abatements is reached. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the proposed abatements are per tenant. Councilmember Oddie responded in total. The City Manager stated the $300,000 cap is for all abatements; staff will take Council comments and return with 2 to 3 choices in June to allow a good program to move forward. Councilmember Vella stated that she would like to understand the implications to planned Capital Improvement Projects (CIP) at Alameda Point and other properties; there is a cost associated; there are few businesses which have been truly locked out; expressed support for using the budget analysis to determine which items are delayed; there have been complaints related to infrastructure; investment should be in certain infrastructure. Councilmember Daysog stated one way to not provide a "blank check" to tenants would be to provide benchmarks; creating a threshold will help; expressed support for catalyst businesse… | CityCouncil/2020-05-19.pdf |
CityCouncil/2020-06-02.pdf,25 | CityCouncil | 2020-06-02 | 25 | Councilmember Oddie moved approval of directing staff to bring back ballot language for the City Prosecutor and to add language related to the discretion of the City Prosecutor. The City Attorney stated the correspondence indicates the current language requires the City Attorney to prosecute all local law violations; noted proposed language would add State Law violations; stated the correspondence suggests adding the phrase: "exercise the prosecutorial discretion" due to the requirement of federal and State constitutional law. Vice Mayor Knox White seconded the motion. Under discussion, Councilmember Vella stated it would be helpful for the public to have clarity related to the change; she would like clarification whether additional funding for the position will be needed; she has received questions asking why the City would prosecute versus the District Attorney. The City Attorney stated the existing City Charter can be read as authorizing or requiring the City Attorney to prosecute all local law violations; the proposed language would authorize the City Attorney to prosecute State law violations; earlier last year, Council authorized the City Attorney's Office to engage in the activity with the consent of the District Attorney; the intent of the ballot language is to memorialize the authorization to the extent the consent of the District Attorney is withdrawn; staff does not anticipate a need for additional staffing to do work which is already being undertaken. Councilmember Vella stated the item will need a robust communication plan with the community; many people do not understand the matter; engaging and informing the community will be difficult. Councilmember Oddie inquired whether the Council should also decide which items will be put together. The City Clerk responded in the affirmative; provided an example of combining the cleanup language, with Council pay or City Prosecutor. On the call for the question, the motion carried by the following roll call vote: Councilmembers Daysog: Aye; Knox White: Aye; Od… | CityCouncil/2020-06-02.pdf |
CityCouncil/2020-06-16.pdf,25 | CityCouncil | 2020-06-16 | 25 | MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL JOINT MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION (SACIC) TUESDAY-JUNE 16, 2020- -6:58 P.M. Mayor/Chair Ezzy Ashcraft convened the meeting at 7:07 p.m. and led the pledge of allegiance. ROLL CALL - Present: Councilmembers/Commissioners Daysog, Knox White, Oddie, Vella and Mayor/Chair Ezzy Ashcraft - 5. [Note: The meeting was conducted via Zoom] Absent: None. CONSENT CALENDAR Vice Mayor/Commissioner Knox White moved approval of the Consent Calendar. Councilmember/Commissioner Oddie seconded the motion, which carried by the following roll call vote: Councilmembers/Commissioners Daysog: Aye; Knox White: Aye; Oddie: Aye; Vella: Aye; and Mayor/Chair Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye. Ayes: 5. [Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk preceding the paragraph number.] (*20-013 SACIC) Minutes of the Special Joint City Council and SACIC Meetings Held on March 17, 2020. Approved. (*20-392 CC/20-014 SACIC) Recommendation to Accept the Investment Report for the Quarter Ending September 30, 2019. Accepted. (*20-393 CC/20-015 SACIC) Recommendation to Accept the Investment Report for the Quarter Ending December 31, 2019. Accepted. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Mayor/Chair Ezzy Ashcraft 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. Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council and Successor Agency 1 to the Community Improvement Commission June 16, 2020 | CityCouncil/2020-06-16.pdf |
CityCouncil/2020-07-21.pdf,25 | CityCouncil | 2020-07-21 | 25 | Expressed support for the renaming of Jackson Park; questioned whether the sign could be removed while a more permanent solution is sought; expressed concern about the committee selection process and community input: Jenice Anderson, Alameda. Comments read into the record: Suggest Don Grant to replace the name of Jackson Park: Ralph Walker, Alameda. Expressed support for renaming Jackson Park; urged Council to: remove Jackson's name from the park, begin the renaming process and develop one or more memorials to be positioned in the park in consultation with Indigenous communities; stated that she does not support a return to the generic, original name: Rosemary Jordan, Alameda. Expressed support for Option 1: dename Jackson Park, remove the sign immediately, and start the community renaming process: Laura Cutrona, Alameda. Expressed support for renaming Jackson Park; stated racism is a public health emergency; urged Council accept the Recreation and Park Commission recommendation to rename the park: Text message. Expressed support for renaming Jackson Park; stated Jackson caused irreparable harm to BIPOC community in the United States; parks are a place for healing and rejuvenation; renaming the park will ensure parks are inclusive, safe and healing for all: Text message. Urged Council to dename Jackson Park, immediately remove the signage and support the community renaming process in memory of the African people Jackson trafficked, hunted and held in bondage; stated a monument to Jackson does not belong in Alameda's first park: Rasheed Shabazz, Alameda. Stated there has been a renewed effort to eliminate and remove monuments to White supremacist in public spaces; Alameda's first park should be renamed due to Jackson's oppression of African and Indigenous people; Alameda should not honor Jackson with a park; urged Council to immediately remove Jackson's name from the park, rename the park and develop a memorial at the new park for communities oppressed by Jackson: Rename Jackson Park, Alameda. Councilmember Vella … | CityCouncil/2020-07-21.pdf |
CityCouncil/2021-01-19.pdf,25 | CityCouncil | 2021-01-19 | 25 | 51 Councilmember Spencer stated the reconsidered motion is appropriate. Councilmember Knox White seconded the motion, which carried by the following roll call vote: Councilmembers Daysog: No; Knox White: Aye; Spencer: Aye; Vella: Aye; and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye. Ayes: 4. Noes: 1. *** Stated that she does not understand why she would be unable to speak at the continued meeting; outlined PLAs in Alameda County not being inclusive; stated that she would like an update on the current Public Works PLA: Nicole Goehring, Associated Builders and Contractors. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated public comment has closed for the matter; noted speakers are not allowed to speak twice on matters. CITY MANAGER COMMUNICATIONS Not heard. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA Not heard. COUNCIL REFERRALS (21-055) Consider Establishing a New Methodology by which the Number of Housing Units are Calculated for Parcels Zoned C-2-PD (Central Business District with Planned Development Overlay). (Councilmember Daysog) Not heard. (21-056) Consider Directing Staff to Provide a Police Department Staffing and Crime Update. (Councilmember Spencer). Not heard. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS Not heard. ADJOURNMENT (21-057) There being no further business, Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft adjourned the meeting at 12:10 a.m. in memory of those lost to COVID-19. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger City Clerk The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Sunshine Ordinance. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council January 19, 2021 | CityCouncil/2021-01-19.pdf |
CityCouncil/2021-02-02.pdf,25 | CityCouncil | 2021-02-02 | 25 | returned by February 21st; an online survey is available at: www.alamedaca.gov/policesurvey. Councilmember Daysog expressed support for the Interim Police Chief; stated there have been increases in violent crimes; expressed support for having 88 sworn Officers; stated the temporary lull at 73 sworn Officers was supposed to be only until October 2020; any modifications contemplated should work and build off of institutions, protocols and procedures in place; if the City proceeds in modernizing the Police force from the current, stability will be provided to Officers. Councilmember Herrera Spencer stated APD is in a divided community with a split Council; noted that she was not present when the Council decided to form a Subcommittee; stated the Subcommittee has not been a public process; this is the City Manager's Steering Committee, not Council's Steering Committee and subcommittees; expressed concern about the process not being public; stated the Council will have only heard from one group of people; comments and input provided from people outside the committees is as valuable due to the Subcommittees not having Brown Act noticed meetings; the public was not allowed to submit questions; outlined an armed home robbery and the minimum amount of Officers allowed on duty; stated that she will be looking to hear from law enforcement, not committee members; committee members are not members of trained law enforcement; noted that she does not want to wait until March to find out what will happen to APD; she does not want to be a victim of an armed home invasion; expressed support for having enough Officers to respond to calls in a timely manner; stated that she does not want to compromise responses to gun calls; expressed concern for Officer safety; stated people need to find a way to protect themselves as well as the community; that she needs to ensure that APD has the tools needed to provide responsible policing. Councilmember Knox White requested clarification about the home invasion response from APD. Councilmember … | CityCouncil/2021-02-02.pdf |
CityCouncil/2021-03-16.pdf,25 | CityCouncil | 2021-03-16 | 25 | Councilmember Herrera Spencer requested clarification that Council would be supporting hiring up to 88 Officers; she would like specific training for the public on detentions and consensual contact; the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) has a Know Your Rights program; 100 Black Men in Oakland did a great program; she would like a public education component; she would like to hear from the Police that they are getting the training on detention and when people are free to leave; she would like to know whether other Councilmembers agree. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she supports the Crime Analyst position with the concept of where the position lives to be determined; she also supports the Steering Committee recommendation to continue having 88 Officers in the budget; inquired whether Councilmember Herrera Spencer would support posting a link on the City's website to the ACLU Know Your Rights program for the public. Councilmember Herrera Spencer responded in the affirmative; stated the ACLU has a lot of information online and also have volunteers who teach the public; she is not sure if 100 Black Men in Oakland paid anyone; there could be an ongoing educational component; the City could work with the Schools; she would like to have it added. Councilmember Knox White stated it is a good program; that he is a little uncomfortable tying it into the conversation; he knows the program is not about how to keep from being arrested; it is about knowing your rights; he is not clear about the ask or cost; questioned whether the Public Information Officer is able to arrange four events per year; stated perhaps the Police Crime Prevention Unit could bring the ACLU in as well; it is worthwhile; he does not understand what staff is being asked to do. Councilmember Daysog stated Councilmember Herrera Spencer has a concept similar to the previous motion asking staff to return with information to flesh out the concepts. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she understands the concept but is not sure it belongs in this particular se… | CityCouncil/2021-03-16.pdf |
CityCouncil/2021-04-20.pdf,25 | CityCouncil | 2021-04-20 | 25 | liabilities; the key is to look at long-term liabilities and utilize opportunities and management strategies to knock down long-term liabilities and better assure the fiscal future. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated a previous Council looked at the high percentage of funding reserves being held; a percentage is still always held, with half of the remaining overage paying down the pension and OPEB liabilities; the result has saved the City carrying costs on the debt; it is not accurate to state that the City is drawing down on reserves. Councilmember Herrera Spencer stated that she disagrees with Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft's comments; anyone can look at the numbers to see what has happened in the past; she supports the assumptions being provided in order to see how aggressive it is and in which categories; as the forecast unfolds over time, people will see where adjustments should have been and how much the forecasts will be impacted; hopefully, all assumptions are correct. Mr. Morris stated that he tends to begin conservatively. Councilmember Daysog stated it is important to look at historic trends for expenditure analysis; it is also important to look at the budget from a performance standards perspective; outlined the possible breakdowns of City personnel and Capital Improvement Projects (CIP); stated a budget is crafted from the expenditure side based on spending and Council values or expectations and actual spending; the sustainability on the revenue side will be shown; expressed support for budgeting from a performance measure angle; another area to consider is actual capacity; the analysis needs to be factored in. Councilmember Knox White moved approval of accepting the model and report. Vice Mayor Vella seconded the motion, which carried by the following roll call vote: Councilmembers Daysog: Abstention; Herrera Spencer: No; Knox White: Aye; Vella: Aye; and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye. Ayes: 3. Noes: 1. Abstention: 1. (21-276) Recommendation to Provide Direction to Staff Regarding the Allocation of an Anticipated $28.95 Mi… | CityCouncil/2021-04-20.pdf |
CityCouncil/2021-05-04.pdf,25 | CityCouncil | 2021-05-04 | 25 | accordingly; staff ensured the deal for Alameda was at least as good as the deals that ACI and other companies were proposing out on the competitive market place; staff considered a switching cost in order to change contractors; the switching cost can be unpredictable and significant; there have been concerns about having a good partner that has brought the City through a number of changes, programs and services to get to the current status; with SB1383 coming in six months, there is a feeling that ACI will be able to get ahead of customer engagement; the City avoiding compliance issues if the contract expires and a new company is brought in is a big value; it is a policy issue for Council; however, staff has thought about the matter extensively as the deal had been vetted. Councilmember Herrera Spencer inquired which cities received a 20 to 30% increase. Mr. Hilton responded the City of Oakland was well over the percentage increase; stated the City of San Ramon, which uses the same bargaining unit as Alameda, received bids at 20 and 30%; the special district of Castro Valley received bids at 15 and 20%. Councilmember Herrera Spencer inquired whether the rates are reflected in the chart on page nine. Mr. Hilton responded in the affirmative; stated Oakland and Piedmont recently re-did their contracts and are now the most expensive in the Bay Area. Councilmember Herrera Spencer stated that she does not understand why Piedmont would be so high, which is likely an anomaly; the City of Oakland is a little higher than the proposed rates for Alameda; inquired the rate for the City of San Ramon. Mr. Hilton responded the City of San Ramon increased by 30%. Councilmember Herrera Spencer stated the increase depends over time; noted Alameda's rates have increased significantly over time; she would have liked to have seen more information and data in the presentation; outlined the increase of 6% per year since 2006; stated that she has received many complaints about trash not being picked up; noted people will call in and pic… | CityCouncil/2021-05-04.pdf |
CityCouncil/2021-06-15.pdf,25 | CityCouncil | 2021-06-15 | 25 | healthy street operations center; stated the program helps homeless individuals who have been criminalized due to behavioral mental health; FEST works closely with law enforcement for the healthy street operations center initiative and provides motivational interviewing and harm reduction by giving people a social justice restorative justice lens; FEST goes out and operates proactively and reactively in the community, while engaging individuals where they are located and providing documentation when needed; mental health is extremely important; however, efforts from the Felton Institute do not stop at mental health; once a connection is made, mid-support and documentation is provided on a continuum level of care; outlined the supporting treatment and reducing recidivism program that works with citizens being discharged by connecting people with services around housing and mental health; stated the goal is to provide sustainable housing, connection to mental health services and working with medical clinicians in order to triage for the proper programs; mental health providers need to be first responders. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the model being proposed requires a Police Officer to go to a call. Mr. Gilbert responded in the negative; stated the programs in San Francisco and Alameda County do not require Police to be present; the City would decide who would go to 911 calls; the Felton Institute has hotlines it runs, which could receive any calls directly to respond to people in crisis; the program proposed is a 24 hour mental health service program, not a crisis response program; the programs are staffed with a majority of people of color, which is a majority of the people being served; the agency is extremely diverse; staff reflects the clients served. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the Felton Institute has a vehicle, to which Mr. Gilbert responded in the affirmative; stated two of the three agency vehicles are parked at the headquarters on Atlantic Avenue; an additional vehicle will be added and… | CityCouncil/2021-06-15.pdf |
CityCouncil/2021-07-06.pdf,25 | CityCouncil | 2021-07-06 | 25 | ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (21-446) Jay Garfinkle, Alameda, stated it has been three months since a death occurred in Police custody; the autopsy had been completed in early May, then passed on for peer review; any competent peer review of the autopsy findings could have been completed by this time; the City appears to be stalling; the City declared an emergency in the last year; several actions were taken under the emergency declaration; the emergency declaration has been extended; discussed parking and traffic on Webster Street and Park Street; Council must review the declaration every 60 days; discussed funding for local businesses; expressed support for a report being provided for the funding. (21-447) Aimee Barnes, Alameda, discussed a pedestrian fatality at the intersection of Walnut Street and Lincoln Avenue; stated it is frustrating to have a fatality create the traffic priority for the problematic intersection; noted a similar issue exists at the intersection of Fifth Street and Haight Avenue; she has repeatedly requested traffic calming measures at the intersection; discussed a collision occurring at the intersection; expressed concern for the intersection's risk to children due to a nearby park; the intersection is also a thoroughfare for people speeding between Lincoln Avenue and Central Avenue; expressed concern over an increase in traffic. Urged Council approve a four-way stop or other traffic calming. (21-448) Zac Bowling, Alameda, discussed the new Seaplane Lagoon ferry terminal opening from July 1st; noted ferry service has reopened across most of the island. CONSENT CALENDAR Councilmember Herrera Spencer requested the Council meeting dates [paragraph no. 21-463 be removed from the Consent Calendar for discussion. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft requested any items pulled from the Consent Calendar be heard at the end of the regular agenda. Councilmember Knox White moved approval of moving the Council meeting date resolutions to end of the regular item. Councilmember Herrera Spencer seconded the motion, … | CityCouncil/2021-07-06.pdf |
CityCouncil/2021-07-20.pdf,25 | CityCouncil | 2021-07-20 | 25 | Councilmember Herrera Spencer stated there have been multiple proposals and categories; noted one of the proposals listed wireless hotspots at $50,000; inquired whether the matter is a stand-alone item. The Assistant City Manager responded in the affirmative; stated the project is one of the lower hanging fruit; however, it will be impactful. Councilmember Herrera Spencer stated the hotspots are important; requested clarification about $18,700 for the service wireless lending hotspot. The Assistant City Manager stated the program would be delivered by the Library; the City would have 30 hotspot devices; a household can be powered by one hotspot device at no cost; the process is similar to checking out a book; the program will fund the service. Councilmember Herrera Spencer requested clarification about the locations of the wireless hotspots. The Assistant City Manager stated the projects are part of the Library program; the broadband system would allow the City to create a network across the City and create a hard-wired internet system allowing an increase to internet speeds across the community; wireless hotspots can be adapted to the broadband system; there is a lending program through the Library, both hardwired and wireless infrastructure comes with the overall broadband program; all items are tied to the Smart City project whether through a lending system or physical improvements and infrastructure; the project is part of a broader effort to improve connectivity across the community. Councilmember Herrera Spencer inquired whether the broadband item is listed under the $6 million Master Plan. The Assistant City Manager responded in the affirmative; stated the broadband Smart City program includes a fiber network across the City and WiFi within the business districts; the system will be both in and above ground to improve connectivity across the community. Councilmember Herrera Spencer inquired whether the $50,000 and the $18,700 could be used without the broadband Smart City program, to which the Assistant Ci… | CityCouncil/2021-07-20.pdf |
CityCouncil/2021-09-07.pdf,25 | CityCouncil | 2021-09-07 | 25 | services will be provided by the Wellness Center; Council needs to not be the ones causing issues relative to the project moving forward; arguments that have been made for exempting other matters do not stand muster; other matters of particular concern on the agenda need to be discussed; she hopes the Call for Review is the last political stunts to try and stop or impede forward movement on the Wellness Center. Councilmember Herrera Spencer stated that she disagrees with the comments made about Councilmember Daysog and herself by her colleagues; she believes the matter is appropriate to bring forth; the personal attacks against Councilmember Daysog and herself from fellow Councilmembers are unfortunate; changes to the rules can come before Council; Councilmembers currently have the ability to submit Calls for Review; it is critical that phone numbers and the ability to participate in meetings is properly noticed. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft expressed support for making changes in the rules; stated direction has been given to staff to look into possible changes. The Assistant City Attorney inquired whether two separate motions would be desired by Council; one to approve the minutes and one to approve the resolution. Vice Mayor Vella and Councilmember Knox White agreed to bifurcate the motion to approve the minutes separate from the project and resolution. On the call for the question regarding the minutes, the motion carried by the following roll call vote: Councilmembers Daysog: Abstain; Herrera Spencer: Aye; Knox White: Aye; Vella: Aye; and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye. Ayes: 4. Abstentions: 1. On the call for the question regarding the project and resolution, the motion carried by the following roll call vote: Councilmembers Daysog: Abstain; Herrera Spencer: No; Knox White: Aye; Vella: Aye; and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye. Ayes: 3. Noes: 1. Abstentions: 1. (21-552) Recommendation to Provide Further Direction to Staff Regarding the Allocation of $28.68 Million of Funding from the Federal Government Through the American Rescue … | CityCouncil/2021-09-07.pdf |
CityCouncil/2021-09-21.pdf,25 | CityCouncil | 2021-09-21 | 25 | contract be written in such a way that Exhibit A can be changed by the City, with agreement from AFS and a 45 to 60 day notice as the program progresses and iterations are made when approaches do not work; AFD and AFS can make the recommendation to change when needed in order to create a mechanism for the program to go back and change the schedule in a simple manner versus having to come back to Council and amend the contract; expressed support for the flexibility in allowing changes to be made, for Council giving direction to have quarterly updates provided and allowing Council to raise issues prior to the one year extension option; stated there are ways that Council can create breaks; he agrees with public commenters that the issue has taken 14 months and it is time to move forward. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the proposed motion amendment becomes a substitute motion. The City Clerk responded that she has heard the comment provided as amendment to the motion on the floor. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she thought the entire Council must decide on the motion amendments, not just the maker of the motion. The City Clerk stated the usual procedure followed by the City is that the maker of the motion accepts amendments to the motion. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated a motion has been made by Councilmember Herrera Spencer, which has been seconded and amended by Councilmember Knox White; the maker of the motion has accepted the amendment to the motion. Councilmember Daysog stated the program represents a historic opportunity for reforming policing in Alameda; the action will be looked at with pride by many generations of Alamedans; Council should move forward with the motion as-amended; he has previously voted for Felton Institute to provide services; he is also confident that the AFD can manage the contract; the RFP is only one and a half pages long; the RFP is written more as a Request for Qualifications (RFQ); AFD has asked for the qualifications with respect to the items and sub-items included in the RFP; the… | CityCouncil/2021-09-21.pdf |
CityCouncil/2021-10-19.pdf,25 | CityCouncil | 2021-10-19 | 25 | Mr. Morales stated the GFOA has a warning on its website which states: "Do not issue pension obligation bonds;" a number of policies are designed to be written for the entire country; the City's financial sophistication is different from anyone else; the GFOA policy is written with cities which might not have high financial sophistication; the information is important because each plan, State law and funding level is different; the CalPERS system is different from the County of Alameda, the State of New Jersey, Illinois or Minnesota; the GFOA writes one universal policy to cover the nation; the financial circumstances of each agency in the country are different; UFI believes a number of the circumstances have been addressed; the most disconcerting part about the GFOA is the advisory not to issue POBs without any recommended alternative options provided outside of using reserves; Council should feel free to adhere to the GFOA advisory; however, the points and counterpoints mentioned by the GFOA should also be considered; the matter is complex and has some downsides, which include equity risks; the answer is not easy; doing nothing has a detrimental impact on operations going forward; the projected operating deficit has to do with increasing pension costs and a shortfall over the next four to five years; the deficit is due to an increase in UAL payments. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired if the current economy, stock market and low interest rates are sustainable and factors into the matter. Mr. Morales responded rates are at historic lows, which makes the matter compelling; stated the discount rate has lowered; he does not believe the growth will continue on a long-term basis; a second industrial revolution is causing some tremendous economic growth; cities cannot continue at 21.3% growth and outrun the problem; the orders are taking more measured steps and being realistic; outlined gains and downsides; stated Council must consider the downside; Councilmember Daysog is correct in his statements about risk; there are thi… | CityCouncil/2021-10-19.pdf |
CityCouncil/2021-11-02.pdf,25 | CityCouncil | 2021-11-02 | 25 | (Councilmember Herrera Spencer). Not heard. (21-709) Consider Directing Staff to Support Removal of the US Navy Constraints Limiting Housing Development at Alameda Point. (Councilmember Herrera Spencer and Councilmember Daysog). Not heard. (21-710) Consider Directing Staff to Address Identifying New Areas at Alameda Point to Develop a Number of Housing Units Above the Originally-Agreed Upon Numbers of the 2023- 2031 Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA). (Councilmember Daysog). Not heard. (21-711) Consider Directing Staff to Move Jean Sweeney Park Fencing. (Councilmembers Herrera Spencer and Daysog). Not heard. (21-712) Consider Reviewing and Updating the Previous City Council's Priorities at a Regular City Council Meeting. (Councilmember Herrera Spencer). Not heard. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS (21-713) Councilmember Herrera Spencer discussed her pin; announced a jewelry sale event hosted by the Friends of the Alameda Animal Shelter. (21-714) Councilmember Daysog discussed the unveiling of two art pieces in Jean Sweeney Park; announced that he attended a the School Board Subcommittee meeting with Councilmember Knox White; stated there is a report which indicates traffic safety measures and should come before Council. (21-715) Councilmember Knox White discussed the School Board Subcommittee meeting; noted the matter related to traffic enforcement [paragraph no. 21- ] which was not heard is part of significant concerns voiced by parents; stated that he would like to see a public workshop to discuss the Shuumi Land Tax. (21-716) Councilmember Daysog stated Council should discuss traffic impacts from the Oakland Athletics stadium. (21-718) Councilmember Herrera Spencer announced that she attended the County Day of Remembrance with Councilmember Daysog. (21-719) Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft announced that she attended an event called Here I Am and a workshop put on by the Water Emergency Transportation Authority (WETA); discussed a Diablo Magazine interview; noted Contra Costa County has recently developed a Countywide transit s… | CityCouncil/2021-11-02.pdf |
CityCouncil/2021-11-16.pdf,25 | CityCouncil | 2021-11-16 | 25 | including, but not limited to, the businesses adjacent to the site or in the general vicinity; inquired whether or not there is a reason to include resident complaints; another requirement is the provider agrees to notify the City should any of the following occur: violence or credible threats against staff or other program clients; inquired about the procedure. Mr. Russell responded BACS is happy to provide notice to the City if it determines issues are -affecting the community; noted some of the language included in the agreement is boiler plate and should be modified. The Community Development Director stated Council can include direction to modify the contract in order to address concerns posed by Councilmember Daysog; staff can ensure there is an opportunity to part ways with the program if excessive complaints arise; staff can hold a discussion on procedure for termination. Vice Mayor Vella stated questions have been raised relative to cost; the City might forego roughly $45,000 in rent revenue per unit annually; the units are currently not being rented; therefore, rent is not being collected; using empty houses at Alameda Point for homeless housing was recommended during her first Council term; she would have liked staff to have provided outreach to neighbors ahead of time; expressed support for outreach being conducted and for scheduling additional outreach meetings to allow for questions and answers; stated the proposed program has been recommended by many over the years; the City now has the funding and space; Council understands that the number of people in need of housing is high and continues to grow; the proposed program provides units and beds within Alameda for emergency needs; the program is critical; the weather is beginning to change; this is an opportunity to make sure emergency beds are available for those who reside in Alameda; she has similar concerns with the contract as noted by other Councilmembers; the language can be kept general to state: "neighbors" or "people within the vicinity;" t… | CityCouncil/2021-11-16.pdf |
CityCouncil/2022-01-04.pdf,25 | CityCouncil | 2022-01-04 | 25 | (22-031) Consider Directing Staff to Address Identifying New Areas at Alameda Point to Develop a Number of Housing Units Above the Originally-Agreed Upon Numbers of the 2023- 2031 Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA). (Councilmember Daysog). Not heard. (22-032) Consider Directing Staff to Move Jean Sweeney Park Fencing. (Councilmembers Herrera Spencer and Daysog). Not heard. (22-033) Consider Reviewing and Updating the Previous City Council's Priorities at a Regular City Council Meeting. (Councilmember Herrera Spencer). Not heard. (22-034) Consider Having the City Council Address the Zoning of the Harbor Bay Club. (Councilmember Herrera Spencer). Not heard. (22-035) Consider Having the City Council Review Recreation and Parks Department Community Events. (Councilmember Herrera Spencer). Not heard. (22-036) Consider Directing Staff to Immediately Agendize an Urgency Hearing on Senate Bill (SB) 9. (Councilmember Herrera Spencer). Not heard. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS Not heard. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft adjourned the meeting at 11:59 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 January 4, 2022 25 | CityCouncil/2022-01-04.pdf |
CityCouncil/2022-01-18.pdf,25 | CityCouncil | 2022-01-18 | 25 | (22-042) Conference with Labor Negotiators (Government Code Section 54957.6); City Negotiators: Eric Levitt, City Manager, Gerry Beaudin, Assistant City Manager, and Nancy Bronstein, Human Resources Director; Employee Organizations: Alameda Police Managers Association (APMA), and Alameda Fire Chief's Association (AFCA); Under Negotiation: Salaries, Employee Benefits and Terms of Employment. Following the Closed Session, the meeting was reconvened and the City Clerk announced that regarding the Existing Litigation, staff provided information and Council provided direction, by the following roll call vote: Councilmembers Daysog: Aye; Herrera Spencer: Aye; Knox White: Abstain; Vella: Absent; and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye; Ayes: 3. Abstain: 1. Absent: 1; regarding Potential Litigation and Real Property, staff provided information and Council provided direction by the following roll call vote: Councilmembers Daysog: Aye; Herrera Spencer: No; Knox White: Aye; Vella: Aye; and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye; Ayes: 4. Noes: 1; and regarding Labor, staff provided information and Council provided direction by the following roll call vote: Councilmembers Daysog: No; Herrera Spencer: No; Knox White: Aye; Vella: Aye; and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye; Ayes: 3. Noes: 2. Adjournment There being no further business, Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft adjourned the meeting at 6:28 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 January 18, 2022 | CityCouncil/2022-01-18.pdf |
CityCouncil/2022-02-01.pdf,25 | CityCouncil | 2022-02-01 | 25 | Vice Mayor Vella stated Councilmember Knox White's recommendation of having the Recreation and Parks Director bring the matter back to Council would suffice; she would like to note that Council has recommended the matter go through whichever processes seen fit prior to coming back before Council. Councilmember Knox White stated that he has proposed a motion with direction to staff, not a motion to take action; the direction indicates Council's wish that when the easements go forward, staff can see fit to move the fence when safety allows; Council is not taking action. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the motion is to have the matter return to Council at a future agenda date. Councilmember Knox White responded in the negative; stated that he does not want to see the matter return; Council has given direction on matters which are within the general scope of an item; the motion is general direction that Council would like to see the fence get moved when the easements are complete and safety permits; the motion keeps Council from getting into the administrative actions of the City. The City Attorney stated Council may always provide general direction on any agenda item; Council may give general direction; the referral rules are clear in that should Council wish to give specific direction, there are three choices; Council may direct staff to bring the matter back, take no further action or reject the referral; Council may provide general direction on any item. Councilmember Herrera Spencer seconded the motion. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft requested the motion be re-stated. Councilmember Knox White stated the motion is to approve the Council's wish that the fence be moved at such a time that the fence is setup for when the new easements are put in place and that those fences are erected as safety allows. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether budget is included in the motion, to which Councilmember Knox White responded in the negative. On the call for the question, the motion carried by the following roll call vote: Councilme… | CityCouncil/2022-02-01.pdf |
CityCouncil/2022-02-15.pdf,25 | CityCouncil | 2022-02-15 | 25 | requirement for youth access to the pool unattended should be increased; there are ways to do more with the pool; the City can come up with a model which utilizes the pool resource; the City can work with ASPA to get the word out about the pools. The Recreation and Parks Director stated the 8-year age limit for youths to be allowed in the pool unattended is being reviewed; the Board has agreed to increase the age requirement to 13 in concept. Councilmember Herrera Spencer stated that her children used the pools for free for multiple summers; noted that she could not get free swim lessons anywhere else in the City; the City does not offer free swim lessons for seniors or children; inquired the cost of City swim lessons. The Recreation and Parks Director responded that she does not have the exact cost for lessons; stated the City does not offer free lessons; however, scholarships are available for those that qualify and apply. Councilmember Herrera Spencer stated many renters do not qualify for scholarships. The Recreation and Parks Director stated the lessons cost $10 per class. Councilmember Herrera Spencer stated the City has been lucky to have the ASPA pools and volunteers; the volunteers have found ways to serve children, seniors and people with disabilities; further stated that she never paid for membership at ASPA pools; there are free options for youth and seniors; expressed support for the returning report to show what ASPA offers for free; stated that she supports ASPA; many families utilize ASPA pools; she appreciates the volunteers help in providing accessibility to pools; the volunteer time put into the pools is important; tiny tot swimming lessons range from $50 to $100; ASPA has been equitable in serving the community; questioned who pays for the operation and maintenance of the ASPA pools; stated it is not appropriate to continue to ask people to volunteer; expressed concern about increasing volunteer work; stated the pools likely would have been closed long ago if operated by the City; pools are ex… | CityCouncil/2022-02-15.pdf |
CityCouncil/2022-03-01.pdf,25 | CityCouncil | 2022-03-01 | 25 | Councilmember Daysog stated that he will support the motion; the motion is in line with trying to work things out with different perspectives of landlords and tenants; two years of no rent increases is not sustainable for many; the proposed motion is reasonable and has middle- ground. On the call for the question, the motion carried by the following roll call vote: Councilmembers Daysog: Aye; Herrera Spencer: Aye; Knox White: Aye; Vella: Aye; and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye. Ayes: 5. (22-147) Introduction of Ordinance Authorizing the City Manager or Designee to Execute a First Amendment to the Lease with Park Street Wine Cellars, Inc., a California Corporation, for Approximately 700 Square Feet of Retail Space in the Historic Alameda Theatre Located at 2315 Central Avenue, Suite 122, to Provide Six Months of Rent Deferral with a Three-Year Repayment Period. Continued to March 15, 2022. (22-148) Introduction of Ordinance Authorizing the City Manager or Designee to Execute a First Amendment to the Lease with Play House, LLC, a California Limited Liability Company, Doing Business as Director's Cut, for Approximately 1,850 Square Feet of Retail Space in the Historic Alameda Theatre Complex, Located at 2319 Central Avenue, to Provide a Six-Month Rent Credit and a Rent Reduction. Withdrawn and not heard. (22-149) Adoption of Resolution Amending the Fiscal Year 2021-22 Budget; and (22-149 A) Adoption of Resolution Amending the Alameda City Employees Association (ACEA) Salary Schedule to Add the Classification of Street Light Maintenance Technician; Amending The International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW) Salary Schedule to Remove the Streetlight Technician; Upgrading Two Maintenance Worker Il Positions To Streetlight Technicians, Effective March 12, 2022. Continued to March 15, 2022. (22-150) Recommendation to Accept the Annual Report on the Climate Action and Resiliency Plan (CARP) and the Annual Report on Transportation. Withdrawn and not heard. CITY MANAGER COMMUNICATIONS (22-151) The City Manager discussed t… | CityCouncil/2022-03-01.pdf |
CityCouncil/2022-04-19.pdf,25 | CityCouncil | 2022-04-19 | 25 | (22-279) Recommendation to Provide Direction to City Staff on Emergency Supportive Housing for Three City-Owned Vacant Homes at Alameda Point. Not heard. CITY MANAGER COMMUNICATIONS Not heard. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA Not heard. COUNCIL REFERRALS (22-280) Consider Having the City Council Address the Zoning of the Harbor Bay Club. (Councilmember Herrera Spencer) Not heard. (22-281) Consider Having the City Council Review Recreation and Parks Department Community Events. (Councilmember Herrera Spencer) Not heard. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS Not heard. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft adjourned the meeting at 12:20 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 April 19, 2022 23 | CityCouncil/2022-04-19.pdf |
CityCouncil/2022-05-03.pdf,25 | CityCouncil | 2022-05-03 | 25 | residential and commercial zones; urged the matter be seriously considered: Dolores Kelleher, Alameda Architectural Preservation Society (AAPS). Stated her neighborhood is dense and diverse; discussed the capability for more units in existing areas; expressed concern about building heights taller than three stories; stated the HE has more than enough places to provide housing throughout the City; urged Council to decide where new housing should go; questioned why the Bridgeside Shopping Center is off the list: Betsy Mathison, Alameda. Discussed RHNA numbers; stated any buffer is unnecessary; urged Council to focus on the 5,353 housing units; the amount is attainable through the current Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) process; there is no need to upzone R-2 through R-6 areas; urged Council to build to the requirement: Matt Reid, Alameda. Expressed support for height limits; stated that she supports smaller units in transit areas and the request to remove unnecessary blanket upzoning across residential neighborhoods; she disagrees with the proposal to include either Lum School or Thompson Field for future housing; urged Council to consider continuing public hearings: Carmen Reid, Alameda. Discussed the HCD letter attached to the staff report; stated the letter provides for a compliant HE which meets the RHNA obligation and fair housing without upzoning the R-2 through R-6 areas; questioned whether deletion of upzoning is not in compliance with fair housing law; stated upzoning all districts is overkill and manipulates the HE without voter approval: Paul Foreman, Alameda. Questioned why staff was not directed to =object to the RHNA numbers while 70 other cities submitted letters of objection; expressed support for an initiative prohibiting out of State developers from funding campaigns and building new infrastructure before RHNA units; discussed a bike and car bridge and spending State funds on infrastructure: Rosalinda Fortuna Corvi, Alameda. Urged Council to upzone Central Avenue and Webster Street; stated Webster S… | CityCouncil/2022-05-03.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]) );