pages
2 rows where "date" is on date 2012-06-06 and page = 8
This data as json, CSV (advanced)
Link | body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
CityCouncil/2012-06-06.pdf,8 | CityCouncil | 2012-06-06 | 8 | Councilmember Johnson inquired about the amount of the MTC grant, to which the Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point responded $200,000; stated the City has to match the grant funding, which works within the current budget. Councilmember Johnson requested staff to compare the difference in readiness between the two plans. The City Manager stated the scaled back plan only makes a difference for the residential area. The Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point stated staff recommends doing the residential work because residential has a greater market; the form based code and engineering for large lot subdivisions would be used to sell super pads; the difference is a developer would have to fund said work. Councilmember Johnson inquired whether the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) would be Base wide and include non-residential, to which the Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point responded in the affirmative. The City Manager stated there would be CEQA review, but there would not necessarily be an Environmental Impact Review (EIR). In response to Councilmember Johnson's further inquiry, the City Manager stated not having residential plans more complete means the developer would have to do work and expend money up front, which would impact the value; having the EIR for the entire Base is the most critical. Councilmember Johnson inquired whether the residential developer would have to do CEQA work, but would not have to do an EIR, to which the Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point responded in the affirmative. The City Manager noted CEQA review does not necessarily have to be an EIR. The Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point stated the intent is to do the EIR and have very little CEQA work needed when a residential developer comes forward. Vice Mayor Bonta inquired if Council went with [staff report] Option 2, a second step could be taken later to close the delta between [staff report] Options 1 and 2 for the residential component, to which the Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point responded in the … | CityCouncil/2012-06-06.pdf |
CivilServiceBoard/2012-06-06.pdf,8 | CivilServiceBoard | 2012-06-06 | 8 | President Peeler asked if there were any objections to hearing the information, or giving Mr. Low more time. Don Peterson, Alameda resident and former member of Local 595 IBEW, stated that he thinks this process is the same as what went on with the hiring process. They (the City) make a set of rules and they do not stick to it. They (the City) have people set up to be put in places and when it gets discombobulated they (the City) do not know what to do. Mr. Peterson thinks you (the Board) need to make a set of rules and live by them. When you set up rules for hiring someone you need to use those rules not disregard them. President Peeler stated that the Board needs to review the information now or later. Vice President Horikoshi stated that the Board can still review the documentation without having Mr. Low tell the Board about it. Mr. Riddle stated that each side will have three minutes again. The appellants will have three minutes and the City three minutes. Mr. Gossman stated that the Appellants are looking for justice. You cannot have a manager going up to people and saying they have already selected them and then 30 or 40 days later give a test and these people have no chance whatsoever. You have all these different dots out there and when you put it all together and it was a scheme designed to eliminate these positions so he could hand-pick the employees he wanted to work for the department. What is important is that Mr. Dale Lillard had made public statements to his staff prior to the testing of who was going to be selected for the new Recreation Specialist classification. That is the information that is the facts, that is the evidence and we have managers who will testify to that. Now the answer from the City is this, "This statement is unfounded." Mr. Gossman stated how can the City make that statement when they did no investigation. Then the City says, "regardless of what Mr. Lillard is alleged to have stated to staff prior to testing, the testing process was designed by the Human Resources Department w… | CivilServiceBoard/2012-06-06.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]) );