pages_fts: 18664
This data as json
rowid | text |
---|---|
18664 | associated costs; stated the argument costs are increased is not necessarily true. Councilmember Tam stated Mr. Viaming is recommending more of a hybrid approach; a PSA makes sense for something as complex, multifaceted, and long term as Alameda Point; regular Public Works projects would fall under the category of a shorter term PLA; inquired what happens when the two types of projects dovetail; stated utilities and infrastructure will be needed at Alameda Point; inquired how the two types work with Disposition and Development Agreements (DDAs); stated the City is going to be conveying parts of Alameda Point. Mr. Viaming responded his answer is going to seem a lot like a dodge; stated the issue would probably best be considered by having a discussion with the City Attorney; the mechanism and scope depend on a lot of different factors; a number of different elements go into in the matrix; that he would suggest deferring until real input is provided regarding the direction in which Council wants to go; next, staff would establish the best model to achieve objectives, which would be used to create the policy agreement; then, negotiations could begin; providing an opinion now would be premature because he does not know all the elements well enough, and gets the City too far down the road too fast. Councilmember Tam stated the things in a PSA, such as no strike, no lock out, jurisdictional dispute resolution process, referral procedures, and having mentorship program, are all things the City wants and values. Mr. Viaming stated one option is to come up with a PSA and another option is to put together a policy which indicates the City is not going to negotiate the Agreement, instead negotiation will be left to the developer; the City policy would include the required elements and direct developers to negotiate with the building trades; there are different ways to accomplish the goal; the City could have a template Agreement and an accompanying policy. Mayor Gilmore inquired whether it would be possible to treat Alameda Point as its own animal, because it is being rebuilt from the ground up; stated perhaps some sort of PLA that applies to Alameda Point could be done and some other kind of Agreement could be prepared for the rest of the City's built environment projects, such as replacing sewer mains, regular maintenance, or road work; inquired whether having one type of Agreement that covers both is better or whether the City could carve out Alameda Point and treat it differently. Mr. Viaming responded the decision is the Council's prerogative; stated the Council could decide to take care of one element first as a separate area; an Agreement could require that Public Works projects over a certain amount of money would have a PSA with specific elements that must be negotiated by the contractor; the most cost efficient way might be to have different approaches; the City probably will need multiple approaches. Special Meeting Alameda City Council 3 September 24, 2013 |