The URL can be used to link to this page

2008-01-02 Packet`°~ , lJ n tC,t .~~~~~~5~~, CITY ~F ALAMEDA CALIFORNIA ~ ;, , ~ .. ~~ .~ o rns rr;nx~` A~ sC~ SPECIAL JOINT MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND ALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ~ARRA} 'WEDNESDAY - - - JANUARY 2, 2008 - - ~- 6:00 P.M. Time: Wednesday, January 2, 2005, 6:00 p.m. Place: City Council Chambers Conference Raom, City Hall, corner of Santa Clara Avenue and Oak Street ~ rr or,ra ~ • 1. RO11 Call -~ City Council, ARRA 2. Public Comment on Agenda Items Only Anyone wishing to speak on agenda items only, may speak for a maximum of 3 minutes per item 3. Adjournment to Closed Session to consider: CITY COUNCIL 3-A. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS X954957.6} Agency Negotiators: Marie Gilmore and Frank Matarrese Employee: City Attorney ARRA 3-B. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS X54956.8} Property: Alameda Naval Air Station Negotiating parties: ARRA and Navy Under negotiations: Price and terms 4. 5. Announcement of Action Taken in Closed Session, if any Adjournment -- City Council AGENDA Regular Meeting of the Governing Body of the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority ~~~~~~~~ Alameda Clty Hall Council Chamber, Room 390 ~2G3 Santa Clara Avenue Alameda, CA 94501 Wednesday, January 2, 2008 Meeting will begin at 7:00 p.m. I. ROLL CALL Z. CQNSENT CALENDAR Consent Calendar items are considered routine and will be enacted, approved or adopted by one motion unless a request for removal for discussion or explanation is received from the Board or a member of the public. 2-A. Approve the minutes of the Regular Meeting of December 5, 2007. 2-B. Authorize the Executive Director to Execute an Agreement with Russell Resources for Environmental Consulting Services for Alameda Point for 12 Months zn an Amount not to exceed $11?,500. 2-C. Approve Sublease for American Bus Repair, LLC at Alameda Point. 3. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS 3-A. Alameda Point Update -- Presentation of Quarterly Master Project Schedule Prepared by SCC Alameda Point LLC. 4. ORAL REPORTS 4-A. Oral report from Member Matarrese, Restoration Advisory Board (RAB) representative. 5. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (PUBLIC COMMENT) (Any person may address the governing body in regard to any matter over which the governing body has jurisdiction that is not on the agenda.) 6. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE GOVERNING BODY 7. ADJOURNMENT ARRA Agenda -January 2, 2008 This meeting wiZZ be cablecast five on channei 15. Page 2 Notes: ^ Sign language interpreters will be available on request. Please contact the ARRA Secretary at 749-5$00 at least 72 hours before the meeting to request an interpreter. ^ Accessible seating for persons with disabilities including those using wheelchairs} is available. ^ Minutes of the meeting are available in enlarged print. ^ Audio tapes of the meeting are available for review at the ARRA offices upon request. Housing Authority of the City of Alameda 701 Atlantic Avenue -Alameda, California 94501-2161 -TEL: X510) 747-4300 -FAX; X510) 522-7$48 - TDD: X510) 522-$467 IF YOU WISH TO ADDRESS THE BQARD: ~. Please file a speaker's slip with the Executive Director, and upon recognition by the Chair, approach the rostrum and state your name; speakers are limited to 3 minutes per item. 2. Lengthy testimony should be submitted in writing and onl a Y summary of pertinent paints presented verbally. 3. Applause and demonstrations are prohibited during Board of Commissioners meetings. AGENDA SPECIAL MEETING 4F THE BQARD QF CQMMISSIQNERS DATE & TIME Wednesday, January 2, 245,1:25 PM LOCATIQN City Hall, Council Chambers, Room 390, 2263 Santa Clara Ave. Alameda CA Ullelcome to the Board of Commissioners of the Housing Authorit of the Cit of Alameda Y y meeting. Regular Board of Commissioners meetings are held on the first Tuesda of each Y quarter in the Council Chambers at City Hall. Public Partici ation Anyone wishing to address the Board on agenda items or business introduced b Y Commissioners may speak for a maximum of three minutes per a enda item when the g subject is before the Board. Please file a speaker's slip with the Housin Authorit Executive g Y Director if you wish to address the Board of Commissioners. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 1. ROLL GALL -Board of Commissioners 2. CONSENT CALENDAR ^ Consent Calendar items are considered routine and will be a rov pp ed or accepted by one motion unless a request for removal for discussion or ex lanation is p received from the Board of Commissioners or a member of the public. 2-A. Approving Budget Revision Number 4. The Housing Commission and Chief Executive Officer recommend the Board of Commissioners: 1. Approve the proposed budget revision; and 2. Adopt the resolution revising the budget for the Conventional Low-Rent Housing Program (Esperanza). Special Meeting of the Board of Commissioners January 2, 2005 Page 2 2-B. Audit Report for Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2001. The Housing Commission and Chief Executive Officer recommend the Board of Commissioners accept the audit report for the fiscal year ending June 34, 2001. 3. AGENDA None. 4. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, Non-Agenda (Public Comment) 5. COMMISSIONER COMMUNICATIONS (Communications from the Commissioners) 6. ADJOURNMENT ~~~ Note: Sign language interpreters will be available on request. Please contact Carol vVeaver, Secretary, at 747-4325 voice or 522-8461 TDD at least l2 hours before the meeting to request an interpreter. Accessible seating for persons with disabilities including those using wheelchairs} is available. Minutes of the meeting are available in large print. Audiotapes of the meeting are available on request. Please contact Carol vUeaver at 747-4325 voice of 522-8467 TDD at least 72 hours prior to the meeting to request agenda materials in an alternative format, or any other reasonable accommodation that may be necessary to participate in and enjoy the benefits of the meeting. ~{1 Q~ ~' a '~ o ~ ~ `~, ~ ~~~ .~ ~~ .,. ~~ ~ ~ . C I T Y F • ~ ~ ~~f~~ ~ ALAMEDA ~ALIF~RNIA y ~ ~, cs { ~~ s , .V~ti ~4r A~, p RrrdSTF;PK~~~~ fa~ ~~~ SPECIAL MEETING OF THE COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION WEDNESDAY ---JANUARY 2, 2 0 0 8 -- -- 7: 2 7 P. M. Location: City Council Charnb~rs, City Hall, corner of Santa Clara Avenue and oak Street. Public Participation Anyone wishing to address the Commission on agenda items or business introduced by the Commission may speak for a maximum of 3 minutes per agenda item when the subject is before the Commission. Please file a speaker's slip with the Deputy City Clerk if you wish to speak on an agenda item. 1. ROLL CALL - Community Improvement Commission 2. CONSENT CALENDAR 2-A. Minutes of the Special Joint City Council, Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority Meeting of December 4, 2007, and the Special Community Improvement Commission Meeting of December 18, 2007. City Clerk} 2-B. Recommendation to approve the amended Contract with Architectural Resources Group, Inc. by increasing the Contract amount by $23,540 to provide additional Construction Administration Services for the restoration and rehabilitation of the Historic Alameda Theater. Development Services} 3. AGENDA ITEMS None. 4. ADJOURNMENT - Community Improvement Commission Beverly oh n, Chair ~' . V } n ~~ ~ ,7 _ ~l. ~~ 4_ ,y ~ o. . ~ ~ ~ {p \h~` ~~~~ CITY OF ALAMEDA • CALIFORNIA IF YOU WISH TO ADDRESS THE COUNCIL: 1. Please file a speaker's slip with the Deputy City Clerk and upon recognition by the Mayor, approach the podium and state your name; speakers are limited to three ~3) minutes per item. 2. Lengthy testimony should be submitted in writing and only a summary of pertinent points presented verbally. 3. Applause and demonstration are prohibited during Council meetings. AGENDA - - - - - - - - - - -- REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL UVEDNESDAY - - - -- - - JANUARY 2 , 2 0 0 8 - - - -~ 7 : 3 0 P . M . [Note: Regular Council Meeting convenes at 7:30 pm, City Hall, Council Chambers, corner of Santa Clara Ave and oak St] The Order of Business for City Council Meeting is as follows: 1. Roll Call 2. Agenda Changes 3. Proclamations, Special Orders of the Day and Announcements 4. Consent Calendar 5. Agenda Items 6. Oral Communications, Non-Agenda Public Comment} 7. Council Communications Communications from Council} 8 . Adjournment Public Participation Anyone wishing to address the Council on agenda items or business introduced by Councilmembers may speak for a maximum of 3 minutes per agenda item when the subject is before Council. Please file a speaker's slip with the Deputy City Clerk if you wish to address the City Council SPECIAL JOINT MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND 6:00 P.M. ALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS CONFERENCE ROOM Separate Agenda Closed Session} REGULAR MEETING OF THE ALAMEDA REUSE AND 7:00 P.M. REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS Separate Agenda REGULAR MEETING 4F THE HOUSING AUTHORITY BOARD 7:25 P.M. OF COMMISSIONERS, CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS Separate Agenda SPECIAL MEETING of THE COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT 7:27 P.M. coMMISSION CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS, Separate Agenda 1. ROLL CALL - City Council 2, AGENDA CHANGES 3. PROCLAMATIONS, SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY AND ANNOUNCEMENTS 4. CONSENT CALENDAR Consent Calendar items are considered routine and will be enacted, approved or adopted by one motion unless a request for removal for discussion or explanation is received from the Council or a member of the public 4-A. Minutes of the Special Joint City Council, Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority, and Community Improvement Commission Meeting of December 4, 2007; Special City Council Meetings of December 5, 2007; Special City Council Meeting of December 11, 2007; and Special and Regular City Council Meetings of December 1S, 2007. City Clerk} 4-B. Bills for ratification. Finance} 4-C. Recommendation to approve Amendment No. One to the Agreement between the Navy and the City for conveyance of the Fleet Industrial Supply Center ~FISC} property attaching as a new "Exhibit J" a Memorandum of Agreement among the Navy, City and Palmtree Acquisition Corporation PAC} allowing PAC to carry out remediation of the FISC property in order to construct the Alameda Landing Development. Development Services} 4-D. Adoption of Resolution Approving an Amended Boundary Map for Community Facilities District No. 03--1 Bayport Municipal Service District}. Development Services} 4-E. Adoption of Resolution Approving Revised Part-Time Classifications Salary Schedule Effective January 1, 2008. Human Resources} 4-F. Final Passage of Ordinance Amending the Alameda Municipal Code by Adding Section 4-4 to Article I Littering and Maintenance of Property} of Chapter IV Offenses and Public Safety} to Prohibit Polystyrene Foam Food Service ware and Amending Section 1-5.6 of Chapter I General} to Authorize Additional City Employees to Serve as Code Enforcement Officers. Public Works} 5. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS 5-A. Adoption of Resolutions Appointing Michelle Blackman, Hannah Bowman, Jardon Flores, Ilya Pinsky, Anguli Sastry, Priscilla Szeto, Ben Ulrey, and Angela Sterling Vick as Members of the Youth Commission. 5-B, Public Hearing to consider Adoption of Resolution Amending Master Fee Resolution No. 12191 to Revise Permit Fees Charged for Installation of Photovoltaic Systems. Planning and Building} 5-C. Public Hearing to consider an appeal of the Historical Advisory Board's denial of a Certificate of Approval ~CA46- 0431} of demolition for 433 Taylor Avenue; and adoption of related resolution. Planning and Building}~To be continued to January 15, 2008] 5-D. Recommendation to accept the Corica Golf Complex Operational Review and authorize staff to begin the process to secure a long-term operator for the Golf Complex. Recreation and Park} [Continued from December 18, 2007] 6. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA Public Comment} Any person may address the Council in regard to any matter over which the Council has jurisdiction or of which it may take cognizance, that is not on the agenda 7. COUNCIL REFERRALS Matters placed on the agenda by a Councilmember may be acted upon or scheduled as a future agenda item 8. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS Communications from Council} Councilmembers can address any matter, including reporting on any Conferences or meetings attended S-~A. Consideration of Mayor's nominations for appointment to the Youth Commission. 9. ADJOURNMENT -- City Council *** • For use in preparing the official Record, speakers reading a written statement are invited to submit a copy to the City Clerk at the meeting or e-mail to: lweisige@ci.alameda.ca.us • Sign language interpreters will be available on request. Please contact the City Clerk at 747-4$00 or TDD number 522-7538 at least 72 hours prior to the Meeting to request an interpreter. • Equipment for the hearing impaired is available for public use. For assistance, please contact the City Clerk at 747-4800 or TDD number 5227535 either prior to, or at, the Council Meeting. • Accessible seating for persons with disabilities, including those using wheelchairs, is available. • Minutes of the meeting available in enlarged print. • Audio Tapes of the meeting are available upon request. • Please contact the City Clerk at 747-4800 or TDD number 522-7538 at least 4S hours prior to the meeting to request agenda materials in an alternative format, or any other reasonable accommodation that may be necessary to participate in and enjoy the benefits of the meeting. UNAPPROVED MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE ALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY 'Wednesday, December 5, 2007 The meeting convened at 7:34 p.m. with Chair Johnson presiding. ~. 1. ROLL CALL Present: Chair Beverly Johnson Boardmember Doug deHaan Boardmember Frank Matarrese Boardmember Marie Gilmore Vice Chair Lena Tam 2. CONSENT CALENDAR 2-A. Approve the minutes of the Regular Meeting of November 7, 2007. Member Gilmore clarified that the following correction should be made in the minutes regarding Item 3-C. Alameda Point Advisory Task Force: that the Board and Commission representatives would not only convey their Board or Commission's position to SunCal at the public meetings, but also, they could speak for themselves if they made it clear that they were speaking for themselves and not on behalf of their Board or Commission. Member Matarrese motioned for approval of the Consent Calendar with the clarification made by Member Gilmore, seconded by member Tam and passed by the following voice votes: 5 ayes, 4 noes, 0 abstentions. 3. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS 3-A. Presentation by the Veterans Affairs on the VA Project Development Plans at Alameda Point. Debbie Potter, Base Reuse and Community Development Manager, introduced Claude Hutchison, Director of Asset Enterprise Management, and Larry Jaynes, Capital Asset Manager, of the VA who made a powerpoint presentation. Mr. Hutchison gave a summary profile of the Dept. of Veterans Affairs. The VA is the second largest agency within the Federal system, second only to the Department of Defense ~DGD}. They are essentially the alumni association for the DGD and serve the needs and requirements of 24 million living Americans who served our country, They have an annual budget projected to be $$4 billion. There are three major areas of responsibilities and activities: 1} Veterans Health Administration - to serve the medical needs and requirements of those enrolled in the VA system. Currently S million enrollees, with 155 acute care hospitals around the country and 900 outpatient clinics, 2} Veterans Benefit Administration -financial services ranging from real estate loans to insurance and educational requirements, and 3}National Cemetery Administration -runs 125 national shrines as final internment for Veterans. Their hope is to place a combination of all three at Alameda Point - a significant, multi-purpose outpatient clinic, offices for the Veterans Benefit Administration, and an above-ground columbarium. The entire land mass that the VA hopes to have transferred to them by the Navy is approximately 597 acres. They envision developing about 113 acres concentrated in the north east area of the property. Mr. Hutchison further explained that the VA is still in negotiations with the USF&W because of the Lease Tern and California Brown Pelican whose habitat is within the area they hope to control. Mr. Jaynes concluded the presentation with an overview of the property area, stating that Alameda Point is strategically located to serve the Veterans of the greater Bay Area, and in addition, it is ideally and centrally located to serve the Veterans of northern Alameda County. He indicated on the map which area was the federal-to-federal parcel at the far west end of Alameda Point. It primarily consists of what was the airfield and landfill for NAS. The parcel does not include the Northwest Territories, which is still going to the City of Alameda. It also does not include any submerged lands. The 579-acre parcel runs from the west side of hangar row all the way down to the bay, and follows the perimeter shoreline all the way around the tip. When it gets to the Northwest Territories, it comes back down to hangar row. Mr. Jaynes presented the VA's site development plan which they have been working on for 1 S months. They plan to only develop 113 acres, and the remaining 466 acres will be left undeveloped. The VA's planned development is a circumference of about 1900 feet from the Lease Tern colony, based on the closest structure on hangar row, to assure the protection of the Lease Tern and the Brown Pelican and so the VA and these endangered species can co-exist on the site. Their plans include an outpatient clinic on the far east end which would replace the two facilities currently in Gakland. The clinic will be approximately 80-90,000 sq. ft. and be afull-service ambulatory care clinic which will not have any beds. The VA would like to develop an above- ground cemetery on the 50+ acres on the far west end of the parcel. There are approximately 390,000 Veterans in the greater Bay Area that would use the cemetery services, and for the clinic, they envision that it would serve approximately 7,000 of the 40,000 northern Alameda County Veterans. Also included in the clinic would be a small clinic that is run by the Air Force David Grant Medical Center} that would treat active duty and active duty dependents in the Bay Area. The third development plan includes land reserved for "enhanced use", apublic-private partnership where a developer comes in and builds a facility on under-utilized VA land. The VA was envisioning as their enhanced use partner a civilian in-patient hospital, which they believe is a compatible need with their outpatient clinic. Chair Johnson asked how many in-patient hospital beds the VA would anticipate be used by Veterans. Mr. Jaynes replied that approximately 10 - 20 would be used for Veterans. Member Matarrese mentioned that there is already a hospital here in Alameda that can be partnered with the VA. Mr. Jaynes explained that the plans for the civilian hospital are still conceptual. The enhanced use plans also include two structures for medical office buildings, which would house civilian doctors and administration. Also included is a small nature center which the VA would build to house fish and wildlife services and employees on the site to work with the Lease Terns, as well as EBRPD rangers if an agreement can be worked out with them. The VA would also build a bay trail on the property, limited to the far west side of the parcel in order to protect the endangered species. Mr. Jaynes presented the VA's timeline for development. They have been in consultation with USF&W for almost two years, and are currently in negotiations with the Navy to develop an MGU which will lay out the transfer terms, It is the VA and Navy's plan that the final transfer, including the transfer documents, will be complete by Fall of 2005. In addition, the VA is currently conducting a National Environmental Policy Act ~NEPA} environmental assessment for transfer, and a biological assessment. They have plans to do a NEPA environmental impact study which is funded and ready to go. Mr. Jaynes explained the VA's two major construction projects, one for the clinic, one for the cemetery. Both projects are congressionally authorized and appropriated, if approved for the budget, design will begin on the clinic in 2010, with construction completed by springlsummer 2012. The columbarium is on the same timeline, but could be phased and opened sooner. The enhanced use lease is in the concept application process and will go to the Secretary of the VA in the spring, and if approved, the enhanced use process will begin in late spring and work toward having a partner and open in 2012. Member Tam thanked Mr. Jaynes and Mr. Hutchison for the presentation and had some questions: 1} on the discussions the VA has had with the Navy regarding environmental clean-up costs, 2} has there been progress in the VA's coordinatian with SunCal, and 3}the VA's role and relationship with the Alameda Healthcare District. Mr. Hutchison explained that the VA has had ongoing dialogue with the Alameda District hospital and will be meeting with the new CEC tomorrow morning Dec. 6} to continue that dialogue and they are very interested in maintaining that relationship with the Alameda Healthcare District. He further explained that the VA has issued an RFP for outpatient services, and that the Alameda Healthcare District has responded. A final determination has not yet been made. As a response to Member Tam's first question,about the clean-up costs, Mr. Hutchison discussed that the Navy is responsible for clean-up. The VA's M~U with the Navy will set forth the terms and conditions that outline the requirements of the Navy to bring it up to appropriate commercial standards. The VA does not want to take on liability for contamination over which they had no control. The inter-agency transfer will set forth clearly the Navy's requirements with no dispute between the VA and the Navy as to those requirements. He emphasized that the VA has a significant due diligence process. Member Tam mentioned that since the VA is the alumni association to the Navy, that they may have a stronger tie to them than the ARRA does. Mr. Hutchison explained that the Navy is well aware of their obligation and is prepared to live up to it. Mr. Jaynes discussed the coordination efforts with SunCal, stating that most of their communication with SunCal since their last meeting with them has been through Debbie Potter. He said that he has been playing phone-tag with the project manager for SunCal, Pat Keliher, but will continue to strive to communicate with them to make sure their plans are in coordination with the ARRA's. Mr. Hutchison thanked Member Tam for being the catalyst to bringing SunCal and the VA together in a joint cooperation going forward. Chair Johnson wanted to clarify whether residential units were still part of the VA's development plan. Mr. Hutchison confirmed that residential units were never part of their plan. Member deHaan discussed his concerns about the budget appropriations and the VA's cost for their development plans. Mr. Hutchison stated that the budget approval cycle was FY ' 10 and the dollar amount for the hospital is in the $50M range, and considerably less for the columbarium. They are confident that their proposal will be well received by congress and the Dept. of Veteran's Affairs. Member deHaan also asked about the status of their coordination efforts with SunCal. Mr. Hutchison reaffirmed what Mr. Jaynes had said about their intent to maintain dialogue with SunCal. Chair Johnson called the speakers, first Bill Smith, who spoke about various topics, including the Lease Terns and transportation issues. The next speaker, Mark Chandler, Commissioner of the Alameda County Veterans Affairs Commission, spoke in support of the VA's plan to develop the outpatient clinic at Alameda Point. He discussed the status quo of Veterans having to travel to Martinez, Travis AFB, and Mare Island for healthcare. Another speaker, Leora Feeney, Boardmember of the Golden Gate Audubon Society and Friends of the Alameda Wildlife ~FAWR}, stated her appreciation for the cordiality given by the VA regarding their proposal. She stated that all of them support Veterans in a huge way, and also support wildlife and open space and opportunities for our children to experience nature. Ms. Feeney discussed her concerns on specific issues of the VA presentation, mainly the "circle" concept X1900 feet distance from the nearest hangar}, She's concerned that any development that places a barrier between the Lease Tern colony and the water would present a problem, as the Lease Terns do not fly over buildings. They would not be able to get to the water to forage. Ms. Feeney's other strong objection is the VA's unwillingness to accept the water around the refuge, together with the land, including the island breakwater where the brown pelicans roost, If the VA accepts the land and develops that northern portion of it, it seems reasonable, but there is a need to protect the foraging waters of the Lease Terns and the island breakwater for those endangered species. She emphasized the need for accountability to protect these things, and stated that if the USF&W does not have it, nor the VA, she's concerned about who will accept the responsibility. Chair Johnson asked the VA what their intention is with regard to Ms. Feeney's concerns about the water. Mr. Hutchison stated that it is envisioned that the water area would go to the master developer, SunCal, and that the VA has never coveted that water. Deputy Executive Director, David Brandt, corrected Mr. Hutchison's statement by explaining that the area is Tidelands property, so it would be the ARRA or the City that would hold title to the property, and not SunCal. The next speaker was Eli Saddler, Conservation Director for the Golden Gate Audubon Society. He discussed further the concerns of Ms. Feeney, and agreed that they support the VA. He would like them to go forward with their development plans, but just not at the Alameda Point site. Gne of their primary cancerns is that the VA's plan contradicts the existing biological opinion that was developed when USF&W originally requested the property as a refuge. There was a minimum acreage required for the California Lease Tern which was the entire area sectioned off, not including the northern-most portion, which was going to the City and was to be developed as a buffer zone. The VA's plans would be inside the buffer zone of the area that has already been designated as the critical habitat for the species. They do not think that it is biologically defensible to draw a circle of 1900 feet around the colony, it is unrealistic to think that the birds will obey and stay in that circle: They use the whole area, including areas where the VA has already planned to put their hospital. Mr. Saddler also further discussed his concern about the water area, which was also included in the original biological opinion, which stated that the area to the south was needed for foraging for both species. He emphasized their concern about whether the VA's plan was biologically feasible without very serious mitigation that would have to be done ahead of any construction, mitigation meaning having an alternative site for the Lease Terns to go to, and there was no discussion of this mitigation. 1t is their understanding that the USF&W would have some kind of requirement that would include mitigation. The problem is, however, that there really is no other location for the Lease Terns to go. The VA plans could potentially jeopardize Alameda's very significant Lease Tern colony. Mr. Saddler also discussed his concerns about the VA's NEPA process and whether it is legally defensible. The transfer of the parcel is for a purpose, and if there is a new biological opinion that contradicts apre-existing one, this places the VA's development plans on shaky ground, legally. Chair Johnson thanked all the speakers and Mr. Hutchison for coming in from Washington, DC to make the VA's presentation. Member deHaan asked whether the VA looked at other opportunities at Alameda Point. Mr. Hutchison clarified that their discussions have been with the Navy, and that the Navy came to them, unable to agree to terms with the USF&W and was going to dispose of the property, and asked whether the VA had an interest in taking it over. Their relationship to the parcel is a direct result of the Navy soliciting their interest. Mr. Jaynes added that the VA had looked at the older Coast Guard Housing property, but felt that it wasn't large enough to satisfy the VA's needs for a medical clinic as well as a columbarium. Member Matarrese expressed his appreciation for the presentation as it quelled various rumors about the VA's interest in the property. It's good for the ARRA and for the public to hear a presentation live from officials of the VA. Member Matarrese asked if they would take back with them a couple considerations: 1}that he does not share their optimism regarding the Navy's commitment to do clean-up, He asked that they have the same demands as the ARRA does regarding clean-up, and to accept the land clean, especially if it would be the final resting place for our Veterans, and 2} explore to the maximum the opportunity to work with the Alameda Healthcare District. A competing private hospital would be to the detriment of the hospital that Alameda taxpayers support. Member deHaan requested that the Alameda Healthcare District make a presentation to the ARRA regarding their interest in the VA project. Chair Johnson stated that they will invite the Alameda Healthcare District to make a presentation to the ARRA when they are ready to do so. 3-B. Update on the Former Coast Guard Housing Property. Debbie Potter gave an update on the North Housing parcel, specifically on the temporary license agreementllease for estuary park, the exploration of a possible short-term leasing program, and the screening process underway for the homeless accommodation and public benefit conveyance. Staff has been working with the Navy on the short-term lease for estuary park, some sticking points involve environmental remediation, but a short term lease agreement is planned to be brought back to the ARRA in January '48. Staff determined that it was not feasible to have a short-term leasing program for the surplus units. Regarding the screening process, on Nov, 5, the Navy published their notice of surplus property in the Federal register, which triggered the ARRA's obligation to notify the public that the property is available for screening and we are currently in the middle of the process. There is a public information workshop scheduled for tomorrow (Dec. 6} to brief interested parties on the screening process, and to take them on a tour of the property. Notices of Interest (NDI} for both the homeless accommodation and the public benefit conveyance will be due to the City on February 29, 2448. Those notices will be evaluated working with HUD and the Navy, and ultimately we will go through a public process of amending the Community Reuse Plan to reflect the accommodations and public benefit conveyances that may result from this process. 3-C. Alameda Point Project Update--Ural Report. Debbie Potter gave an update on the Alameda Point project. scheduled to take place in November was rescheduled to community meeting is scheduled on December 13th at the public meeting scheduled on January 34, 2448, There was one speaker, Bill Smith. 4, URAL REPORTS A meeting with the Navy originaiiy December 12th. The next SunCal 4' Club at 6:34 p.m, with another 4-A. Ural report from Member Matarrese, Restoration Advisory Board ARAB} representative. Member Matarrese will attend the meeting tomorrow (12/6) and will have a report in January. 5. GRAL CUMMUNICATIUNS, NUN-AGENDA PUBLIC CUMNIENT} There were no speaker slips. 6. CGMMUNICATIaNS FRGM THE GOVERNING BODY none. 7. ADJOURNMENT Meeting was adjourned at 5:49 p.m, by Char Johnson. Respectfully submi~~ed, ~~%Js~,(~ C~ " t Irma Glidden ARRA Secretary Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority Memorandum To: Honorable Chair and Members of the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority From: Debra Kurita, Executive Director Date: January 2, 2005 Re: Authorize the Executive Director to Execute an Agreement with Russell Resources for Environmental Consulting Services for Alameda Point for 12 Months in an Amount Not to Exceed $117,500 BACKGROUND For the past nine years, Russell Resources has provided the environmental consulting services of reviewing, analyzing, and preparing comments on Navy environmental documents for the clean up of the Alameda Naval Air Station Alameda Point) on behalf of the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority ARRA}. 1n addition, Russell Resources attends and represents the ARRA at meetings with State and Federal environmental regulators and the Navy and provides professional expertise to ARRA staff to allow full participation in the cleanup decisions made by the Navy. Most recently, Russell Resources assisted with negotiations with the Navy on the draft conveyance term sheet and supported staff in the Alameda Point Master Developer Request for Qualifications process. Russell Resources' existing contract expired on December 31, 2007. nr~~C'Tt~~T~N rn 2004, a limited Request for Proposals was issued for environmental consulting services at Alameda Point to determine if an additional environmental firm should be retained to augment Russell Resources, or if a new firm should be retained to replace Russell Resources. Three firms were interviewed as part of that process. An evaluation team met with Levine Fricke, Environmental Resources Management 'Vest, and CH2M Hill. Following those interviews and a review of the proposals received, the evaluation team determined that no additional services were necessary and that the ARRA should continue to engage Russell Resources. 7n addition, as part of evaluating environmental services for 2007, staff conducted an informal solicitation from two environmental consulting firms, Erler & Kalinowski and GeoMatrix, to determine if Russell Resources' expertise and cost were comparable to that of other firms. Given Russell Resources' familiarity with Alameda Point, Iong-standing relationships with the Navy personnel and environmental regulators assigned to Alameda Point, and competitive billing rate, the ARRA Board approved an agreement to retain Russell Resources. Under the new agreement, which is on file in the City Clerk's Office, Russell Resources will support the discussions with the Navy related to the conveyance of Alameda Point and will provide technical support to the staff on current and future environmental remediation. In addition, Russell Resources will continue to attend all Base Closure Team and Restoration Advisory Board meetings, attend Honorable Chair and Members of the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority January 2, 2005 Page 2 meetings in furtherance of conveyance between and among ARRA, the Navy, and SunCal Companies, and attend other technical meetings that may be necessary to support conveyance of Alameda Point. Russell Resources will also review, and prepare draft comments on, technical environmental documents published by the Navy, along with reports and work plans, in support of the successful transfer and redevelopment of Alameda Point, BUDGET CGNSIDERATIGNIFIlVANCIAL IMPACT Funds far Alameda Point environmental services are provided as part of the cost recovery provisions included in the Exclusive Negotiation Agreement with SunCal Companies. Approval of this agreement does not impact the City's General. Fund. RECOMN~NDATrON Authorize the Executive Director to execute an agreement with Russell Resources for environmental consulting services for Alameda Point fora 12-month term in an amount not to exceed $117,500. Respectfull su tted, Leslie itt e Development Services Director t ~ ~ ~, ~ By: Debbie Potter Base Reuse and Community Development Manager CGNSULTANT AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT, entered into this 2nd day of ,lanuary 2008, by a~~d between the ALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, a Joint Powers Authority, ~Ilereinafter referred to as "ARRA"}, and Russel] Resources, Inc,, a California corporation, whose add~•ess is 440 Nova Albion way, Suite 1, San Rafael, CA 94903 ~he~~einafter referred to as "Consultant"}, is made with reference to tl~e following; RECITALS: A. ARR.A is a Jai~~t Powers Authority established by the City of Alameda and the Coi~~rnu~~ity Improvement Cainmission under tl~e California Soint Exercise of Powers Act and a public entity lawfully created and existing under the State of Califor~~ia with the power to carry a~~ its business as it is raw being conducted. B, Consultant is specially trained, experienced and competent to perform tl~e special services which will be req~iired by this Agreement; and. C. Consultant possesses tl~e skill, experience, ability, backgro~~nd, certificatio~~ and knowledge to provide the se~•vices described in this Agreement on the terms a~~d condiitions described herein, D, ARRA anti Consultant desire to enter into an agreement for services upon the terms and conditions herein, NOW, THEREFORE, it is ~~~utually agreed by and between the undersigned parties as follows; 1. TERM: The term of this Agreen~e~~t shall continence on tl~e 2"`~ day of January 2008, and shall. termi~~ate on tl~e 31~` day of December 200$, unless ter~~ninated earlier as set forth herein. 2, SER~~C.ES TG I3E PERFaRMED: Consultant shall perform each and every sezvice set forth in Exhibit "A" which ~s attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, 3. COMPENSATYON TG CGNSULTANT: Consultant shall be compensated for services perfo~•~ned pursuant to this Ag~•eement in the amount not to exceed $117,540,00 as ,set forth in Exhibit "A" which is attached hereto and inco~~parated herein by this reference, 4. TIME IS GF THE ESSENCE: Consultant and ARRA agree that time is a.f the esse~lce regarding the performance of this Agreement, l~rrssc~ll Rcsr~trr~cc~~~, hrc. .Irrrrrrrrr~~ 1008 Prrgc~ 1 of 8 5 , STANDARD ~~ CARE; Consultant agrees to perform all services hereunder in a mal~ner commensurate with the prevailing standards of life professionals in the San Francisco Bay Area and agrees that all services shall be perforilled by qualified and experienced personnel wlao are not employed by tl~e ARRA nor have any contractual relationship with ARRA, ~, INDEPENDENT PARTIES; ARRA and Consultant intend that the relationship between them created by this Ag~•eerne~lt is that of eixlployer-independent contractor, The manner and means of conducting tl~e work are under the control of Consultant, except to the extent they a1•e limited by statute, rule or regulation and the express terms of this Agreement. No civil service status or other right of cnlployn1e11t will be acquired by virtue of Consultant's services, None of the benefits provided by ARRA to its e111ployee5, including but not limited to, ttnelnploy111e11t insurance, wo~•lcers' ca~~~pellsation plans, vacation and siel~ leave are available from ARRA to Consultant, its crnployees or agents, Deductions shall ~1ot be made for any state or federal taxes, rICA payll~ezlts, PERS payments, 01' other pu~•poses 1lortnally associated wltl7 an ey7lployer-e111ployee relatiolasllip fro~~1 any fees due Consultant, Payments of the above 1te1n5, if required, are the responsibility ol`Consultant, 7, ZMMZ~RAT~~N REr~RM AND C~NTRDL ACT~ZRCA,}; _ .,,,~, ~,,...~~ , , ,.~ ,,,,. ,.,_,.~,.,.~.~ _.,...,.,.w Consultant assumes any and alb responsibility far verifying tl7e identity and enlploy~~ent authorization of all af• 1lislher employees performing worm hereunder, pursuant to all applicable IRCA or other federal, or State rules and 1•egulatians, Consultant shall indemnify and hold ARRA ha1•i~lless from and against any loss, damage, liability, costs or expenses arising fron~ any nonco117plia~acc of tllxs provision by Consultant. S, N4N-D~SCR~M~NATY~N: Consistent with ARRA's policy that harassment and discrimination are unacceptable enlpiayerle111ployee conduct, Consultant agrees that l~arassn~ent or discri~~nination directed toward a jab applicant, a ARRA employee, or a citizen by Consultant or Consultant's employee or subcontractor on the basis of race, religious creed, color, national origin, ancestry, handicap, disability, marital status, pregnaa~cy, sex, age, or sexual arielltaiiol~ will 1~ot be tolel•ated. Co~lsultallt agrees that any and all vial.ations of this provision. shall co~~stitute a mate~•ial breach of this Agreement, ~, HELD HARMLESS: Co~~sultallt shall indemnify, defe~ad, and bald ha1•mless ARRA, its Boa~•d, officials, employees, and volunteers {"~ndernnitees"} from and against any a1~d all loss, damages, liability, C1a1171S, suits, costs and cxpel~ses whatsoever, including reasot~ahle attorneys' fees ~"Claims"}, aI'1S1~1g fr 4I11 or 117 any lnanller Connected t0 Consultant's 1leglxgellt act or o1I7,1SS1o11, Wl]etllel' alleged or actual, rcgardillg performance of services or work conducted or performed pursuant to this Agreement, to the extent Consultant's negligent act or olnission, whether alleged or actual, contributes to such claims. If Claims are f led agai~~st Inden~nitees which allege 1~egligcllce on behalf of the Consultant, Consl~ltant shall have no right of reimbursement against Indenlnitees firr,~~sel1 l~esoru~ceti~, lrre, ,Irrrrurrr}~ .2U0~ 1'rrgc~ Z o~8 for tl~e costs of defe~ase even if negligence is not found an the part of Consultant. However, Consultant shall ~aot be obligated to indemnify Indemnitees from Claims arising froze the sale or active negligence or willful misconduct of ~ndemnitees, As to Claims for professional liability only, Consultant's obligation to defend Ir~demnitees has set forth above} is limited to the extent to which its professio~lal liability insurance policy will provide such defense costs, 10. ~NSURANC~: ~n or before tl~e comn~encen~ent of the term of this Agreement, Consultant shall furnisl~ ARRA with certificates showing the type, amount, class of operations covered, effective dates a.1ad dates of expiration of insurance coverage in compliance with paragraphs 10A, B, C, D and E. Such certificates, which do not li~nit Consultant's indemnificatio3l, shall also contain substantially the followi~ag statement; "Should ally of the above insurance covered by this certificate be canceled or coverage reduced before the expiration date thereof, the insurer affording coverage shall provide thirty X30} days' advance written. notice to tl1.e ARRA by certified mail, Attention: Risic Manager," It is agreed that Consultant shall rz~aintain in farce at all tinges during the performance of this Agreement all appropriate coverage of incur a~7ce required by this Agreement with an insurance company that is acceptable to ARRA and licensed to do insura~~ce business in tl~e State of California. Endorsements naming tlae ARRA as additionll i~~sured shall be submitted with tl~e insurance certificates. A. CgV~RAGE: Consultant shall maintain the following insurance coverage; ~ 1 } worl~ers' Com ensatiox~: Statutory coverage as required by tl~e State of California. ~2} LiabiIit ; Cornn~ercial general liability coverage in the following minimum li~~~its; Bodily Injury; $500,000 each occurrence $1,000,004 aggregate -all other Property Damage. $'100,000 each occurrence $250,000 aggregate Xf submitted, combi~~ed single limit policy with aggregate limits in the aznaunts of $1,000,D00 will be considered equivalent to the required minin~um limits shown above. (3} Automotive: Co~np~•eiaensive automotive liability coverage in the following lninimun~ limits; Bodily Inju~•y: $500,000 each occurrence Property Damage; $ ~ 00,000 each occurrence or Combined Single Limit; $500,000 each occurrence ~4} Professional Liabilit ; Professional liability insurance wl~ich in.cludcs coverage for the professional acts, errors and omissions of Consultant in tl~e an~otE7~t of at least $1,000,000. Rrrssc~l! Res~oirrrc~s, I~rc~. .lru~rrru}f 20f~~'! !'ngc' .~ of ~' B. SUBROGATION WAIVER; Consultant agrees that in the event of loss due to any of the perils for which helshe has agreed to provide comprehensive general and automotive liability insurance, Consulta~~t shall look solely to hislher insurance far recovery, Consultant hereby grants to ARRA, on behalf of any insurer providing comprehensive general and automotive liability insurance to either Consultant or ARRA with respect to the services of Consultant herein, a waiver of a~~y right to subrogation wl~rcla any such insurer of said Consultant may acquire against ARRA by virtue of the payment of any loss u~~der such insurance. C. FAILURE TD SECURE: If Co~asultant at any tune during the term hereof should fail to secure or ~~naintai~~ the foregoing insurance, ARRA shall be permitted to obtain such insurance in the Consultant's name or as an agent of the Cons~iltant and shall be compensated by the Consultant for the costs of the insura~ace preu~iums at the maximum rate permitted by law and computed from the date written notice is received that the premiums have not been paid, D. ADDITIONAL INSURED: ARRA, its Board, officials, employees and volunteers shall be named as an additio~lal insured under all insurance coverages, except any professional liability insurance, re aired b a y tla~s Agreei~lent, The naming of an additional insured shall not affect any recove~•y to which suC~1 additional insured would be entitled under this policy if not aaan~ed as such additional. ins~~red. An additional insured ~~amed herein shall not be held liable for any premium, deductible onion p of any loss, or expense of a~ay Mature an this policy or any extension thereof, Axay other insurance held by an additional insured shall not be required to contribute anything toward any loss or expense covered by the insurance provided by this policy. E. SUFFZCZENCY DF INSURANCE: The i~lsurance limits required by ARRA are not represented as being su.f~ci.elat to protect Consultant. Consultant is advised to confer with Co~~sultant's insu~•ance broker to determil~e adequate coverage for Consulta.~at, 1 ] . CDNFLYCT DF INTEREST: Consultant warrants that it is not a conflict of interest for Consultant to erform the p services required by this Agreement. Consultant maybe required to fill out a conflict of ii~.terest form if the services provided under this Agreement ~•equire Consultant to n~alce certain governmental decisio~as or serve i~~ a staff capacity as defined in Title 2, Division G, Section 18700 of the Califorl~ia Code of Regulations, 1.2. FRDHXBITZDN AGAINST TRANSFERS; Consultant shall not assign, sublease, hypothecate, or ta•ans fer this A reerne~~t or a~~ ,~ ~ y interest therein, directly o~• ~nd~rectly, by operation of law or otherwise, without prioz• written consent of ARRA. Any attempt to do so without said consent shall be null and void, and any assignee, sublessee, hypothecate o~• transferee shall acquire no right or interest by ~•eason of such attempted assignment, hypothecation or transfer, ~Xowever, claims far money ley Consultant from ARRA under this Ag~•ee~nent ~1~ay be assigned to a banl~, trust company or other financial institution without prior written consent. VU'rittcn notice of such assig~~~nent shall be ram tl p PY furnished to ARRA by Consultant, 1~rr,ti.s~r~111~esarrr~ce.5, lire. Jrrrrrrrrr~, ?~08 !'rrgc~ ~ oj~ The sale, assignme~at, transfer or other disposition of any of the issued and outstanding capital stock of Consultant, o~• of the interest of any general partner ar.joint venturex• or syndicate alaernber or cotenant, if Co~lsulta~~t is a partnership or ~oin.t venture or syndicate or cotenancy, which shall result in changing the control of Consultant, shall be construed as an assignment of thYS Agreement. Cozatrol means fifty percent ~5a%} ar more of the voting power of the corporation. ] 3. SUBCQNTRACTaR AP~R.QVA,L; Unless prior written consent from ARRA is obtained, only those eo le and P p subcontractors whose names and resui~nes are attached to this Agreement shall be used in the pe~•fornlance of this Agreement. lay tl~e event that Consultant employs subcontractors, suc11 subcontractors shall be regt~i~•ed to f~~i•~Zish proof of workers' con~pet~sation insurance and shall also be required to carry ge~~eral, autarnabile and professional liability insurance in reasonable conformit to the Y insu~~a~~ce ca~-r~ed by Consultant. rn add~t~on, any work or services subcontracted hereunder shall be subject to each provision of this Agreement. 14. PERN[~TS AND LICENSES, Consultant, at hislher sole expense, shall obtain and znaintain dua•i~1g tl~e terns of this Agreement, all appropriate permits, certificates and lice~~ses including, but not lin7ited ta, a City Business .L~cense, that nay be requlrcd in connection with the perfa~•i~~ance of services hereunder, 15. REPORTS; each a~1d every report, d~•aft, work product, map, record and other document reproduced, prepared or caused to be prepared by Consultant pursuant to or in connection with this Agreement shall be the exclusive property of ARRA. No report, inforj~~ation nor other data given to ar prepared or assembled by Consultant pursuant to tl~~s Agreel~aent shall he made available to any individual or organization by Consultant without prier approval by ARRA. Consultant shall, at silch tiane and ill such farm as ARRA may require, filrnish repoz•ts concerning the status of services required undex- this Agreement. 1Ci. RECQRDS: Consultant shall maintain complete and accurate records with ~•es ect to sales costs p s expenses, receipts a~1d other such izaformation required by ARRA that relate to the perfoi-naaaace of services under thas Agreement. Consultant shall ~a~aintain adequate records of services provided in sufficient detail to permit an evaluation of services. All such records shall be maintained in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles aloes shall be clearly identified anal readily accessible. Consultant shall provide free access to such books and records to the representatives of ARRA or its designees at all proper tunes, a~1d gives ARRA the right to examine and audit sa~aae, and to make transcripts tl~erefrona as zaecessary, and to allow inspectioxa of all work, data, documents, proceedings and activities related to tl7.is Agreement, Such records, together with suppo~•ting Itrrstic~l! Rc~,ti~nrrr•cr~s, ljzr., .Ir1~~rr~u}- ~(1fJ~4 1'a,~rc~ S of,s dacuinents, shall be Dept separate from other documents and records and shall be maintained for a period of three ~3}years after receipt of final payment. If supplemental examillatio7l or audit of the records is necessary due to concerns raised by A.RRA's preliir~inary examination ar audit of records, and t11e ARRA's supplemental exal~lixlation or audit of tlxe records discloses a failure to adhere to appropriate internal financial controls, or othe~• breach of contract or failure to act in good faith, then Consultant shall reimburse ARRA for all reasonable casts and e~pe~lses associated with the supplemental examination or audit. 17. NaTZCES; All a~oti.ces, demands, requests or approvals to be given under this Ag~•eement shall be given zn writing and canclusrvely shall be deemed served when delivered personally or on tl~e second bus~2~ess day after the deposit thereof in the United states Mail, postage prepaid, registered or certified, add~•essed as hereinafter provided, All notices, demands, requests, addressed to ARRA at; Developnle~lt Services Departnle~lt 950 W. Mall Square, 2"~ Floor Alameda CA 945Q1 Attention; Debbie Potter o~• approvals from Coalsulta7lt to Al<~RA shall be All ~lotices, demands, requests, ar approvals from ARRA to Consultant shall be addressed to Consultant at; Russell Resources, Znc. 440 Nova Albio~l Way, Suite 1 Sai~ Rafael, CA 949U3 Attelltldn: Peter Russell 1$. TERMINAT~~N: Zn the event Ca~lsulta~~t fails or refuses to perform any of the provisions hereof at the time and an the n~anixer reciulred 1lereundez-, Consultant shall be deemed in default in the perfor~~nance of this Agree~~lent. zf. such default is not cured within a period of two ~2} days after receipt b y Callsultaxlt from ARRA of w~-itten ~~otice of default, specifying t11e natu~•e of such default and the steps necessary to c~~re suc11 default, ARRA nay terminate the Agreement forthwith by giving to the Consulta~at written notice thereof, ARRA si~all have the option, at its sole discretion and without cause, of terminating this Agreement by giving seven ~7} days' prior written notice to Consultant as provided herein, Upon ter~nination of this Agreement, each party 'shall pay to the other party that portion of can~pensation specif ed in ibis Agreement that is earned and unpaid p~•ior to the effective d~~te ol` tern1l11at10~1. I9. CQII7PL~ANCES; Consultant shall comply with all state or federal laws and all ordinances, rules a~ad regulations e~lacted or issued by ARRA. l2irti•,~e11 Rc~sotrr•ces, lrrc~. .Ir,l~~rrn;~~ 111~1~ ~,rr~~r, ~ nl•~, 2a, CONFLICT OF LAw: , This Agreelnelat shall be interpreted under, and enforced by the laws of the State of California excepting a~ay choice of law r~~les which may direct the application of laws of another jurisdiction. T11e Agreement and obligations of the parties are subject to all valid laws, orders, rules, and regulations of tlae authorities having jurisdiction over this Agreement for the successors of those authorities.} Any suits brought pursuant to this Agreement shall be filed with the courts of the Cotirnty of Alameda, State of California. 21. ADVERTZ~EMENT: Co~~s~lltant shall not post, exhibit, display ar allow to be posted, exhibited, dis la ed an pY y signs, advertising, show bills, lithogl•aphs, posters or cards of a~~y kind pertaining to the sclvices perfol~ned under this Agreement unless priol• written approval llas been secured froze ARRA to do otherwise. 22. 'WAIVER: A waiver by ARRA o1` any breach of any ter111, covelaant, ar condition contained herein shall loot be deelrled to be a waiver of any s~ibsequent breach of the sa~r~e or any other tern, covenant, or condition contained 1lereill, wlletlle~• of the sane or a different character. 23, INTEGnATED CONTRACT: This Agreement 1•cpresents tlae full and, complete uilderstanding of every kind or 1lature whatsoever between tl~e parties hereto, and all preliminary negotiations and agreements of wllatsocvcr kind ol• nature are merged herein. No verbal agreel~nel~t or it~lplied covel~ant shall be held to vary t11e provisions hereof. A11y 111adificatiorl of this Agreement will be effective only by written execution signed by both ARRA and Consultant, 24. INSERTED PROVISxONS: Each provision a~1d clause required by law to be inserted into the Agreement shall be deemed to be enacted herein, and the Agreel~nent shall be read and e~~farced as though eaclz were ~ncltlded 1lereln. If through 1111stake or otherwise, any such provision is not inserted or is not correctly 111serted, the Agreen~erlt shall be amended to nzal~e such insertion on application by either party. 25, CAPTIONS: The captions i11 this Agreea~lent are for convenience only, are not a part of the Agreelncllt and in no way affect, limit or amplify the tel'111s or provisions of this Agreement, l~rrsxel! Rr?sorrrrc~s, lrrc. Jrrrrrnrr~l ZU(1~ 1'n~~~ 7 or'b' IN WITNESS wHERE~F, the parties have caused the Agreement to be executed on the cl~~y end year 1"irst avove w~•itte~.~, Russel] Resources, Inc, Title: ,f/~~l~~~~~ ~~~ Rirssc~!! 1~c~svirl~cc~,s, l~tc. Jrrirr~r~t}~ 20f)S Alameda Reuse & Redevelopment Authority Debra ~urita Executive Director RECQMMENDED FAR APPR~~IAL: ~~1, . ~r ~~ ~~ Leslie A. Little Development Services Director .... Deb ie Pottier, Manager Base Reuse & Community Development APPRQVED AS TQ F4RM: Te~•esa Highsmith City Attorney ~II~~iN ~S' Uf ~ Exhibit A 2008 Scope of Worlc for Russell Resources, Inc. Task I:Attend Regularly Scheduled BRAC. Meetin s; Base Closure Team BCT}, Remedial Advisory Board ARAB}, and Proposed Plan Public Meetings ~preparatian, meeting attendance, and documentation of meeting},Estimate 11 BCT meetings,ll RAB meetings, and 4 Proposed Plan public meetings, Budget: 28 5D0 assumes average cost is $1,GOD per BCT meeting, and $900 for each RAB meeting and Proposed Plan public meeting} Task 2: Attend Meetin s in Furtherance of Conve anc~ between and among ARRA, Navy, and Master Developer to Be Selected. Estimate 12 meetings. Budget: 10 800 (assumes average cost is $900 per meeting) Task 3: At~end_Meetings with Environmental Regulators and Technical Supplemental Meetings preparation, meeting attendance, and documentation of meeting}, Estimate 15 meetings. Budget; ~ 1b 500 assumes average cost is $1,10D per meeting} Task 4: Review of Technical Dacurnents, Including Reports, worlcplans, and Environmental Regulators' Comments on Same, and Preparation of Draft ARRA Comments on Selected of These Documents. Estimate 47 documents. Budget: 38 700 assumes 30 documents perused at $200 each, l2 documents reviewed at $1,600 each, and 5 documents reviewed and commented upon at $2,700 eacl~} Task 5: Additional Consultation fat the request of ARRA} and Contingency. Tl~e ARRA must preautllorize these tasks. B~~dget: ~ 1Z 000 approximately 1D°/~ of the budget for Tasks 1-4} Task b: Pro'ect Mana ernent Including Email, Pl~one, atlier Correspondence, Cost Accounting, Invoicing, Coordination, etc. Budget: 8 400 (assume $700 per month) Total 2408 Budget: # N 7 5aa Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority Interoffice Memorandum To: Honorable Chair and Members of the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority From: Debra Kurita, Executive Director Date: January 2, 2008 2-C Re: Approve Sublease for American Bus Repair, LLC at Alameda Point BACKGROUND In accordance with a policy established in 20x4, the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority ~ARRA~ governing body reviews and approves all new and existing Alameda Point subleases with a term greater than one year. Routine subleases and renewals are presented as Consent Calendar items. New, longer term, and more complex leases are presented on the Regular agenda as needed. nT.s~~ r.~~~rr~N Attachment A describes the business terms for the proposed sublease for American Bus Repair, LLC, dlbla Coach Specialties for a portion of Building 24. The rent far this proposed lease is $68,550 annually, or $0.38 per sq. ft. in the first year, with a three percent increase each year in the subsequent years for industrial vehicle sales and leasing, painting and finishing, and repairs and storage. Building 24 is in fair condition. In accordance with the Exclusive Negotiating Agreement, this lease has been discussed with representatives from SunCal Companies and has their concurrence. BUDGET CONSIDERATION 1 FINANCIAL IMPACT The lease is expected to raise $68,580.00 in the first year. These funds will be retained by the ARRA. RECOMMENDATION Approve the proposed sublease agreement. Honorable Chair and Members of the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority January 2, 2007 Page 2 Re~spec~fully submitted, ^ W--,.~ `~ f ~ ~ ~ /CC ` } 1 ~ , f '~ ~~i /l;11~~ f~ .. ~~Les~ie Little -- Development Services Director By: anette B Finance & Administration Manager Attachment: A. Proposed Sublease Business Terms B. Site Map ATTACHMENT A PROPOSED SUBLEASE BUSINESS TERMS TENANT BUILDING SIZE ~SF~ TERM RENT American Bus Repair, 24 14,997 5 yrs $5,7 ~ 51mo. LLC, dlbla Coach S ecialties G:1CorndevlBase Reuse& RedevplARRA1STAFFREP1200812-C American Bus Repair LLC.doc ..F.r ~,~~ ~~-~~,~y N4. fi ~; ....~~ ~;: j °r ~ ., ~~ i { i i ~t i ro t 1 MATCH LANE SEE PWC DWG # 1D8,fi9D ATTACHMENT 2 „__~~. ~ WILDLIFE REFU E BDUNDARY 1....~.. TAXIWAY N4 4 a N ~~ H r..~._..~._M~~~~._~.._.___...~,:~....__~~..._...,~ ~~._~......_..... ~ r° l~ r ~ ~~ ' Q m ~ ~ '~ N ~.___..~.J ~ '~ w ~, ~ .~ ~ I~ l~ ~~ ~I-'~~ ~~'~ ~~I~ _ _ ~~~ ~ ~V~.. _...~.,....~,.,,, _~ ~,~ .r„,„, .~..,.~.. i fi99^ ~ i ~ ~ N ~~~.~, ( ~ ~N ro ~. Y r r n 4D5 ~ N ~....~.._~.... 30 7 ~ 0 5B0 H~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i ~ 5DD ~ w ~,~........~...~,...,...!?.y~ M~._.~,.~LE'X~~G7 Q .... '~ m N 1f i ^ 1 ~ ~ i i f~ ~~ ~~. r~.~S~ ~TI ~`` ~ 1 m 0 o c ~~' ro ~ .~_-~ ~ ~~~.... ~ ~~ ,o~ o ~~~ ~~~~ ~ ~~w ~v~.~,._.. ~..... i N ~........~M.~...~~. ~' ~~ ~~ - w I I ~~ i i ~ m ~ M GA 0 r m ~._ ~,. ~.~~ ~; LL~~ ~,.._._ ~ o ~ ' Q ~ ~~~~ ~ - ~~ ,; ~ m ~ ~~ N ~.. r-~ .~ ~ i m Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority ~ _ e Interoffice Memorandum 1 ~ To: Honorable Chair and Members of the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority From: Debra Kurita, Executive Director Date: January 2, 2008 Re: Alameda Point Update -- Presentation of Quarterly Update of Project Master Schedule Prepared by SCC Alameda Point LLC BACKGROUND On May S, 2007, the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority (ARRA} selected SunCal as its Master Developer for Alameda Point and established a 60-day due diligence and Exclusive Negotiation Agreement ENA} negotiation period. The due diligence period was completed, and the ENA between SunCal and the ARRA, Community improvement Commission ~CIC}, and City Council was approved on July 18, 2007. At the September 4, 2007 ARRA meeting, SunCal presented the Project Master Schedule, as required by the ENA. The ENA also requires that SunCal update the Project Master Schedule quarterly. The Project Master Schedule contains major project milestones, lists required actions to achieve each milestone, provides the start and end dates for the actions, and charts the duration of each task. Since presenting the Project Master Schedule in September 2007, SunCal has continued meeting with ARRA staff on a weekly basis. in addition, SunCal has accomplished the following project activities: ^ Held two community meetings: ~ 1 } an October 24, 2007, meeting that introduced SunCal and its consultant team and presented preliminary findings from a technical constraints analysis; and ~2} a December 13, 2007 meeting that presented two broadly defined development concepts for the site; ^ Began planning for a third community meeting on January 30, 2008, to present more refined development alternatives based on community feedback from the December 13th meeting; ^ Met with the Navy on December 12, 2007, to begin discussions regarding the broad development concepts being explored by SunCal for Alameda Point; and ^ Continued meeting with local, regional, State, and Federal stakeholders; The attached quarterly update of the Project Master Schedule identifies the tasks necessary to complete the Mandatory and Non-Mandatory Milestones outlined in the ENA. Honorable Chair and Members of the January 2, 2008 Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority Page 2 nr~c~T r~~~~rnN The initial Project Master Schedule presented to the ARRA in September 2007 was predicated on the assumption that SunCal would commit to implementing the Alameda Point Preliminary Development Concept ~PDC}, which served as the basis for the Final Draft Conveyance Term Sheet with the Navy, Since the initial Project Master Schedule was presented to the ARRA, SunCal has conducted significant due diligence and determined that the PDC is not financially feasible. As a result, SunCal is pursuing new and distinct development concepts for the site, and the timing of certain project activities in the Project Master Schedule has changed. The quarterly update reflects the following changes to the Project Master Schedule: ^ A "Continuing Constraints AnalysislPlanning" task was added to the schedule to reflect SunCal's decision to dedicate additional resources towards developing a new, feasible development concept for Alameda Point. This task is expected to be ongoing over the next 1 S months. ^ A "City Technical Peer Review" task was added to complement SunCal's constraints analysis and planning activities. This task is also expected to be ongoing over the next 18 months. ^ The Final Draft Conveyance Term Sheet with the Navy may need to be revised depending on SunCal's ultimate development concept and, as a result, the initial January 2008 date for agreeing on the Term Sheet has been postponed. It is expected that this task will be finalized in June 200$. ^ The draft Tidelands Trust Exchange Agreement with California State Lands Commission ~CSLC} may need to be revised depending on SunCal's final development concept. As a result, the initial Gctober 2007 timeline for submission of the Agreement to CSLC was changed. It is expected that the draft agreement will be submitted in May 2008 and approved in Spring 2009, ^ Re-initiation of the Section 7 consultation with the United States Fish and Wildlife Service ~USFWS} needs to be postponed until SunCal finalizes its development concept. As a result, the initial January 2008 timeframe for re-initiating this process with USFWS was changed. It is expected that this task will begin in May 2405, The Master Project Schedule will continue to be updated quarterly, and updates will be presented to the ARRA Board regularly. BUDGET CGNSIDERATI4N 1 FINANCIAL IMPACT There is no financial impact on the General Fund, CIC, or ARRA budgets. The cost recovery provision in the ENA provides that SunCal pays for ARRA staff casts and consultant expenses. Honorable Chair and Members of the January 2, 2008 Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority Page 3 REC~MMENDATI~N ' This report is for information only. No action is required. ,~Resc~fully sub~riitted, f ~ ~ ~ ~ .ff~ ~ ~~ ~r,: 1 •! ~. ~ ~ r ,. ,~ Leslie Little ~~ Development Services Director ~~~ L r By: ebbie Potter Base Reuse and Community Development Manager Attachment: t. Quarterly Update to Alameda Point Project Master Schedule G:IComdevlBase Reuse& RedevplARRA1STAFFREP1200813-A SunCal Update.doc \~ rn 0 0 N li;l~'I lo, ' ~' ICI' ' ~~ I! ~ ~~I~ I .I,.!. w '''~ C i, •,.,. i'I, ~I.,, i r~,. I r' ~ r I!,' '', ~'I,. O .~ /~ V W ~ vv ANN ~ N ~ ~ ~ Q ~ C ~ v~ ~ ~~ C ~a C Q N ro 'cEo ro a' a=•`~ o{~j0 ~~~ era '~A o Mm VIZ W ~ rD7 Il ~, ll,il ~~,a I ~1I111 ,~G_iil_, li r- '' 'I'I,•II ;~,!lil ,,I: 'IIIV ,'6V''~,'I d'I'°' !''I^ ~'I:;r, ~i+ bl• 'll'!''I ~ i ,i~ q !. Ililr~, ':ljli '~'I~i I'!'Ij ,::I `i I'I:~ Fl~.,,i ii, l ro l~1 ~ I!: i.'.. '~l: '•!'PI, i I:i ~-'~j ' r ^ II'' 1':•i! ':a li, ! ~ ,!i,~~ r~ :I I I I! N " -i .. ~ I .............. .. .......... ... ............. ............. ... s.. _. .....;;I;r -...._._ I,illl', ....I,'~~; I~.,I; ::44i II I.i '; i II ~~;I I'I U i ~, i~ I:, II~~' ,~,I it i ',,', ,,r,~.,,,,.__.,,,~ .~. _,.,~.rl~',lilx, li~~Jrr i~ri ,'~~i!'Frr rViin .. ....... ......... ,, ~ ^ ;,III.. ~i~!III: lil'i~,l'~ Ily,I~ i~i.~ ~r i'lll ~'i~ll''~i~ ili,b i ~,i'~, i it ~ 'plti i I. ,'I I:. __', I,~:,r_ . I. .r ,. l,~i II ; ~~II,, ~,~I ,~I~~u'I r I I rr~ ,f'{ :!II' !~hillil !Il~~r :il i i. i Q l~l i,i.'~,, I I_o-l li],~li!I ;.l i~ ~!.I~I I'~~' .Fr i_ r!~,i~~i` ~,i~ :~~~ l ,i. r. I, it i ~ ! al +.. U i~ l ~i.•ii' i','! ;',Iii ~ ; . ire ~, '! it II I'II• ~I:. .r',. ~' Q ' ?• II' I.. , ~'!I,~ ~~~ ~'i; r;~l"II ;I I~,.' ~!yl~ ~j.`r•' I "~ ~r'i'il; .~~~!~! ~'~Il~j~l II,, ~ 1i'~~I•• '.i ll~r~ ,';I rl, I!,;`, I . I ': j~l •~~,I,~I:.'~ N ' ~'i'~I ~~I'4'' I.' ~ !I,~,! I,' i,' I~ ICI,, ,~',• ~~ i.'• il'I'I;I i~.~l; II. li'~ ~: ',I i~l,:l 'I: .,I. 'ii,1. i.;' !!' I iii rri.f' ~ ..'' iV•~ d•I'~~ 'illli I:I',Ir ~ I ,,i;',' '~ I;' I; ,' '., . , Il,~fl; Ii + ~ .I ,, I ~ ' I.'': '°~' : . . ~'~ ~;~,: l~rl ,f'I I ~' ,Ili ~''II~ '~,.., I~ I~','!r~ I;. 7 Of r• M h h h h CQ h 00 h ao ao m QO 01 co co 01 CI QI t~ a oG a ro fG ao ~ a 00 00 m au aD co o a o a o 0 0 0 0 o a o 0 0 o v o o a o:o 0 0 0 0 0 0 o O:o a o 0 0 0 0 CO ~ 0~ r M ~t ~ O : M O N [~ ~r a3 M r QO r r cy r 1r? ~ lfl ~[! ~ : ~ : u7 ~ en u7 61 ~ r N r~ N M~~~ :N M •r M r~ r~ r r~ N N r Ly Y r r r r 'r 'r r r r r P r H h h m~ a0 C Ql 1l1 '; O r, a r M~ In 7 M G] 7 f~ f+ r h N~ N~ N ': N N~~ N M 4? ~ '4 a 7 'a 'C D 7 ~ ', ~ ~ ~ ~ 'O t 7 C L m y O7 ~ '[ 'C 'C 'C .C 'C 'C 'C 'C .7 ~ 'C LL 3 3 ~ 3 " ~ ~ 3 1 ~ 3 ~ 3 3 3 3 " ~ g ~' H H ~ E'- u. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ h h h h h h h 1~ =f~ h :h QO M f0 O w h O 09 h h h h 1+ h h h h :h h h h h LU W O O O O O O O O Q O O .O O O O O p O 0 0 0 0 0 p Q p 0 0 0 :Q O O O O O O o Op M DJ Cl O r ~ O :00 N :ln M r Cri M GO D ~ ~ O O G7 M O O O O O CO ~0 00 Op CU p7 C9 M r r r r M~~ t• :r N =N ~ M r~ p r r r r r r r r r r r r 'r r r r r r r r f+ h h h Op .. ~ h• h O .O 7 r M ] h h ('~ ~ h n h ~- h h h h h h f~ h h h [~ ~+f M N 't1 'O 3 7 7 ~ 7 ~ ~ r r L 7 7 t ~ 'O 'C G) 1! ~ U r ~ ~ a i7 W ' ~ 'O ~ ~ T] C 7 7 m N t L L F- m N 7; 7 ~ L L~~~ LL 7 m m d ~ y~ 41 ~ d1 • N ~~ G) ~ ~ Z L 33~~~ 33~;H ~~ 33 ~333~3333333333~~~ y A y y Vi N ]+ y rn N• y N N N N y +n y N y y ~ N y y N y y~ N N N y N N N p v p tC m ro~ p °ro o ro ro m ro ro Q ro ro .ro o p ro ro o ro ro ro ro :ro ro ro ro ro ro o ro o E r E~~~ r a n E -o ~~ a~ ~ a v ~v E b ro ro~~~ ~~: v v~ a~ v E v N N M O D LO N r N O r o Op h C7 t,+'? M M. M M M M M r O ~ C7 t0 ~ h Ql ~' u7 N~ N~ !'~} ~ In In IA 1(? r r r r r r r: r r r r r fr} r M ~ t17 r O N O N r r a ,a r [D ^ N N N N N N N N N ~y O N ~ M ~ N N I ~ ,N ~ m . C •C C ro a m y °" G ~ N a ~ ~ C c 0 Q ~ ~ c C m ~ y h ~ c ~ w ~ m c c ~ 0 ~ N d d ~ ^ ~ w l.~. ~ a N ~ L ~ c d ro ~ a~ E E ~ C .~+ 41 ~ h ~ 'S ~. 'rn U~~ m y ~ c ~ ~ ~ y ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ iO G1 ~ ~ V ~ ~ ~ L ~ D! ~ _ ~ .r C N '~ 't V C ~ o*'~ a`.~,~~, ~ ~.~ as *+ '~a.~ ~ E ~t~~ ~ `° ~ ~ ~ ^ ~ ~ a~ ~ GI: ~ ~ m ~, U ~ ~ :' a ° ro ~° ~~ ~~ a~ W ` o c ~ ~ ~ N uai a E c .N 'm v ~ a m~ ~ c is E .c 7 ro ~ '~ E a a ._ (~ D y w 3 Q C V ,~ m ~ ~ ~ ~. L o~~ y a~ : m ~ o U~ ,E E .~ m~ v o ~ n ~~ o ~ w ~° a o ~n o~ U~ m a d~ F- Q U~ I~ o L w m~ d aw • ~ a~~~~ ~ ~ 4 v~ ^ U i~ cn ~ n ~ ~ ~ ~~~~ ~ 5 a ^ 4 0 l6 a ^ i~ ~~:ro ~ a Y~w~ a ~ a N ~ ~a ^ r N M ~ u~ fD h ao O O Y r C' N r M r v r N r O h ao 01 r r r r O N r nl cy n ca nl ~ nl us nl cD nl h nl ao rn nl nl O M r M N ch ~ to (D m rn ro a \~ 1y it I;II ~- 1,1:1,11 1111.. ~ 11 o ro I J~'I I,~',III{ N ~ ;~ ;,{, ^' ..._.~...~...~.~..._~.~......~..~...~.~..~~..~.......~.~...~.~.~.~.~...~.~.~~.~.~. _...~ IIII ~.~..~.~..~.~.....~.~.~..~..~.....~.~....~.~... ......~...... .. ......... ...... ...... ...... ....._. .. ... ~.~....~.......~..~.~....._~.~....~.~~.~.~~..~.. ..~...... 'I,II'll ~...._~.. _.._.~.._~ ..~~._.._... _.. _...~.~.~~.~.~.~. Y! ~ I 111 I' U 1 ^ ~I'111{ ~IIIIIf III ~ I i1~~1 1111111: I~~11~'E 1 .. ' I'~'',"'' ;111°I :':' '~.:; ,'~l; l; ~I •I' ~,; 111:111 ~ ~ ~ 1 r ,,' 1;1 %; lli~.l'~ ',i'iI,I '4'I :j 111 II 1. ''1 ~';'~ :'I i'i,l ~.' ii'I~ ,.'1 i i •i• I• •'~~'I'~ 11'1111 i ~,1.. ~ Ili' LL :{, I .1, ..11.1 11.1 1! !, ~l~l.ll ~. Ii~I'"' .I' 11'1111{ il~'I.I"I li~li 11 I~'~ 1''~F~ ,1'11, N ~ .... .. ........~- - -. _.. _.._... _..._._..._ ... III{II I~ i'I~ i~i~li ~II I~'I IIII ~~I' ~I~I~I' III'~~ ''~~i' I~IIII U . ~ .~ ~. .~.~~.....~ ~.....~.~...~.. ......~ ~ 1 °11 ~I~i1u ~ III+I,II ~~I 1'~ ~'•I I II~~{'•I Ali, ~ ~•~I d~~u, ^ ~ •'~'li '~~~li fll '1! IIII i~ll•l i~,'~~~ ;:I ~ 111,1,'.;11 •'I. Il, 1,1,1111 'p,~1 i;.', i I ' ~~',, ~,{r'; ,I. ' ''~II'1 j~III111~. :;,ICI ~i'~~1~1~~• }{1 ~,I ;~~~, '~ 11~.i :~i 1 0 1j 1.11 I. I' '~ i'i'1 •I, ;'1.11,1 ~; •;~~ 'I~~i~, ~ I. i I.1'.. lil ~ I i~l y. ';~~; I. i.i~ •i~~~~"I ~ii,1~V~_ !I`i, l1.l•I ~,'~'{~ tiIfI~C 1. '11;11 •.~•', ~ O I' L;.' '~ I'i 1 Il{•i.1 ~ 1 III~r 1: ;'III. V i •1' J I i ~• 'I.~. f~{~• ~I ' ' I{ is ~. '1 ~ S ~ a I,~q j.ll'I `.J: i'I IIII •'I,, I, X11 I ~I~~ .I I.~~1 I+ I I J ,11,1 ~~''11. 11.1;3• ~ j;;~'11, a• I II ~ N N 1'° ~ ~'~'~ '.' 7 ~i~1,'~'I "I~11;. 11i,11~ ~1~i ~,rp•~:II I''j{: .jj'll A` "~i{~,_ Iii' 1~1'I' ,:i~~' '~'~'' ;F''.~~ ~ ~ - ':I'I ~I''~~'~ ~'''~' Ilil .,~IiI 1;'1,1 7 Qgc ~ *~ ~ U~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~,~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a:o•o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0'0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o a . .~ . ~ '~ l(? tf u7 Q1 O f0 In h r h O N r' Q1 01 61 01 01 01 01 O C1 ~ 01 st f7 O QI '00 ~ ~ 117 r r ~ 00 Q N r N r N N N r N r N N N r r r r r• r r r r ~+J r r r N r' r r N~~ [q r N ~~//~~ t 'a ~A h LIJ In U7 h C7 h N ~ cp h P] fh C7 M c'7 (9 (7 C7 1'~1 h if) h 0] 00 r V 1 a ~ LL N~ 0 7 a li o 3 7 0 d~ N N N~ ~a1 m~ m m~ 0 0 y ~Q1 'o • N m ~ y' ~ lC iC ro LL ~ ~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~'~~3~~~~~~~~ ~ncncn a aho ~ ~ cn ao ao ao ao ; ao . rn m O h h h h h h h r r• ao co 0o ao ao ro ~ rn o h h a0 c0 ao 0 0 0 o v a a o a.a a o 0 0 0 0 o a:a a o a o 0 0 o a a:a a a o 0 o v a O fD ID t0 a O 00 r r C] a7 00 ~ 00 ~00 CO Op 00 ~ ~ O lf7 ~ r a '~ fD W 00 (~ r In r N N N N N N r N N r N N r r r r r r r r r r r- N r r N 'N r r r r~~ r ~ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ' ~ . . ~ - . . . . . . ~ ~ N fr+ n ~f ID ~ ~ ~ ~ of ~ If} ~ ~ l~ r r [~ ~ h h f~ h h h h h h h 1+1 C7 t!] h GO C~0 . r fn f73 7 ~ ~ ~ ~ N l~0 ~ 7 ~ 7 7 N q1 N 0.1 QI ' N N N ~ ~ ~ m @ ~ 3 r 3 3 '~ 'O N 7 C N N N Vl A N N N N° ul N N ], ul (q N N N N y !n N N N N y N N Ul ' N VJ N N N N N ]+ A ~ A ro A A A C: A A A m C A 7, ]~ ]~ A 7, A A = 7+ 7+ 7, A A A 7, C 7+ 7, 7+ 7, ro ro a ro~ ro ro ro p ro 'ro ro~ o ro ro ro ro ro ro .ro ro~ ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro p ro m In ro c ~ ~ ro ~, -o a ~ -a ~ ~ r E a ~ ~ v ~ v -a ~ ~ ~ ~ v a ~ a ~ a ~ a ~ 0 ~ 00 ~ tt r r r 1 ~ O :N C7 (Q (D ID ID (0 (0 fD (0 ~ h fD a h r : r h h ~ d1 O ~ ~ r r C7 N L'7 O f'7 . P'} O (D fD N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ M ID In (*1 Q1 Q1 ' ~ QI In (D r r a r 00 N N N N N N N N IA r ~ N ^ r7 ~ ~ N 0 a C y ~1 ro U ro 0 ~ w 7 0 ~ ro G N d a ~. U ro ro a ~ ++. W W 1 ro .s ro ° a .~ a ~ ~ *' ~ as ro ~ a ~ ~~ Q L ~ N d a ma ~ ,~ ro r ~ ~ ~ ~ (A ~ ' .N a s ro ~~' Q ro c c o. ~ m a c ~ a c ~' . 3 aroi d ~, M " U N U~ 0 ~ a~ E ~~ m ~ v o d ~ ~ ~ ~ . ~ :° ~ d ~ . ~ u, d ~ rn ~ ~ ~ ~, U ~ m ' a. ~ aroi u d ~ : ~ ° Q D .~ ~ z ~~- ~ E a a a aci ~•~ c :~ ~ Q cA N H IA . a~ .~ ro~ N N ~ w m ii = ~ •N o N a m .c c] v~ ~~ ~~~ I K^ v~ I N C U u1 ^ c u ~s Q ro m F- ~ o ~ ro~ N N 'c E o v ~ :~ __ ~ .a d ti d .y O ~ d a a ~ a `w ~ ~ o. U ^ .~ 'a '~ ~. z ~ i~ ro 0 'y Qw ,_ ~ G7 3 ~ Q aVo Y ^ m V W UE~ ~ ~' m~y~ UrQ U} Z m ^ h CO - c9 M ~ o r N M ~ uz f0 r+ M '~t ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ co a O r N r~ ~ l(1 t0 h ao ~ ~ u7 N u7 tl1 i~ I!3 u7 u] 01 a r N C7 ~ lA ca u7 ID cD ID f0 ID t0 cD h ao Q1 O r N tD cD ID h h h N N Q1 ro a \~ #r+~ C _~ o~ a a~ ~ ~ °o Q~ N N ~1~+ a~~ ~~~ ~~ ,~ ~a c 0 m m ?' m c 'cEo m ° ';~ qV0 ~E~ L VtQ cr a f/}Zm 0 0 N d C N ~ ~' III ~'I i ~l 't . 'r ~~ :' il' I~~{.i~ ,~,.~ :.'p ~~: i .,;,p '.~ r'II '~fi'I~ I'.!~~ ~: _.~~.~.~.~....~~~~~...~~....~.._.~._.-_- -n-._.-.,~~-...._~.~~~-..,._.. r iii lii~l I~ ICI: ~'~ ; I',; I'~ ,' ~; ',~'~~j °~~ ;'~' ;~;'~ ~'~~ ~. ~,~I" .~ '~ ~_;!~~ ~:i ~ 'i 0 0 0 0 0 a a o a o a o a v a a o 0 o v a'o 0 0 0 0 o a o o a o 0 0 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 1 1 ~ ~ ~ - ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ r ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ` ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ cp ~ cq r n ~ a • r C 4 u7 ~ a u7 ti = ~ iff n us r N a r n (U a~ a r r o0 00 ; lp ch a0 c+'} N N~ N r r- N N N N r r N r r r r r r N r ''N N r r r N N N N N :N A N N t G1 M h~ V f~ n h 1~ 6l M n c0 01 L~ ~ r fD h I(1 IfJ n r .5 ~ m ~' 3~ m a~ o 0 0 1° o o~ io m e a 3 a r o~ o 0 0~ a m o,~ ~` r~ w ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N ~ ~ ~ N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N ~ ~ ~ ~ H ~ g ~- ~ ao w ~ ro a~ rn rn 0 0 0 0 0' o o a a o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 :0 0 0,o a s ~ o. ~ 1 1 . . . . . ~ . . . . . . . . . . . D ~ ~ •a ~ O O O ~ n c0 r r as cD r O O O f.0 u1 r r ao In r o0 ap W ; c~] cq N a0 f+ 01 r U'1 lf1 m '. W (~] ~ Q) N N N N N r r :N N N N r r N N r r N r r r •r N N r r r N r r N :N ~ N ---------------~-----------------a~- fp 0) c~ 4? u7 0) ~ n l~'1 L'7 c~ Ql M 1(1 47 : ~ N u7 r h ti ! u7 ~ n r N u] n IA ~ ~ n ~ .r i!] N 7 ~~ ~ N L L 7 Z~ L ~ ~ m W ~ 7 ~ m m ~Qf , 7 LCL ~ 3 7 3 3 Z L t' j ~ N [1 u~~r-3~ HH~~~~~v~~~ ~u~~ ~~~~ ~cn~~~-~~~,~ N U1 N N V1 Vl W A IA N VJ uJ N IA y Vi N y ~ y N N N N N N N A IA Vr W N y N N 7+ A 7+ C A A A f~ ~ C A 7+ A = A 7+ A 7+ 7+ C ], 7, ], 7, ]~ ], A f9 ~ A A A A A ]~ ro N ro G [6 SD I9 ~ O Q W W ~ G fC m m l9 l0 G cri (~ ~ N cU IO IC ~ G f9 IG f~ l0 ~ N c a a a a ~ ~ r o a -o v -o ~ ~ a ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ r ti ti v ~ ~ ~ ° v o o E a a s E E o o ao ~ o 0 o r o~ o. a o a a r M ~ v r o o u~ m ~ 01 CO p Q7 N r ~ h h LU ~ N cif N 4] c0 GO r to D r cD Gp M ~ (~ M r _(0 i(D fp ~fJ N ~ r r N r N N N r r r p r r r (~] ~ (+') r ~ 7 ^ r r r ~ N ~ ~ ] U S ~ a ° .w o r o ca m m ~ ~~ E ;~ ~ ~ Z ~' C m ~ O ' ° N ~ .0 ~- ~ d ~ ~ ~ °1 C^ m d ~ C ~ ~ U ~ C ~ p ~ U ,~? N ~ ~ ~ a1 ~ ~ IQ ~ ~, ~ V (A p ~ ~ U E ,c Q u y ~ m~° 0° ~ c° c C c~ E Cl ~ m w y N 0 a N -- " 0 m~ 'a. c Y~ '~ w Q d ro 2 ~ U ~ ~ "m ~ c~~, ~~ '~ ~ ~ 0 0 N ° ~ W ~ ~ o D D v ~ ~ ~ ~ (ai ~ ~ ~ ~ p ~ a ~ 'o. ,~ ~ ~ E ~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ '~ ~ ,~ K ° o (~ Q ~~ a m ~ E m ° ° 0 a *, ' ~ ~ N o ~ ~ ~ ~ c m .L U U m 4- m +~ ro 3~ O E m E~ •. v m ~ y 'n. o N ca ~ w w y~ °' m~ y E ~ .~ E ~ °~ a rn a o N cco m U m~ r~ :~ W °i ~ V ~ c ~ ~- : ~ c ~ ~ ~ ~ _ a u v 3 a~ ° © ii ~ c~ ~ ~ .w tD m ~ N ~ ~ : a~ ~ u, Z d v o o ^ ~~ ~ ro a 7 ~~ ~ :d D ~ ao 0 ~ an d G E ~' c ~s ~ 'c w e a~ '.c c m o y$ v ~ 'w 'r. ,N ~ ~f ~ L ~ ~ r a N 0 ~ ? ,u O ~ ~ ~ .C L ~p ~ ~ C ~ ~ ~ • U} ~ ~ ~ C c $~ E u .~ .~ C Q Z U u. N~.~ ro~ .~ N O N H~ ,~ m .c p Q ~~ m~ ° ~ L x ~ '~ v ~ x ~ 0 ~ ~ 4~ ~ m ~ Q ~ '7 ~ ~ ~ ~ m ro a ~~ :o ° ~ ccu E cn i.._ ui ~ cn ~ O w ~~ LL m :© a o ii a s a. a u a o. I z~ ~_ z ~ d a z ~ H N ~ Z V Y N ro ^ M v~ cn n ao ~ o ~- N M I u~ co n ao rn a r N m t} ~n co n as ~ o 0 o Q o a v o - n n n h n n n rq co a] aD a] co ao 0o ao ao 01 61 GJ ~ CA Qi 01 01 01 ~ - - M m Dl f~ d . ~ Housing ~"' Authority of the City of Alameda 701 Atlantic Avenue -Alameda, CalHomla 94501-2181 -Tel: (510) 747-4300 -Fax: (510)522-7848 - TDD: (510) 522-8467 To: Honorable Chair and Members of the Board of Commissioners From: Debra Kurita Chief Executive Officer Date: January 2, 2008 RE: A rovin Bud et Revision Number4 BACKGRGUND On April 4, 2006, the Board of Commissioners approved atwo-year operating budget for all programs covering the fiscal years July 1, 2006 to June 30, 2007 and July 1, 2007 to June 30, 2008. an April 3, 2001, the Board of Commissioners approved Budget Revision Number 3. The budget for the fiscal year July 1, 2007 to June 30, 2008 was prepared more than eight months ago and needs to be updated with current income, expenses, Extraordinary Maintenance Projects ~EMP's}and capital improvements. DISCUSSIGN Several operating and capital budget changes have occurred since the last budget revision and a new updated budget is needed to reflect these circumstances. The Playa del Alameda management contract has been eliminated through HUD's new single contractor administrative program therefore a budget reduction in Housing Assistance Payments CHAP} and administrative items included in the General Fund operating budget have been adjusted. Housing Assistance Payments associated with Playa have been reduced by $472,445 along with administrative fees of $26,651. Payroll expenses that were supported by Playa administrative fees have been reallocated back to the other AHA programs. Independence Plaza's SIP} tax increment adjustment for fiscal year ending 6130/2007 resulted in a reduction of $73,287 for the current fiscal year. The cost of police services to each fund are reallocated based on an updated cast allocation plan, which takes into consideration police activities at each complex. Interest income in the General Fund has been increased to reflect the current improved interest rate environment by almost $21,000. Gverall changes to the budget proposed are shown on Exhibit A. Several changes are recommended to the Schedule of Extraordinary Maintenance Projects HEMP} and Capital Improvements Projects ~CIP} Schedule Exhibit B}. There were five projects not completed last fiscal year that need to be carried aver to the current fiscal year. These include completing the exterior door and hardware replacement at Eagle Village, installing a drainage system at Anne B. Diament Plaza, HABGC Item #2-A CC ~ 1-02-08 Honorable Chair and Members January 2, 2008 of the Board Commissioners Page 2 of 3 replacing the stair rail at China Clipper Plaza, and the repairinglstaining of the siding at Independence Plaza. The funding far these projects also is carried over from last fiscal year. Four projects are proposed to be added. Two projects are to replace kitchen and bath cabinets and countertops at Parrot Village x$14,100} and, at Eagle Village, to replace floor covering x$68,100}. There are funds available for these projects from the bond refinancing of this complex to cover the anticipated casts. Another project, the emergency repair of the elevator at Anne B. Diament Plaza, has been completed and is requested to be budgeted at $55,000. Funds from the Community Development Block Grant Program ~CDBG} are available and will be granted to Esperanza for trash enclosures budgeted for $~ 00,004. Several projects are proposed to be deleted or postponed. Refinishing or replacing bathtub surrounds at Anne B. Diament Plaza is proposed to be done on an as-needed basis. Replacing the faucets, angle stops, and mixing valves, which should be done at the same time, also is proposed to be done on an as-needed basis. Replacing the angle stops at China Clipper Plaza also is recommended to be done on an as-needed basis and is, therefore, recommended to be deleted from this Schedule. It is recommended that the drainage and parking lot improvement projects at China Clipper be combined; no change in dollar amount is recommended. Two projects to improve the cabana at China Clipper Plaza also are recommended for elimination until such time as an appropriate use for this building is determined. The hallway ventilation project at China Clipper is needed, and staff will likely request its addition in next year's budget. The additional time will allow staff to determine how to complete this project and meet fire codes. The project to replace galvanized piping at Stanford House also is recommended for elimination. Much of the piping was replaced during an emergency repair at this building last year so no additional work is needed at this time. In addition to painting, some repairs are needed to the fencing at Independence Plaza. As such, an increase of $20,040 is proposed to cover this expense. It is advised that the Housing Authority General Counsel attend the Housing and Development Law Institute Annual Conference held in Washington, DC. The cost is estimated to be approximately $1,600. There will also be one staff member going to HUD procurement training in Portland, Oregon. FISCAL IMPACT The resul# of these operating changes would be to decrease the budgeted operating income surplus} by $140,659, from $664,786 to $524,127. EMP1C1 P changes increase the project budget by $439,388 primarily for the completion of projects carried over from last fiscal year, the addition of projects covered by the bond refinancing, and the addition of the Esperanza trash enclosures. Since CDBG is granting the $100,000 funds for the trash enclosures, there will be no bottom line impact from this project. Honorable Chair and Members of the Board Commissioners REC~MMENDATInN January 2, 2008 Page 3 of 3 The Housing Commission and Chief Executive officer recommend the Board of Commissioners: 1. Approve the proposed budget revision; and 2. Adopt the resolution revising the budget for the Conventional Low-Rent Housing Program ~Esperanza}. Respectfully submitted, Michael Pucci Executive Director MTP:A~IED Attachments: A. Budget Revision No. 4 B. Schedule of EMP and CIP Projects C. Resolution form HUD-52514 a Z W C~ ~ ~° o N CC ~ d' c~ ~, ~ ~ ~ ~ h V ~ ~ ~z ~ C C o 'n W ~, ~? ~" Q it ~ .~ Q ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~_ ~ x w '"'O°D°'`D a 0NQ1w oac oetwv, ov+~ova OSlYD~MN M ~ooN opvao M r ~D r o 00 '~ po ~n w Q1 [~ e O ~ ~D v+ u~ o e r [~ o~ O r o+ M 0 ~+ N ~O C1 et e ~ N ~ v?MwG~ 00 OMOe ~V7C~ ~Drw~p V10+Ui0 OrK N'erOw O ~Q~M !+1 M r ,~ a w ~-i M D N OO Ci N N M ++i ~ ~j Dp O N •i 00 N 00 O O l~ ~0 00 ,-~ [+3 00 I~ ~D 1!j 1(7 ~ e} pO ~~ ~G+Q1 00 1!}~MM ~CMCi G1N~p00 ~DQ1w00 wM NNa C~ w~Sp O O ~D N ON NM*~ N n .~r° ~~" N"" '7 00H~••w Nw 00 N O raoV1 M M C~ V7 Q N N N ri {y w 1p ~ p b N cy a 1Da0a1~ r CtiNODC~ 000 O~rKln OQ1lh~ O~pO~fMM +-~ N000 000 w ~D araoet o+ ~nwo,~a er0e ~oo~v7o ert-o, cr a~MO ~ raer ~o +n •• o0 ~4MQNi~ M or~oe q~no~ arw~a ~nv~v7o Ow Nea+ v oOO~oa r n ~ r ro r= ,.. a~ v. ri o ai N ri ri ~ e vi oo D ri ri oo N o4 0 o i= ~ oo ~ ri o n oo r-i ri ui 'ef [Q E C ri ~ ~ j ~ N G ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ M ~ O~ N ~G 00 ~D O5 Q~ 10 +~ f+] N N 0 (~ T 'l? M 00 OD CI ~D p0., N M f~1 w 00 r-< <,j N "" a o0 ~ O~ N ~• oo N O ,++ 00 O N N M ~C N N ri N w ~ 0" w t; Q N N N NO*+ON Ifr OMM~ 000 OOMM MOrti~ O'COrO+~ O '~TDe 000 a 00 ~ 00 OD Vr +~ O~ O O C^ w rK V1 ~ r ~o [~ ~C v, N r ~D w V7 O N N N ~D f+'1 VI a M ,~ N 00 M I ~ GO N 90 ~D OU DO ~ N c op N 7 T Otti9 O w N M lh OD N 'Ct OD ~ N N 0~0 ~ ~ N N ~D O6 ~ a °a v, M o0 00~ w ~ o N M M V7 V] ~ e ~ Ati N w ~ O w w rte. ~ N N O OQ e0 NOO ~ nOwpq Oov QOMM M0~'tf OeDOOM 00 eDe ODO N ~8 ~ ~ ~ ~ +~ MOO 7 ~ ~ ~ 'R! [~ ~D ~D ~D Cti M w +,p 00 V7 00 N N .r M~ e M ,~ N 00 M'1 *-w 00 M r' M 00 00 N 4 ~ ~op N ~? k~ Oro ~~~~ [~ 00 N~00~ ~N 0~0 a r N N O N U1 a ¢ ~ ,,,, C o0 ,., O N M M ifi V^ G~ a ~`1 w N ~ ~ ~ o 4 ~ w N MNONN O. O~eOM ~a~c wOp~e O~l1wr OV7aO~Ot! a 000 00DOD N M "`°~ ~~ ~ NOD~Or GOO OeM00 Mrtt~ r0 M ~+ N rt- e ~ ~ ~ 9 rN ~r H oo~Dr.1Q ~wV7 wb~0[''1 rr~O Vit+'1 r~ O tiG 00 f~ l~ ~ N N o ~ N ~ ~ ,a-i 0~0 ~ r r e a o p~ N o~ ri N M M O ~ oD ~ [~ ni ri M 0~ o~ ~G i~ ~ 53,0 SON pO N ~N N N VYer~N ~er~G Ne U7 N N d~C+ r r o. s~. N w N N~ ,-{ N N 'ere H rr 00 07 ~ 41 ~ ONONN ~Q ~Oe00 ~oa~a •~oDV7et all7wtp av70Q~0e o 000 000 0 ~D C ""~ ~Sfl ~ 7`Op~ON OOO DeM00 rtiretN r0 M rr 1l1 rC~ a O N r p.~ MPF ~Cw l^ 1n1pw~ ewla7 w~D~DM9 Cr1~~N CI'+~ 00 N r OG O O ao 0 y yap C ri r~ Q~ N ~D t~ f~ ~ O p 4i N C~ w rr M M Ci 700 Pt U1 [~ ftS !+J N N N 0+ C a O r N w ~ rr ~~ N N ~ e w~ N~ N N *" e ~ N „ODe a D+ o0 00 1p *K e e r N I..I a. N w Q *" *w w ObOO~ O r"MV3Q1 V70V'7 efO0MU1 U'lrr0 aMONO+fi f+l 00000 000 +^ O+ OOw or ao '~tv7aoo ~OO~c '~t~oev7 aao~•• v'7~o MMn a MM o o M e 9 V1 0~ O O U7 ~D ,+r M r. w w N t w 'tT OC a N w N ~D a Op ~+ i~ ••e N l'+k N ~D 10 rw e y aq M N O oa ~ N [+~ N o0 o O oo N M ~i ao 0o N OD O a, ~ lV o ~ ~ ~0 ~r ~ f+l w G.o 01r ~ 00 N"'t„wyM N N r~M~ N~Mi~ll Mw ~ N [[~ ee N N r e ~ `N ~ ~ v M ~ *~ a~ 0 d oo~ooa~o a •aMV1N ~r7av7 eaoM~n erra, aMOa~oN r+1 00000 ooa w v. OD +r Or a4 N~Cnr ~DO~D e~eVl NOG~N ~LG NMw r+j Mr+1 ~D •G f''1 ~ x, ~~; oo u~ Nwrsr *~wN rerooo NwN~D aoo rro r• NN ~ r ~ 00 ri N o a4 er of M ri ~ o ~ ao eS ri vi ~ oo N r 00 a~ Sri ri r ~ a ~o a a w ~O Gar ~ Ow0 ~O.y'~~M N N r~[+1~ SN~t0~7N ,~.., .~i OwO N eC O O M ONO Q N ,y ~ N N v~ N ~: ~oocoa a roMO ova v,oooM MOOOw Ov70••a~c w o0o avo ~• r1 ono Ma M voooar nor a+oao aoa~~o rN evM a ~o~ C~ '~ r N M O f~1 O O M~ e w V1 V1 C F N V1 M1 00 a N ~ d~ w ~p w C~ ~O ~O ~ n ~ o p ~ r rNw ~ ~ e ~ 4 N N "'' ~' Sf1 +~+ 1ry 1~ O M M U1 00 [+'1 ,~: 00 DC 00 C~ ,~ ~ 5>, O 0~ 5p w N r '~ C+ C~ of ~G o 'r! e a ,~ •r a a s w M ;~ p ~y ~ *~ N tl7 *~ N O M M M M 10. '~ w w a~ ca W ~op0coo a eroMr oov v7oooM ooaaa0 ov7a~r70a~ t- o00 00o n r ~ ova r,o M v7 o0oow nor v+ooo o~oa,ao MN rON a ~~ ~ 9 rN Mo M DOOM e-~v~ ~nrNV~ 4000M OQ~ wlpr ir7 ~O~D w~++ p ' pp ~ n .Nr ~ 00 ~ V7 0~0 N: N w ~ SI1 ,r er [~ d N +-i V1 [~ M h N DO 00 ,-i 00 N V) w N O f+9 M N M dl Q N w w ~ r~ OOOrN Oti v7~r7a+a o~Od~ 0000 o~ra0e O~OOMG~ N 000 000 N M OC~1 MM ~ M~M~ ~OC~ rMOO ~DMeN 'lfw ~GOrK u7 'G ~ M *' ~ 00 'Q D N1 o O r 00 C w ~D O +~ V1 O p ~ yap 00tt MCA M M~DV1~ Dp't-N OQt"ir+1V} GC1MN NOO i17N00 ~ 4 0 ~~ N O ,r. N N *" M U} 00 ,~. O O M r .~ DO rr ry ,~ M ~ ~ N O N ~ N N VI *• N w w ,.r N p" ~ w ~ ~ 000rN o~ OV1v~M G1O01 a0aa NroOr O~pOrM~D ~ OOa 000 V1 ~o (~ ~ OT ~.~, ~ V]M,Np O+OC~ rMQO wMeT Ow N'10V7 ~} Vi 1l7 rlwe o0dOr1 ..ora0 rrb c0w1Q M f'1 ~D :ap 06~ Mr M QtAViN 00~N 00[+1MVi oiC+M+-~ C~oO Mr+i+~ M ~ M 00 C~ M N r u7 M w M v] 00 w a T M r w 0 ••r N ,~ b ~O a N w 1fj N O w N w r~ N V'7 r~ .t N ~ w *r 4 ., ,~ OO~Oti .Nn ~ODO~O 000 0000 0000 OMaV7000 e} 000 000 '~f OD ~ 1p N O O OF N N ~ ~ N 5(07 ~ ~ O O ~ 000' R D ~ w N OD M ~ w w M Vl ~ 0~0 OHO ~ '" r a ~ i N N ,.. ,..~ N N ~ Q+ CR CJ ~ ~OdN~ ~ a00~ DOO OOOa wOOw DMaROI~ ~C Opa00 OD0 e w ~~ v 'p ,• O Ob e e e '~t O M [+} r e tr O O N o+ ~G ~0 ~D ~l7 * F N O O O 0 M e} ~- ~ o tNp M ~ as ~ M M M M ~ rMr ~ ~ ~ '~ w .N. a 0 ~D r y N ~0 ~d r a ~ ~ ~ ~, ~ W u d ~ro ~ Z ~ Q y y C ~ H IL .. Cd ~ ~ i.i G 0 ~ ~ w w '~ w a ~ F vl ~' S, W +. L" d W @ y ~ ~ ~ fn d ~~ ~ a oWa ~ a •~ 3 ~ ~ a ~ ~ o a L~ °+' W ~'°' ~ d ~ ~ ~pL.~ c ~ c °' w ~ c Z a ~ u ZzF ~ ~ u vi v] Q U .a.~ ~ ~~~ a C~ ~.~ o ~ .. ~ Fa ~~,~ `"F~v .a F~,d.a ~~'~ ,~ ~~,~u,~ ~a~vduo o rd~, ~ w~a~ ~ o Wd w~~f F"W~~ ~ ~F" z ~ ~E'" a a ~ ~,F zy ~ ~F z'~ y'~ °'v~-' Q GGp'' ~.F W~ ~F'" d ~ ~ axccd~o ooQE ~~° ~,~H° j3wc~° ~~~u° ~a~ur~u° o °x~° F~,a° o F~ o F o e ~ r ~ ~D N ~ y .-~ o r v 00 X79 w ~ 00 e v .-. .fir N N v '-, O M Q C M M O N w w w r~ O O~0 M oa'a ~~ ~ ~ v ~ 0~0 ~ ,: p D Op ~• a o ~ ~ w .r ~ .• +D ,r .~ .~ O ~ O N N M .~ ~-, 1(7 *~ o n Q ~ N M ['r r C~ 00 ~ ~ .. '~ ~ Ob ~ w c ~ 4 0. ~ a w L ~ a ~ a a o 0 ~ i 0 0 Exhibit B PROPOSED CHANGES TO SCHEDULE OF EMP AND CIP PROJECTS JULY 1, 2007 -JUNE 30, 2008 (FY2008) PROJECT EMP CIP BUDGET FUND, PROJECT CODE, AND DESCRIPTION qF CURRENT PROPOSED CURRENT PROPOSED PROJECT FY08 FY08 FY08 FYD8 HOUSING AUTHORITY GENERAL FUND HA-GF TGTALS ~No changes $ 1,000 $ 1,000 ESP1-08 Trash Enclosures Paid by CDBG~ $ 100,000 ESP TOTAL $ $ - $ - $ 1 DD,000 EAGLE VILLAGE AND PARROT VILLAGE ......Existing„EV and PV projects ......................................... $ $ $ 242,000 $ 242,000 EV2-07 Replace exterior doors and hardware .... .... . $ 106,D00 .. V3-08 Replace flooring in ~ 21 units ............ .. .. .... . .... $ 65,1 DO Replace kitchenlbath cabinetslcountertops paint and replace flooring as needed in PV2-08 ~6 u n its 74,100 EV AND PV TGTALS $ - $ - $ 242,ODD $ 490,200 HOUSING AUTHORITY-OWNED Existing HA-Owned projects ......... .. 96104 96100 .. . . $ 317,D00 $ 317,000 .. BD1-D7 Install drainage system rear of bldg; . . . . . 80,000 Refinish or replace has needed} bathtubs ABD3-08 and surrounds 41,500 - Replace faucets and angle stops in most units, and mixing valves in a[I units ABD4-08 ire uires asbestos abatement .............................. ....q...............................................................~............................ . 55,260 - .. ................ BD9-08 Repair elevator .......... .......................... .... . .. ......................................................... .. ... 55,000 Replace metal stair rail; extend handrails at CC1-07 ... landing ..................................... .. .. ........ . - 23,100 . GG2-08 Replace ankle stops .............................. ..... ................................ 5,500 - ....................................................... . .. .. .......................... ................................ CC3-O8 Add drainage outside unit 101 8,500 - - Cutlpatch and seal coat deteriorated CC4-08 asphalt paving in parking lot 20,000 28 500 - - Replace fire protection system alarm, CC5-08 pulls, smoke detectors in common areas 37,000 - CC6-OS Replace window and door of cabana 3,000 - - - CC7-08 Re.~air and pant cabana interior 6,000 - CC10-08 Add hallway ventilation .. 10,000 - SH2-OS Re lace alvanized i in 6,400 - - - HAO TOTALS $ 200,160 $ 124,600 $ 405,5DD $ 415,100 INDEPENDENCE PLAZA Existin IP Pro'ects $ 27,000 $ 27,000 $ 190,000 $ 190,000 IP2-D7* Re air, aintlstain exterior $ 77,748 IP3-08 Re air, aint fence $ 55,000 $ 75,000 IP TOTALS $ 82,DD0 $ 119,145 $ 190,000 $ 190,OOD TOTAL CURRENT EMPICIP $ 283,160 $ .831,500 TOTAL PROPOSED EMPICIP $ 305,348 $ 1,255,3DD TOTAL CURRENT EMPICIP COMBINED $ 1,121,2 fiD TOTAL PROPOSED EMPICIP COMBINED. $ 1,560,648 DIFFERENCE _ _ $ 439,388 * Carried over from prior year. Exhibit C PHAIIHA Board Resolution u.5. Department of Housing OMB Approval No.2577-0026 (Exp. 613012001} and Urban Development Approving Operating Budget or Calculation of Office of Public and Indian Housing Performance Funding System Operating Subsidy Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 15 minutes per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. This agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless that collectan displays a valid OMB control number. This information is required by Section 6~c)1'47 of the U.S. Housing Act of 1937. The information is the operating budget far the Ivw-income housing program and provides a summary of proposedlbudgeted receipts and expenditures, approval of budgeted receipts and expenditures, and justification of certain specified amounts. HUD reviews the information to determine ifthe operating plan adopted by the PHA and the amounts are reasonable and that the PHA is in compliance with procedures prescribed by HUD. Responses are required to obtain benefits. This information does not lend itself to confidentiality. Acting on behalf of the Board of Commissioners of the below-named Public Hauling Agency PHA}IIndian Housing Authority ~IHA}, as its Chairman, I make the following certifications and agreements to the Department of Housing and Urban Development THUD} regarding the Board's approval of check one or more as applicable}: date) Operating Budget Submitted on: Operating Budget Revision Submitted on: 011021200$ a Calculation of Performance Funding System Submitted on: Revised Calculation of Performance Funding System Submitted on; I certify an behalf of the; PHAIIHA Name} HoUSing AUthorlty Of the City of Alameda that: 1. All regulatory and statutory requirements have been met; 2. The PHA has sufficient operating reserves to meet the working capital needs of its developments; 3. Proposed budget expenditures are necessary in the efficient and economical operation of the housing far the purpose of serving low-income residents; 4. The budget indicates a source of funds adequate to cover all proposed expenditures; 5. The calculation of eligibility for Federal funding is in accordance with the provisions of the regulations; b. All proposed rental charges and expenditures will be consistent with provisions of law; 7. The PHAIIHA will comply with the wage rate requirements under 24 CFR 968.110~e) and ~f} or 24 CFR 905.120~c} and (d); $. The PHAIIHA will comply with the requirements far access to retards and audits under 24 CFR 968.110~i) or 24 CFR 905.120~g}; and 9. The PHAIIHA will comply with the requirements for the reexamination of family income and composition under 24 CFR 964.209, 990.115 and 905.315. I hereby certify that all the information stated within, as well as any information provided in the accompaniment herewith, is true and accurate. Warning; HUD will prosecute false claims and statements. Conviction may resultin criminal andlorcivil penalties. X18 U.S.C.1001,1010,1012; 31 U.S.C. 3729, 3802} Board Chairman's Name (type Beverly Johnson, Chair Previous edition is obsolete Date form H U D-52574 (10195} ref. Handbook 7515.1 _. -~. 5' ,,~~ 'a ~~~1n = _. .~u~~~ri o tl~~ 1~ o ~ a m~d~ 7~1 Ati~ntlaAven~e -Alameda, Califarr~ia ~4aQ~-z~~~ -Tel: ~51U~ T4T-430 -Fax: ~5~0~52z-784 - TDB: ~51a~ 522-8451 To: Honorable Chair and Members of the Board of Commissioners From: Debra Kurita Chief Executive Officer Date: January 2, 2008 Re: Audit Report for Fiscal Year Endin June 30, ~OOl BACKGROUND The financial statements of the Housing Authority of the City of Alameda for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2007, were prepared in the format prescribed by the requirements of Government Accounting Standards Board Statement 34 ~GASB 34}. The firm of Wallace Rowe and Associates, certified Public Accountants, has certified the audited financial statements of the Housing Authority for the Fiscal year reported above. DISCUSSION This report submits the annual Financial Statements for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2001. The auditors, Wallace Rowe and Associates, opined that "the financial statements ... present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of the Housing Authority of the City of Alameda, California, as of June 30, 2007, and the results of its operations and the cash flow of its proprietary fund types for the year then ended in conformity with accepted accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America." The Financial statements provide a brief review of all funds. There were no findings for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2001. The Housin g Commission had the opportunity to review the audited financial statements and voted to recommend acceptance. The Financial Statements are on file at the Housing Authority and the Cit Clerk's Y Office. RECOMMENDATION The Housing Commission and Chief Executive Officer recommend the Board of Commissioners accept the audit report for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2001. Respectfully subm' , Michael T. Pucci Executive Director HABOC Item #2-B CC 01-02-08 UNAPPROVED MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL JOINT CITY COUNCIL ALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ~ARRA~, AND COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION ~CIC7 MEETING TUESDAY- -DECEMBER 4, 2007-- -7:31 P.M. Mayor/Chair Johnson convened the Special Joint Meeting at 8:57 p.m. ROLL CALL - Present: Councilmembers/Board Members/Commissioners deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese, Tam, and Mayor/Chair Johnson ~- 5. Absent: None. rn~T.~Fnrm Mayor/Chair Johnson announced that the recommendation to authorize the use of up to $50,000 paragraph no. 07-- CIC], and the recommendation to approve a $300,000 loan [paragraph no. 07-- CIC] were removed for discussion. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan moved approval of the remainder of the Consent Calendar. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Gilmore seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. [Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk preceding the paragraph number.] ~*07- CIC7 Minutes of the Special Community Improvement Commission Meeting of November 20, 2007. Approved. X07- CIC7 Recommendation to authorize the use of up to $50,000 in interest earnings to complete the enclosure of the Historic Alameda Theater Balcony Access Corridor and related improvements. Commissioner deHaan stated that the Commission discussed bringing back value engineering items if money became available; inquired whether other worthy items should be considered. The Development Services Director responded the CIC would not be required to make other significant, hard construction improvements to the Historic Theater in the future; stated decorative or restoration items could be considered; the mezzanine balcony rehabilitation and restoration is the last hard construction item left unfinished; the Historic Theater is required to have certain fire and life safety exiting paths as well as American with Disabilities DADA} access; the proposed platform is part of the Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Alameda Reuse 1 and Redevelopment Authority, and Community improvement Cammissian Meeting December 4, 207 existing path for fire safety as well as ADA access; ADA access would be provided using an elevator system in the new theater; the second floor was always assumed to be part of the second phase; the balance of the second story improvements are the responsibility of the developer. Robb Ratto, Park Street Business Association ~PSBA}, stated that he supports the staff recommendation; he is concerned with safety issues; PSBR urges Council to accept the staff recommendation. Chair Johnson stated the enclosure should be done now since money is available. Commissioner deHaan inquired whether a canopy would be used or a full enclousre, to which the Development Services Director responded a full enclosure. Commissioner Gilmore stated the enclosure should be done now because the contractors are on site and there would be minimal disruptions. Commissioner Matarrese stated that staff and the developer did an excellent job; he supports the staff recommendation. Commissioner Matarrese moved approval of the staff recommendation. Commissioner Gilmore seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. X07- CIC} Recommendation to approve a $300,000 loan to Alameda Entertainment Associates, L.P. for rehabilitation and restoration of the mezzanine balcony in the Historic Alameda Theater and for augmentation of the Cineplex construction contingency budget. The Development Services Manager gave a brief presentation. Commissioner Tam stated that the use of $691,000 Merged Area Bond is fairly restricted. The Development Services Manager stated that the 2003 Merged Area Bond anticipated financing a number of projects; $4 million was unspecified; using the Bond for the Library was not anticipate; $2 million was pledged to the Library to finish construction; State funding for the library is closed out; the unused money was intended to come back to the CIC for other projects. Commissioner Tam stated the remainder of the fund cannot be used for branch libraries because said libraries are not in Special. Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Alameda Reuse 2 and Redevelopment Authority, and Community improvement Commission Meeting December 4, 2007 redevelopment areas. The Development Services Manager stated typically funds have to be used in redevelopment project areas or benefit redevelopment project areas. Commissioner deHaan stated the West End library would fall well within said criteria because the library is the only library in the area; he is concerned with 738 seats; inquired whether there is a market for 738 seats. The Development Services Director responded she called a number of theaters; stated three or four shows can be sold out in a row on an opening day or the day before. Commissioner deHaan stated that previous discussions addressed utilizing the balcony differently; 254 seats were never anticipated in previous discussions. Kyle Connor, Developer, stated theater strategy is to double track; a lot of auditoriums are needed to double track; capacity is needed to meet demand; 1,300 people attended a silent film festival at the Castro Theater in San Francisco. Commissioner deHaan inquired what is the next largest theater other than the main theater. Mr. Connor responded three theaters have approximately 200 seats. Commissioner deHaan stated that the Castro Theater film festival was a special event. Mr. Connor stated that hopefully Alameda will have film festivals; films pay off in approximately 2.7 weeks; 900 of business is done within the first three weeks; facilitating capacity is important. Commissioner deHaan inquired how the other portion [of the balcony] would be closed, to which Mr. Connor responded drapery would be used. Robb Ratto, PSBA, urged approval of the staff recommendation; stated the community wants the balcony open. Commissioner Matarrese stated the $2 million was not designated far the Library; inquired whether the $2 million was redevelopment money that was held in case Library costs escalated, to which the Development Services Director responded in the affirmative. Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Alameda Reuse 3 and Redevelopment Authority, and Community Improvement Commission Meeting December 4, 2007 Commissioner Matarrese stated there is still Measure 0 money that is supposed to go for branch upgrades; a report is needed on the matter at some point; he would rather open the mezzanine balcony now; people saw the potential for the theater; he thinks the loan should be given to complete the job; twelve public days might demand 800 seats. Commissioner Matarrese moved approval of the staff recommendation. Commissioner Gilmore seconded the motion. Under discussion, Commissioner Gilmore requested a run down on restoration that has been accomplished. The Development Services Director stated the project has gone very well; major, significant repairs and alterations were made to the ceiling; all the trim molding was painted; original light fixtures were installed; fabric workers restored the original curtain; artisans did all of the leaf work; the original art work was put back in place; the detail is phenomenal; some of the original furniture might be recovered. Chair Johnson stated the marquee sign is beautiful. Commissioner deHaan stated that the Historic Alameda Theater is one of the better restorations; separating the upper balconies into theaters would be a shame; inquired how many seats will be gained, to which the Development Services Director responded 150. Commissioner deHaan requested a breakdown of efforts made for the transition into the Cineplex. The Development Services Director stated some of the original carpeting will be put back into the Historic Theater; the Cineplex will have similar carpeting and upholstery; similar icons and images have been carried through the Cineplex. Commissioner Gilmore requested staff to update the website photos. Commissioner Tam stated that the schedule shows a March opening; all contingencies are being used; inquired whether the CIC would be requesting another loan in the next four months. The Development Services Director responded there is approximately $106,000 left in contingency. Commissioner Tam inquired whether staff is requesting $200,000 on top of the loan, to which the Development Services Director Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Alameda Reuse 4 and Redevelopment Authority, and Community Improvement Commission Meeting December 4, 2007 responded in the negative. Commissioner Matarrese inquired whether the $300,000 loan is coming from undesignated bond money, to which the Development Services Director responded in the affirmative. On the call for the question, the motion carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. ~ *07- authorize Council. CIC} Recommendation to accept the Annual Report and transmittal to the State Controller's Office and the City Accepted. (*07- CC/*07- CIC} Recommendation to accept transmittal of the: 1} Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR} for Fiscal Year ended June 30, 2007; 2} Auditor's Agreed Upon Procedures Report on compliance with Vehicle Code Section 40200.3 Parking Citation Processing; 3} Agreed Upon Procedures Report on compliance with the Proposition 111 21005--06 Appropriations Limit Increment; 4} Police and Fire Retirement System Pension Plans 1079 and 1092 Audit Report for Fiscal Year ended June 30, 2007; 5} Metropolitan Transportation Commission Grant Programs Financial Statements for Year ended June 30, 2007; 6} Community Improvement Commission Basic Component Unit Financial Statements for the Year ended June 30, 2007; and 77 Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority Basic Component Unit Financial Statements for the Year ended June 30, 2007. Accepted. AGENDA ITEMS (07- CC/07- 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- A/CC} Resolution No. 14162, "Approving Execution of an Amendment of th Agreement (Alameda Landing Mixed Acquisition Corporation." Adopted; e Disposition Use Project} and and Authorizing and Development with Palmtree (07- B/CIC} Resolution 07-151, "Approving a First Addendum to the Alameda Landing Mixed Use Development Project Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report and Authorizing the Executive Director to Amend the Disposition and Development Agreement (Alameda Landing Mixed Use Project} with Palmtree Acquisition Corporation." Adopted; and Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Alameda Reuse 5 and Redevelopment Authority, and Community Improvement Commission Meeting December 4, 2007 X07- C/CC} Introduction of Qrdinance Approving Development Agreement Amendment DA-06--0003 to the Development Agreement Alameda Landing Mixed Use Commercial Project? By and Between the City of Alameda and Palmtree Acquisition Corporation, dated January 16, 2007. Introduced. The Base Reuse and Community Development Manager provided a Power Point presentation. Dan Bucko with SMwM provided a brief presentation on wharf redesign. The Base Reuse and Community Development Manager provided a brief summary of the proposed modifications to the Disposition and Development Agreement ~DDA}. Councilmember/Commissioner Gilmore inquired whether utility lines would be above ground going to Clif Bar and restaurants. The Base Reuse and Community Development Manager responded the existing 115 kV line would be relocated into the Mitchell Avenue right-of-way; stated Catellus would perform the trenching and install the conduit necessary for the ultimate undergrounding; the 115kV line starts at the High Street Bridge, runs the entire length of the City's waterfront, and terminates at Pacific Avenue and Main Street adjacent to Alameda Point. Councilmember/Commissioner deHaan inquired what is the estimated insurance cost. The Base Reuse and Community Development Manager responded the cost has not been calculated; stated the idea is to obtain insurance if available at commercially reasonable rates. Councilmember/Commissioner Matarrese inquired what would be a commercially reasonable rate, to which the Base Reuse and Community Development Manager responded that she would provide the information. Councilmember/Commissioner Gilmore stated the Alameda Landing tax increment would be parceled off; Merged Improvement Areas would be paid back first with tax increment from other areas; requested clarification on the matter and whether Alameda Point would be affected . The Base Reuse and Community Point is in the Alameda redevelopment area and would Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority, and Community Improvement Commission Meeting December 4, 207 Development Manager stated Alameda Point Improvement Project ~APIP} not be affected; the Merged Area is 6 the West End Community Improvement Project ~WECIP} and Business and Waterfront Improvement Project ~BWIP}; the Merged Area Bonds were issued in 2003 and were an existing condition when the DDA was approved with Catellus in 2006; the bond was sized and assumed a zero tax increment from Alameda Landing because the property is not on the tax roll; all of the tax increment in the entire project area is pledged to the repayment of the debt; typically underwriters have a debt to loan value ratio when debt is issued; technically, the Alameda Landing tax increment is already pledged to the repayment of the existing obligation; the Bond was sized when there was no tax increment at Alameda Landing; the project area should have no trouble making the bond payment without Alameda Landing tax increment; eventually, property taxes will be on the rolls for Alameda Landing. Mayor/Commissioner Tam stated that some of the proposed Development Agreement FDA} amendments spread the cost and shift some of the liabilities; the staff report notes that the City's financial obligations do not increase but overall project costs increase and references just the acquisition of the property; inquired whether that is the only additional cost. The Base Reuse and Community Development Manager responded there is a one time cost for fencing the wharf and acquisition of the property insurance; stated the 115kV obligation would not be triggered until the DA is amended to remove the project obligation; the process is sequential. Councilmember/Commissioner deHaan requested elaboration on the utility assessment district; inquired whether an assessment for the wharf is required. The Base Reuse and Community Development Manager responded a Municipal Utility District is anticipated which would pay for maintenance and operations of the public open spaces such as the wharf; the undergrounding district would be just like the Rule 20A Undergrounding District where there is an assessment. Councilmember/Commissioner deHaan inquired what the district would cover. The Base Reuse and Community Development Manager responded the district would be comprised of the properties from Alameda Landing to Alameda Point. Councilmember/Commissioner deHaan inquired whether there would be an assessment fund to maintain the wharf. Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Alameda Reuse 7 and Redevelopment Authority, and Community Improvement Commission Meeting December 4, 207 The Base Reuse and Community Development Manager responded the assessment fund would be from the Municipal Utilities District, covers more than the wharf, and includes other City services. Mayor/Chair Johnson opened the public portion of the hearing. George Phillips, Alameda Boys and Girls Club, urged approval and expedition. Christopher Buckley, Alameda, encouraged the developer to keep both warehouses. Roberta Rockwell, Alameda East Bay Miracle League, stated that she supports the Alameda Landing Project. Richard w. Rutter, Alameda, stated he thought that the May 29 plan was great; he was distressed when the September amendment came before the Planning Board and the western portion of the wharf and a major structure were removed; he thinks that there may be ways of saving and repairing the pier over time. Mario Mariani, Alameda, stated he supports the changes. Don Lindsey, Alameda, encouraged moving forward with the project. There being no further speakers, Mayor/Chair Johnson closed the public portion of the hearing. Councilmember/Commissioner Matarrese inquired whether the buildings would be demolished or deconstructed and reused. The Base Reuse and Community Development Manager responded the buildings would be a combination of deconstruction and potential demolition; stated the existing DDA does not obligate the developer to maintain the warehouses; the Planning Board added a Condition of Approval which states that prior to making a decision about the disposition of the second warehouse, the developer will go back to the Planning Board and make a presentation regarding the feasibility of retaining the warehouse; the May and September plans do not contemplate the retention of the second warehouse; currently, the Plan calls for the retention of the first warehouse for Clif Bar;. several other warehouses south of the wharf will be partially deconstructed and made into parking sheds; the developer is committed to recycle and reuse elements if the second warehouse is not used. Councilmember/Commissioner deHaan inquired what is the office space square footage for Clif Bar, to which the Base Reuse and Community Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Alameda Reuse 8 and Redevelopment Authority, and Community Improvement Commission Meeting December 4, 2007 Development Manager responded approximately 100,000 square feet. Councilmember/Commissioner deHaan inquired what would be the remaining square footage of the building, to which the Base Reuse and Community Development Manager responded approximately 300,000 square feet. Councilmember/Commissioner deHaan inquired whether three to five story buildings are still contemplated on the wharf. The Base Reuse and Community Development Manager responded the Master Plan provides for a maximum of five stories; stated the height limit was reduced to 85 feet last year. Councilmember/Commissioner deHaan inquired whether the waterfront would have five-story buildings, to which the Base Reuse and Community Development Manager responded possibly. Councilmember/Commissioner deHaan inquired whether the issue would be contrary to the planning principles of having more open, step down designs to the waterfront. The Base Reuse and Community Development Manager responded the Master Plan provides for a maximum of five stories; stated the new buildings would be set back from the waterfront; there would be waterfront access and open space mare than 100 feet from the water; the Bay Conservation and Development Commission ~BCDC~ requires a minimum 100 foot setback from the water. Councilmember/Commissioner deHaan inquired what would be the cost estimate for retrofitting the wharf. The Base Reuse and Community Development Manager responded between $30 million and $35 million; stated San Francisco waterfront improvements are estimated at $1 billion; the Cruise Terminal did not go forward because of a $144 million bill to retrofit the piers at the Cruise Terminal; San Francisco's challenge is much bigger than Alameda Landing but is similar to the challenges of upgrading the wharf to current seismic conditions and Uniform Building Code as well as geotechnical issues. Councilmember/Commissioner deHaan inquired what the anticipated cost would be. The Base Reuse and Community Development Manager responded the cost would be approximately $15 million in order to accommodate Clif Bar. Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Alameda Reuse 9 and Redevelopment Authority, and Community Improvement Commission Meeting December 4, 2007 Councilmember/Commissioner deHaan inquired whether said cost was new compared to the original estimate, to which the Base Reuse and Community Development Manager responded in the affirmative. Councilmember/Commissioner deHaan inquired what was the original estimate. The Base Reuse and Community Development Manager responded that she would need to check; stated an additional $30 million to $35 was originally budgeted to retrofit the wharf and is cut back to $15 million to preserve the warehouse for Clif Bar; the developer states that it is infeasible to spend an additional $15 million to $20 million to preserve the remainder of the wharf; the developer believes that the redesign maintains a lot of the public amenities and benefits and is a better plan in some ways in that the entire waterfront experience is not seven feet above the water; there is the ability to step down and access the water at the water level. Councilmember/Commissioner Matarrese stated that he appreciates the history; construction costs escalate; costs for preserving the warehouse and rest of the wharf are not worth holding up the project; everything should be done to recycle materials if a couple of buildings are lost; historic significance can be preserved in photos and videos; the buildings are warehouses on a dock; he likes the idea of getting closer to the water's edge and getting millions of dollars in sales tax which helps to have a safe City and good parks; everything should be done to underground the 115kV line, including pursuing Homeland Security money; keeping the project on track is important. Councilmember/Commissioner Tam stated that she concurs with Councilmember/Commissioner Matarrese; there has been a six-month 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 Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Alameda Reuse 1 and Redevelopment Authority, and Community Improvement Commission Meeting December 4, 200? 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 2DD9. 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 by unanimous voice vote - 5. X07- CC/07- CIC/ARRA} Recommendation to accept the Fiscal Year 2007 First Quarter Financial Report and budget adjustments. The Finance Director gave a Power Point presentation. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Gilmore stated that Proposition 1A did~not provide any protection for the City's redevelopment fund; requested clarification on the issue. The Finance Director stated the last Educational Revenue Augmentation funds ~ERAF} were $711,OOD out of $5 million of property tax in the past years; the construction of a takeaway formula is unknown; redevelopment agencies are the most vulnerable. Councilmember/Board Member/CCommissioner Matarrese stated Council did not intend to use reserves for Beltline litigation costs; inquired what will be done in the future to prevent reoccurrence. The Finance Director responded any direction for use of funds needs to come from the City Manager to the Finance Department and needs to have discussions on funding. Mayor/Chair Johnson stated all money needs to be budgeted with Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Alameda Reuse 1 1 and Redevelopment Authority, and Community Improvement Commission Meeting December ~, 2007 approval of Council. The Finance Director stated that she understands that the money was approved for payment from the Risk Management Fund. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Matarrese inquired whether audit practices and protocols are sufficient to catch any in the Finance Director's opinion; stated that authorisation happened over a year ago; audits have been performed since that time; the matter is just coming to light now; inquired whether audit practices and protocols are sufficient. The Finance Director stated the only way that an auditor would be aware of the issue was if substantial information was available about the fact that the litigation was directed by Council; the direction would be in the form of information from the City Manager and the City Attorney to Finance. _ Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Matarrese inquired how the issue was discovered. The Finance Director responded by review of the Risk Management Fund when the balance became a deficit. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Matarrese inquired whether the auditors look for deficits. The Finance Director responded the auditors pointed out that it was a deficit this year but the issue was already determined. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Matarrese stated the Power Point presentation should be posted to the website and Council should reveive a copy; the national economic environment affects California and will affect the City; thanked the Finance Director for doing a good job on the presentation. Vice Mayor/Board Member/Commissioner Tam echoed Commissioner Matarrese's appreciation for the presentation; inquired how the City deals with replenishing or drawing down on the reserves from the 20~ to 25a range. The Finance Director responded the draw down was purposeful and well thought out by Council in terms of trying to meet unmet infrastructure needs. Vice Mayor/Board Member/Commissioner Tam inquired whether reserves are replenished also. Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Alameda Reuse 1 2 and Redevelor~ment Authority, and Community Improvement Commission Meeting December 4, 2007 The Finance Director responded reserves are replenished only by having revenues exceed expenditures; stated the expenditure budget is $85.7 million; typically, not all money is spent and will go back into the fund balance; an absolute commitment cannot be made at this time. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan stated there was a draw down on the reserves because of needed infrastructure; the draw down was supposed to be 2 5 ~ to 2 3 ~ and i s now 210 ; 18 o i s 1 of t and will leave approximately $12 million; a lot of the $12 million is obligated. The Finance Director stated 18a will leave approximately $15.5 million; the $400,004 reserve designated for Fire Station 3 replacement is excluded; approximately $6 million is loaned to other funds. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissianer deHaan inquired whether the $6 million could be called back. The Finance Director responded the $6 million could be called back, but the disaster would be pushed off to another area. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan inquired what loans are in the $6 million. The Finance Director responded $2.2 million is from Alameda Power & Telecom SAP&T} and is scheduled to be repaid in 2449; the remainder is all redevelopment agency loans. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan stated Public Safety equates to approximately 600 of the budget and 300 of the staffing; the out years obligation is concerning; Public Safety retirement funds are escalating. The Finance Director stated the actuarial evaluation was received in October from the Public Employee Retirement System ~PERS}; the City's contribution rate for Public Safety is remaining very close to 30o and is not increasing or decreasing significantly. Mayor/Chair Johnson stated the dollar amount increases because of salary increases. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan inquired whether immediate action is necessary to the extent of hiring freezes, etc. The Finance Director responded department heads have been requested to restrain spending; stated discretionary spending should be Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Alameda Reuse 1 3 and Redevelopment Authority, and Community Improvement Commission Meeting December 4, 2007 postponed. The City Manager/Executive Director stated department heads have been advised that a minimum of 1.5a needs to be saved; the budget is reviewed at weekly meetings; more changes may be necessary mid- year. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan stated that out years are a real concern; different plans will need to be developed; requested elaboration on Proposition 1A. The Finance Director stated the report includes an excellent description of Proposition 1A; the Governor has to declare that there is a severe State fiscal hardship; the State can temporarily suspend Proposition 1A basic protection of property tax; the Legislature has to agree by a two-thirds vote; a separate statute must be adopted that requires the State to repay local governments in three years and can be done only twice in ten years. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan stated he has heard about a 25o cut; a 10o cut would be disasterous at a State level. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Gilmore stated one way to build up the General Fund reserves is by having revenues exceed expenses; the other way is to not fund infrastructure, as was done in the past; Council decided that the City could no longer do that [not fund infrastructure]; tough choices will need to be made. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Matarrese stated that he is not overly concerned with replenishing the reserves; the reserve was built partially on the PERS bonanza that occurred in the dot.com boom. The Finance Director stated two years had a zero percent contribution; the money was allowed to flow back into the fund balance rather than setting the money aside to be used in the future for payments. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Matarrese stated that his biggest concern is balancing the budget and delivering essential services; the big difference between 2002 and today is that there was not $10 billion a month of tax dollars flowing out of the economy at the federal level; tonight's discussion sets the stage for what will be a very tough fiscal environment for the foreseeable future; it is important to put on the brakes now. Mayor/Chair Johnson inquired how department heads cut budgets when there are already built in increases. Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Alameda Reuse 1 4 and Redevelopment Authority, and Community Improvement Commission Meeting December 4 , 2 0 D'1 The Finance Department responded salary and benefits are contracted; a position can be left vacant. Mayor/Chair Johnson stated department heads are being asked to cut budgets by 1.50; however, budgets are increasing more than 1.50 because of fixed increases. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Matarrese stated Contracts are tied to salaries; the salaries are paid to people; the blunt end is either not filling the position or lay offs. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan inquired how long the City had the 25o reserve. The Finance Director responded Council was presented with a policy for adoption in late 1997 or early 1998. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Matarrese requested a copy of said policy. Vice Mayor/Board Member/Commissioner Tam stated Alameda is one of the few cities that has a reserve; many cities are being hit hard; the League of California Cities cautioned all cities regarding Proposition 1A; it is .easier for the Legislature to raid local government than it is to go up against the educational lobbyists. Mayor/Chair Johnson stated the City of Oakland was audited; $3 million is questionable on payroll; inquired whether an operational review or audit would be beneficial to Alameda. The Finance Director responded an operational review never hurts; there is a great deal of coordination between Human Resources and the Finance Department; a review could be scheduled later in the fiscal year and there has been some practice with the conversion of the new payroll system. Mayor/Chair Johnson stated operational reviews were performed with significant findings for AP&T and the golf course. Vice Mayor/Board Member/Commissioner Tam stated that the City of oakland did a performance audit; inquired what would be the cost for such an audit. The Finance Director responded a Request for Proposal ~RFP} would need to be done. The City Manager/Executive Director stated AP&T and the golf course Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Alameda Reuse 1 5 and Redevelopment Authority, and Community Improvement Commission Meeting December 4, 20Q7 are enterprise funds and are different. The Finance Director stated a RFP could be issued in the spring. Mayor/Chair Johnson stated expenditures are 23o to 25a generally; some are lower; inquired whether some categories are over budgeted, such as Police Contract overtime, abandoned vehicle abatement, and advance life support. The Finance Director responded the Police Contract overtime does not follow a straight line and is based upon the need of outside persons to contract with the Police Department for overtime, such as for school dances. Mayor/Chair Johnson inquired whether there is enough in the budget for additional animal shelter staffing and improvements. The City Manager/Executive Director responded a grant fund could be used; stated funding impacts would need to be identified. Mayor/Chair Johnson stated the golf course had more of a shortfall than was anticipated; inquired how much is left in the golf course fund, to which the Finance Director responded $1.9 million. Mayor/Chair Johnson stated the golf course fund is burning through approximately $50,000 per month. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan stated the $15.5 million [reserve]is pretty well obligated; he believes that staff has the skills in getting requirements in order; having an outside review process would be a shame; actions have to be weighed; AP&T and the golf course are other concerns. Mayor/Chair Johnson inquired whether a 1.5a reduction is aggressive enough far the next six or seven months. The City Manager/Executive Director responded the 1.5a reduction is a beginning; stated the matter will be monitored; she believes that the reduction fits at this point; direction can be changed if necessary. Mayor/Chair Johnson stated Council needs to consider how cuts are made. The City Manager/Executive Director stated the matter would be brought back to Council mid year. Vice Mayor/Board Member/Commissioner Tam moved approval of the Speczal Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Alameda Reuse 1 5 and Redevelopment Authority, and Community Improvement Commission Meeting December 4, 2007 first quarter financial report and requested recommended appropriations. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Mayor/Chair Johnson adjourned the Special Joint Meeting at 11:41 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 1'] and Redevelopment Authority, and Community improvement Commission Meeting December 4, 207 UNAPPROVED MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY- -DECEMBER 18, 2DD7- -7:25 P.M. Chair Johnson convened the Special Meeting at 7:48 p.m. Commissioner Matarrese led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL - Present: Commissioners deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese, Tam, and Chair Johnson -- 5. Absent: None. SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY X07- 7 Update on the Alameda Theater, Cineplex, and Parking Structure Project . The Redevelopment Manager gave a brief presentation. Commissioner Tam inquired whether tenant improvements would be in place and in operation by March. The Redevelopment Manager responded most tenant improvements would be done by March; stated the time schedule is very aggressive and both tenants are working hard to open in March; the latest date would be some time in April. Commissioner deHaan inquired whether the additional 250 seats would be configured the same way, to which the Redevelopment Manager responded in the affirmative. AGENDA ITEMS None. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Chair Johnson adjourned the Special Meeting at 7:55 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger Secretary, Community Improvement Commission The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act. Special Meeting Community Zmpx~avement Cammissian December 18, 2007 CITY OF ALAMEDA Memorandum To: Honorable Chair and Members.of the Community Impravement Commission From: Debra Kurita Executive Director Date: January 2, 2008 Re: Approve the Amended Contract with Architectural Resources Group, Inc. by Increasing the Contract Amount by $23,540 to Provide Additional Construction Administration Services for the Restoration and Rehabilitation of the Historic Alameda Theater BACKGROUND Cver the past five years, the Community Improvement Commission of the City of Alameda CIC} has implemented plans to rehabilitate and restore the historic Alameda Theater, in conjunction with amulti-screen cineplex and parking structure. As part of this implementation process, the CIC retained historic preservation architects, Architectural Resources Group, Inc. ~ARG}, to provide design and architectural services for the rehabilitation of the historic Alameda Theater. In November 2003, the CIC contracted with ARG to prepare preliminary cost estimates, base drawings, code analysis, testing of interior panels and finishes, and recommendations for interior rehabilitation. The cost of that contract was $78,590. Since then, the CIC has amended ARG's contract seven times to authorize performance of expanded services necessary to move the proposed Historic Theater project forward: 1. In June 2004, the CIC approved a $129,200 amendment to provide additional testing and analysis of system improvements with complete cost estimates for potential rehabilitation of the theater. 2. In Gctober 2004, the CIC approved a $43,550 amendment to coordinate with the preliminary designs forthe cineplex and parking structure. 3, !n December 2004, the CIC approved a $320,000 amendment to produce construction documents. 4. In April 2005, the CIC approved a $44,275 amendment to provide documentation for Section 106 requirements of the National Historic Preservation Act and to provide specifications for the ADA ramp and exit stair enclosure. CIC Agenda Item #2-B o~-oz-oa Honorable Chair and January 2, 2005 Members of the Community Improvement Commission Page 2 of 3 5. In July 2005, the C1C approved a $301,414 amendment to provide additional pre- planning and construction administration services for the rehabilitation of the Alameda Theater. 6. In May 2006, the term of ARG's contract was amended for an additional two years until June 30, 2008. 1. In September 2006, the CIC approved a $19,860 amendment to value-engineer the scope of work and to successfully negotiate a construction contract with C. Overaa & Co. for the rehabilitation of the historic Alameda Theater. The total amount allocated to date for ARG's scope of work is $943,189, not including the proposed contract amendment. The proposed contract amendment will increase ARG's budget by $23,840 for a total contract of $967,029. The contract and all amendments are on file with the City Clerk. DISCUSSION Over the last several months, ARG provided additional design services to the CIC for the Alameda Theater rehabilitation that were not included in their previous contract amendments. These services included additional architectural review and construction administration due to: ~1 }numerous unforeseen conditions related to areas concealed by the built-up floor in the auditorium and the non-original carpet in the lobby; ~2} additional scope of work approved by the CIC, such as patching and painting the ceiling and niches in the main auditorium; ~3} movie operator requirements for the concession area design; and ~4} drawing revisions and submissions required by the Planning and Building Department not initially necessary at the onset of construction. As a result of ARG's increased scope of work, additional budget is required in order for ARG to fulfill their previous scope of work of providing construction administration services through completion ofthe Theater rehabilitation and restoration. The total architecture and engineering ~A&E} costs for the historic Alameda Theater of $967,029 represents approximately 10 percent of the construction budget of $9,800,000, including all currently executed and pending change orders. This is within the industry standard of 10 to 12 percent. Additionally, ARG's A&E costs included intensive research and testing, such as microscopic analysis of paint samples, which is not typically required for non-historic building renovations. BUDGET CONSIDERATIONIFINANCIALlMPACT This project will be funded by the 2003 Merged Area Bonds and will not impact the General Fund. Architectural fees for this scope of work will not exceed $23,840, for a total contract amount of $961,029. This contract amendment will not impact the contingency budget for the project. The contract amount will be withdrawn from the $211,000 in the budget line item for additional soft costs for the project as described in "Attachment 3"from the July 26, 2006 CIC meeting. Honorable Chair and January 2, 2008 Members of the Community Improvement Commission Page 3 of 3 RECGMMENDATIGN Approve the amended contract with Architectural Resources Group, Inc. by increasing the contract amount by $23,840 to provide additional construction administration services for the restoration and rehabilitation of the historic Alameda Theater. R s fully submitt , r ~~ Leslie A. Little evelopment Services Director By: Dorene E. Soto Manager, Business Development Division By: Jennifer Ott Redevelopment Manager DKILALIDESIJG:rv Attachment: ~. "Attachment 3"from July 26, 2006 CIC Meeting cc: Architectural Resources Group, Inc., clo Naomi Miroglio Attachment 3 Proposed Budget for Downtown Theater Project Propos®d Difference Item Budget Budget Budget between 3l2~i2DOS sr~~2aas 7~2s~2oas sn- 7~2s 1. SOURCE CF FUNDS~'y Sources of Funds ' $29,003,D00 $29,OD3,QOD $29,003,D00 0 $ Add l Redevelopment Bond Proceeds Libra ~ rY} ' 0 $ $O $1,000,DDD $1,DDD ODD Add i Redevelopment Bond Proceeds ~D ~D, 200 a0D , 2D0 DOD ~ T07AL SOURCES OF FUNDS 29 003 00 $ D $29,DD3,OOD $3D,203,QDD '~ $1,200,000 ![. USE ~F FUNDS Parking Garage Land Acquisition $811,OD0 $811,OOD $811,OOD $Q Construction Costs $8,300,OOD $8,3OD,oOD $8,371,000 $71 OD0 Other Costs $1,41 D,oOD $1,410,DOD ~ $1,41 D,DOD , $D Construction Contingency~z~ 7B6 ODD 786 ODD 415 DOD 371 D40 Subtotal $11,3D7,oDD $11,307,ODD $11,007,OOD $300 ODD ~ ~ Cin,,,, eplex Public ContributionlLoan $~,BDO,ODO $2,80D,OOD $2,80O,OOD $D Hazardous INaterials Clean-up~~~ $2DO,ODO $200,OD4 $250,000 $50 000 Theater Connections 675 DOO ' fi75 ODO fi75 DOD ' ~D Subtotal $3,675,000 $3,675,000 $3,725,000 $5D,OD0 Alameda Theater Rehabilitation Property AcquisitionlRelocation $2 500,400 $2,500,000 $3,418,000 $g1 g p00 Rehabilitation Costs $7,373,6DD $8,500,OOD $B,BOO,DOO , $30O OOD Other Costs $1,870,DDD $1,870,000 $1,B70,DD0 , $p Additional Soft Costs~4~ $D $A~5,OO0 $~77,OOD 232 0 $ oa Construction Contingency~Z~ 1 106 OOO 1 1 Ofi DOD 1 1 ofi DOD , D ~ Subtotal $12 849 fiO0 14 ~1 $ ,0 ,000 $15,471,000 " $1,450,DD0 TOTAL USE DF FUNDS $7,832,000 $29,003,OD0 $30,2D3,D00 $1,200,000 Ilj. NET BALANCEI REVENUE SURPLUS $1,1,71,000 $0 $p ~'~ Assumes $1 million in library redevelopment bond funds and $201x,000 In uncommitted bond funds no !anger required for cash reserves are committed tv the Theater project under the 7126121]06 budget. t2~ The contingency for the theater under the 7!2612406 budget is approximately t3°/° instead of t5°/a with the increase in construction budget; and the garage was reduced to 5°/° still exceeding industry standards. ~~~ This contingency was incorrectly stated as a $200,800 in previous budgets. The DDA stales it is a $254,000 contingency. ~a1 As part of the value-engineering process far the theater, these tunds are likely to be required for additional salt cysts. CIC Attachment 'I to Agenda Item #2-B 01-42-08 UNAPPROVED MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL JOINT CITY COUNCIL, ALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ~ARRA}, AND COMMUI~IITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION CIC} MEETING TUESDAY- -DECEMBER 4, 2007-- -7:31 P.M. Mayor/Chair Johnson convened the Special Joint Meeting at 8:57 p.m. ROLL CALL -- Present: Councilmembers/Board Members/Commissioners deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese, Tam, and Mayor/Chair Johnson -- 5. Absent: None. CONSENT Mayor/Chair Johnson announced that the recommendation to authorize the use of up to $50,000 [paragraph no. 07- CIC, and the recommendation to approve a $300,000 loan [paragraph no. 07- CIC] were removed for discussion. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan moved approval of the remainder of the Consent Calendar. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Gilmore seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote -~ 5. [Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk preceding the paragraph number.] ~*07- CIC} Minutes of the Special Community Improvement Commission Meeting of November 20, 2007. Approved. X07- CIC} Recommendation to authorize the use of up to $50,000 in interest earnings to complete the enclosure of the Historic Alameda Theater Balcony Access Corridor and related improvements. Commissioner deHaan stated that the Commission discussed bringing back value engineering items if money became available; inquired whether other worthy items should be considered. The Development Services Director responded the CIC would not be required to make other significant, hard construction improvements to the Historic Theater in the future; stated decorative or restoration items could be considered; the mezzanine balcony rehabilitation and restoration is the last hard construction item left unfinished; the Historic Theater is required to have certain fire and life safety exiting paths as well as American with Disabilities DADA} access; the proposed platform is part of the Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Alameda Reuse 1 and Redevelopment Authority, and Community Improvement Commission Meeting December 4, 2007 existing path for fire safety as well as ADA access; ADA access would be provided using an elevator system in the new theater; the second floor was always assumed to be part of the second phase; the balance of the second story improvements are the responsibility of the developer. Robb Ratto, Park Street Business Association ~PSBA~, stated that he supports the staff recommendation; he is concerned with safety issues; PSBR urges Council to accept the staff recommendation. Chair Johnson stated the enclosure should be done now since money is available. Commissioner deHaan inquired whether a canopy would be used or a full enclousre, to which the Development Services Director responded a full enclosure. Commissioner Gilmore stated the enclosure should be done now because the contractors are on site and there would be minimal disruptions. Commissioner Matarrese stated that staff and the developer did an excellent job; he supports the staff recommendation. Commissioner Matarrese moved approval of the staff recommendation. Commissioner Gilmore seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. X07- CIC~ Recommendation to approve a $300,000 loan to Alameda Entertainment Associates, L.P, for rehabilitation and restoration of the mezzanine balcony in the Historic Alameda Theater and for augmentation of the Cineplex construction contingency budget. The Development Services Manager gave a brief presentation. Commissioner Tam stated that the use of $691,D00 Merged Area Bond is fairly restricted. The Development Services Manager stated that the 2003 Merged Area Bond anticipated financing a number of projects; $4 million was unspecified; using the Bond for the Library was not anticipate; $2 million was pledged to the Library to finish construction; State funding for the library is closed out; the unused money was intended to come back to the CIC for other projects. Commissioner Tam stated the remainder of the fund cannot be used for branch libraries because said libraries are not in Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Alameda Reuse 2 and Redevelopment Authority, and Community improvement Commission Meeting December 4, 207 redevelopment areas. The Development Services Manager stated typically funds have to be used in redevelopment project areas or benefit redevelopment project areas. Commissioner deHaan stated the west End library would fall well within said criteria because the library is the only library in the area; he is concerned with 738 seats; inquired whether there is a market for 738 seats. The Development Services Director responded she called a number of theaters; stated three or four shows can be sold out in a row on an opening day or the day before. Commissioner deHaan stated that previous discussions addressed utilizing the balcony differently; 254 seats were never anticipated in previous discussions. Kyle Connor, Developer, stated theater strategy is to double track; a lot of auditoriums are needed to double track; capacity is needed to meet demand; 1,300 people attended a silent film festival at the Castro Theater in San Francisco. Commissioner deHaan inquired what is the next largest theater other than the main theater. Mr. Connor responded three theaters have approximately 200 seats. Commissioner deHaan stated that the Castro Theater film festival was a special event. Mr. Connor stated that hopefully Alameda will have film festivals; films pay off in approximately 2.7 weeks; 900 of business is done within the first three weeks; facilitating capacity is important. Commissioner deHaan inquired how the other portion [of the balcony] would be closed, to which Mr. Connor responded drapery would be used, Robb Ratto, PSBR, urged approval of the staff recommendation; stated the community wants the balcony open. Commissioner Matarrese stated the $2 million was not designated for the Library; inquired whether the $2 million was redevelopment money that was held in case Library costs escalated, to which the Development Services Director responded in the affirmative. Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Alameda Reuse 3 and Redevelopment Authority, and Community Improvement Commission Meeting December 4, 207 Commissioner Matarrese stated there is still Measure 0 more that Y is supposed to go for branch upgrades; a report is needed on the matter at some point; he would rather open the mezzanine balcony now; people saw the potential for the theater; he thinks the loan should be given to complete the job; twelve public da s mi ht Y g demand 800 seats. Commissioner Matarrese moved approval of the staff recommendation Commissioner Gilmore seconded the motion. Under discussion, Commissioner Gilmore requested a run down on restoration that has been accomplished. The Development Services Director stated the project has one ver g y well; major, significant repairs and alterations were made to the ceiling; all the trim molding was painted; original li ht fixtures g were installed; fabric workers restored the original curtain• artisans did all of the leaf work; the original art work was ut back in place; the detail is h p p enomenal; some of the original furniture might be recovered. Chair Johnson stated the marquee sign is beautiful. Commissioner deHaan stated that the Historic Alameda Theater is one of the better restorations; separating the upper balconies into theaters would be a shame; inquired how many seats will be aired g to which the Development Services Director responded 150. Commissioner deHaan requested a breakdown of efforts made for the transition into the Cineplex. The Development Services Director stated some of the on final carpeting will be ut back in g p to the Historic Theater; the Cineplex will have similar carpeting and upholstery; similar icons and images have been carried through the Cineplex. Commissioner Gilmore requested staff to update the website hotos. p Commissioner Tam stated that the schedule shows a March o enin all contingencies are bein u p g~ g sed, inquired whether the CIC mould be requesting another loan in the next four months. The Development Services Director responded there is a roximatel pp y $106, 000 left in contingency, Commissioner Tam inquired whether staff is requesting $200,000 on top of the loan, to which the Development Services Director Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Alameda Reuse 4 and Redevelopment Authority, and Community Improvement Commission Meeting December 4, 2007 responded in the negative, Commissioner Matarrese inquired whether the $300,000 loan is coming from undesignated bond money, to which the Development Services Director responded in the affirmative. Qn the call for the question, the motion carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. ~*07-~ authorize Council. CIC} Recommendation to accept the transmittal to the State Controller's Accepted. Annual Report and Office and the City ~*07- CC/*07- CIC} Recommendation to accept transmittal of the: 1} Comprehensive Annual Financial Report ~CAFR} for Fiscal Year ended June 30, 2007; 2} Auditor's Agreed Upon Procedures Report on compliance with Vehicle Code Section 40200.3 Parking Citation Processing; 3} Agreed Upon Procedures Report on compliance with the Proposition 111 21005-06 Appropriations Limit Increment; 4} Police and Fire Retirement System Pension Plans 1079 and 1092 Audit Report far Fiscal Year ended June 30, 2007; 5} Metropolitan Transportation Commission Grant Programs Financial Statements for Year ended June 30, 2007; 6} Community Improvement Commission Basic Component Unit Financial Statements for the Year ended June 30, 2007; and 7} Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority Basic Component Unit Financial Statements for the Year ended June 30, 2007. Accepted. AGENDA ITEMS (07- CC/07- 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; ~a7- A/CC} Resolution No. 14162, "Approving Execution of an Amendment of th Agreement Alameda Landing Mixed Acquisition Corporation." Adopted; e Disposition Use Project} and and Authorizing and Development with Palmtree X07- B/CIC} Resolution 07-151, "Approving a First Addendum to the Alameda Landing Mixed Use Development Project Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report and Authorizing the Executive Director to Amend the Disposition and Development Agreement Alameda Landing Mixed Use Project} with Palmtree Acquisition Corporation." Adopted; and Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Alameda Reuse 5 and Redevelopment Authority, and Community Improvement Commission Meeting December 4, 2007 X07- C/CC} Introduction of Ordinance Approving Development Agreement Amendment DA-06-0003 to the Development Agreement Alameda Landing Mixed Use Commercial Project} By and Between the City of Alameda and Palmtree Acquisition Corporation, dated Januar Y 16, 2007. Introduced. The Base Reuse and Community Development Manager provided a Power Point presentation. Dan Bucko with SMwM provided a brief presentation on wharf redesign. The Base Reuse and Community Development Manager provided a brief summary of the proposed modifications to the Disposition and Development Agreement ~DDA}. Councilmember/Commissioner Gilmore inquired whether utility lines would be above ground going to Clif Bar and restaurants. The Base Reuse and Community Development Manager responded the existing 115 kV line would be relocated into the Mitchell Avenue right-of-way; stated Catellus would perform the trenchin and g install the conduit necessary for the ultimate undergroundin the g 115kV line starts at the High Street Bridge, runs the entire len th g of the City's waterfront, and terminates at Pacific Avenue and Main Street adjacent to Alameda Point. Councilmember/Commissioner deHaan inquired what is the estimated insurance cost. The Base Reuse and Community Development Manager responded the cost has not been calculated; stated the idea is to obtain insurance if available at commercially reasonable rates. Councilmember/Commissioner Matarrese inquired what would be a commercially reasonable rate, to which the Base Reuse and Communit Y Development Manager responded that she would provide the information. Councilmember/Commissioner Gilmore stated the Alameda Landin tax g increment would be parceled off; Merged Improvement Areas would be paid back first with tax increment from other areas; re uested q clarification on the matter and whether Alameda Point would be affected. The Base Reuse and Community Development Manager stated Alameda Point is in the Alameda Point Improvement Project APIP ~ } redev elopment area and would not be affected; the Merged . Area is Special Joint Mee~.ing Alameda City Council, Alameda Reuse 6 and Redevelopment Authority, and Community Improvement Commission Meeting December ~, 2007 the west End Community Improvement Project ~WECIP} and Business and Waterfront Improvement Project ~BWIP}; the Merged Area Bands were issued in 2003 and were an existing condition when the DDA was approved with Catellus in 2006; the bond was sized and assumed a zero tax increment from Alameda Landing because the property is not on the tax roll; all of the tax increment in the entire project area is pledged to the repayment of the debt; typically underwriters have a debt to loan value ratio when debt is issued; technically, the Alameda Landing tax increment is already pledged to the repayment of the existing obligation; the Bond was sized when there was no tax increment at Alameda Landing; the project area should have no trouble making the bond payment without Alameda Landing tax increment; eventually, property taxes will be on the rolls for Alameda Landing. Mayor/Commissioner Tam stated that some of the proposed Development Agreement FDA} amendments spread the cost and shift some of the liabilities; the staff report notes that the City's financial obligations do not increase but overall project costs increase and references just the acquisition of the property; inquired whether that is the only additional cost. The Base Reuse and Community Development Manager responded there is a one time cost for fencing the wharf and acquisition of the property insurance; stated the 115kv obligation would not be triggered until the DA is amended to remove the project obligation; the process is sequential. Councilmember/Commissioner deHaan requested elaboration on the utility assessment district; inquired whether an assessment for the wharf is required. The Base Reuse and Community Development Manager responded a Municipal Utility District is anticipated which would a for p Y maintenance and operations of the public open spaces such as the wharf; the undergrounding district would be just like the Rule 20A Undergraunding District where there is an assessment. Councilmember/Commissioner deHaan inquired what the district would cover. The Base Reuse and Community Development Manager responded the district would be comprised of the properties from Alameda Landin g to Alameda Point. Councilmember/Commissioner deHaan inquired whether there would be an assessment fund to maintain the wharf. Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Alameda Reuse '~ and Redevelopment Authority, and Community ~mpxovement Commission Meeting December 4, 2Q07 The Base Reuse and Community Development Manager res onded the p assessment fund would be from the Municipal Utilities District, covers more than the wharf, and includes other City services. Mayor/Chair Johnson opened the public portion of the hearin . g George Phillips, Alameda Boys and Girls Club, urged approval and expedition. Christopher Buckley, Alameda, encouraged the developer to kee both p warehouses. Roberta Rockwell, Alameda East Bay Miracle League, stated that she supports the Alameda Landing Project. Richard w. Rutter, Alameda, stated he thought that the Ma 29 lan Y p was great; he was distressed when the September amendment came before the Planning Board and the western portion of the wharf and a major structure were removed; he thinks that there ma be wa s of Y Y saving and repairing the pier over time. Mario Mariam , Alameda, stated he supports the char es. g Don Lindsey, Alameda, encouraged moving forward with the ro'ect. p J There being no further speakers, Mayor/Chair Johnson closed the public portion of the hearing. Councilmember/Commissioner Matarrese inquired whether the buildin s would be demolished or deconstructed an g d reused. The Base Reuse and Community Development Manager res onded the p buildings would be a combination of deconstruction and otenti p al demolition; stated the existing DDA does not obligate the develo er to maintain the warehouses the Pla ~ ~ p nning Board added a Condition of Approval which states that prior to making a decision about the disposition of the second warehouse, the developer will o back g to the Planning Board and make a presentation re ardin th g g e feasibility of retaining the warehouse; the May and Se tember lan p p s do not contemplate the retention of the second warehous e, currently, the Plan calls for the retention of the first warehouse for Clif Bar;. several other warehouses south of the wharf will be partially deconstructed and made into parking sheds; the develo er is committed to rec cle and reuse p Y elements if the second warehouse is not used. Councilmember/Commissioner deHaan inquired what is the office s ace square footage for Clif Bar to whi p ch the Base Reuse and Community Special Joznt Meeting Alameda City Council, Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority, and Community Improvement Commission Meeting December 4, 2007 Development Manager responded approximately 100,000 square feet. Councilmember/Commissioner deHaan inquired what would be the remaining square footage of the building, to which the Base Reuse and Community Development Manager responded approximately 300,000 square feet. Councilmember/Commissioner deHaan inquired whether three to five story buildings are still contemplated on the wharf. The Base Reuse and Community Development Manager responded the Master Plan provides for a maximum of five stories; stated the height limit was reduced to 85 feet last year. Councilmember/Commissioner deHaan inquired whether the waterfront would have five-story buildings, to which the Base Reuse and Community Development Manager responded possibly. Councilmember/Commissioner deHaan inquired whether the issue would be contrary to the planning principles of having more open, step down designs to the waterfront. The Base Reuse and Community Development Manager responded the Master Plan provides for a maximum of five stories; stated the new buildings would be set back from the waterfront; there would be waterfront access and open space more than 100 feet from the water; the Bay Conservation and Development Commission ~BCDC~ requires a minimum 100 foot setback from the water. Councilmember/Commissioner deHaan inquired what would be the cost estimate for retrofitting the wharf. The Base Reuse and Community Development Manager responded between $30 million and $35 million; stated San Francisco waterfront improvements are estimated a~t $1 billion; the Cruise Terminal did not go forward because of a $144 million bill to retrofit the piers at the Cruise Terminal; San Francisco's challenge is much bigger than Alameda Landing but is similar to the challenges of upgrading the wharf to current seismic conditions and Uniform Building Code as well as geotechnical issues. Councilmember/Commissioner deHaan inquired what the anticipated cost would be. The Base Reuse and Community Development Manager responded the cost would be approximately $15 million in order to accommodate Clif Bar. Special. Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Alameda Reuse g and Redevelopment Authority, and Community Improvement Commission Meeting December 4, 20Q7 Councilmember/Commissioner deHaan inquired whether said cost was new compared to the ariginal estimate, to which the Base Reuse and Community Development Manager responded in the affirmative. Councilmember/Commissioner deHaan inquired what was the original estimate. The Base Reuse and Community Development Manager responded that she, would need to check; stated an additional $30 million to $35 was originally budgeted to retrofit the wharf and is cut back to $15 million to preserve the warehouse for Clif Bar; the developer states that it is infeasible to spend an additional $15 million to $20 million to preserve the remainder of the wharf; the developer believes that the redesign maintains a lot of the public amenities and benefits and is a better plan in some ways in that the entire waterfront experience is not seven feet above the water; there is the ability to step down and access the water at the water level. Councilmember/Commissioner Matarrese stated that he appreciates the history; construction costs escalate; costs for preserving the warehouse and rest of the wharf are not worth holding up the project; everything should be done to recycle materials if a couple of buildings are lost; historic significance can be preserved in photos and videos; the buildings are warehouses on a dock; he likes the idea of getting closer to the water's edge and getting millions of dollars in sales tax which helps to have a safe City and good parks; everything should be done to underground the 115kV line, including pursuing Homeland Security money; keeping the project on track is important. Councilmember/Commissioner Tam stated that she concurs with Councilmember/Commissioner Matarrese; there has been a six--month 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 Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Alameda Reuse 1 and Redevelopment Authority, and Community Improvement Commission Meeting December 4, 2007 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. MayorlChair 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 X009. 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 by unanimous voice vote ~- 5. X07- CC/07- CIC/ARRA} Recommendation to accept the Fiscal Year 2007 First Quarter Financial Report and budget adjustments. The Finance Director gave a Power Point presentation. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Gilmore stated that Proposition 1A did~not provide any protection for the City's redevelopment fund; requested clarification on the issue. The Finance Director stated the last Educational Revenue Augmentation funds ~ERAF7 were $711,000 out of $5 million of property tax in the past years; the construction of a takeaway formula is unknown; redevelopment agencies are the most vulnerable. Councilmember/Board Member/CCommissioner Matarrese stated Council did not intend to use reserves for Beltline litigation costs; inquired what will be done in the future to prevent reoccurrence. The Finance Director responded any direction for use of funds needs to come from the City Manager to the Finance Department and needs to have discussions on funding. Mayor/Chair Johnson stated all money needs to be budgeted with Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Alameda Reuse 1 1 and Redevelopment Authority, and Community Improvement Commission Meeting December 4, 2007 approval of Council. The Finance Director stated that she understands that the money was approved for payment from the Risk Management Fund. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Matarrese inquired whether audit practices and protocols are sufficient to catch any in the Finance Director's opinion; stated that authorization happened over a year ago; audits have been performed since that time; the matter is just coming to light now; inquired whether audit practices and protocols are sufficient. The Finance Director stated the only way that an auditor would be aware of the issue was if substantial information was available about the fact that the litigation .was directed by Council; the direction would be in the form of information from the Cit M y onager and the City Attorney to Finance. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Matarrese inquired how the issue was discovered. The Finance Director responded by review of the Risk Management Fund when the balance became a deficit. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Matarrese inquired whether the auditors look for deficits. The Finance Director responded the auditors pointed out that it was a deficit this year but the issue was already determined. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Matarrese stated the Power Point presentation should be posted to the website and Council should reveive a copy; the national economic environment affects California and will affect the City; thanked the Finance Director for doing a good job on the presentation. Vice Mayor/Board Member/Commissioner Tam echoed Commissioner Matarrese's appreciation for the presentation; inquired how the City deals with replenishing or drawing down on the reserves from the 20~ to 25o range. The Finance Director responded the draw down was purposeful and well thought out by Council in terms of trying to meet unmet infrastructure needs. Vice Mayor/Board Member/Commissioner Tam inquired whether reserves are replenished also. Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Alameda Reuse 1 2 and Redevelopment Authority, and Community Improvement Commission Meeting December 4, 2007 The Finance Director responded reserves are replenished onl b Y Y having revenues exceed expenditures; stated the expenditure bud et g is $85.7 million; typically, not all money is spent and will o g back into the fund balance; an absolute commitment cannot be made at this time. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan stated there was a draw down on the reserves because of needed infrastructure; the draw down was supposed to be 2 5 o to 2 3~ and i s now 21 a; 1 S a i s l e f t and will leave approximately $12 million; a lot of the $12 million is obligated. The Finance Director stated 18o will leave approximatel 15.5 Y $ million; the $400,000 reserve designated for Fire Station 3 replacement is excluded; approximately $G million is loaned to other funds. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan inquired whether the $6 million could be called back. The Finance Director responded the $6 million could be called back ut the disaster would be pushed off to another area. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan inquired what loans are in the $6 million. The Finance Director responded $2.2 million is from Alameda Power & Telecom SAP&T} and is scheduled to be repaid in 2009; the remainder is all redevelopment agency loans. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan stated Public Safet equates to approximatel 50a of the ~ y Y budget and 30~ of the staffing; the out years obligation is concerning; Public Safety retirement funds are escalating. The Finance Director stated the actuarial evaluation was received in October from the Public Employee Retirement System ~PERS the Clt ~ ~ }~ y s contribution rate for Public Safety is remaining very close to 30Q and is not increasing or decreasing significantly. Mayar/Chair Johnson stated the dollar amount increases because of salary increases. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan inquired whether immediate action is necessary to the extent of Kirin freezes etc. g , The Finance Director responded department heads have been re ested to restrain spending; stated discretionary spending should be Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Alameda Reuse 1 3 and Redevelopment Authority, and Community Improvement Commission Meeting December 4, 2007 postponed. The City Manager/Executive Director stated department heads have been advised that a minimum of 1.5o needs to be saved; the budget is reviewed at weekly meetings; more changes may be necessar mid-- Y year. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan stated that out years are a real concern; different plans will need to be developed; requested elaboration on Proposition 1A. The Finance Director stated the report includes an excellent description of Proposition 1A; the Governor has to declare that there is a severe State fiscal hardship; the State can temporaril Y suspend Proposition 1A basic protection of property tax; the Legislature has to agree by a two-thirds vote; a separate statute must be adopted that requires the State to repay local governments in three years and can be done only twice in ten years. Councilmernber/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan stated he has heard about a 25o cut; a 10o cut would be disasterous at a State level. Councilrnember/Board Member/Commissioner Gilmore stated one way to build up the General Fund reserves is by having revenues exceed expenses; the other way is to not fund infrastructure, as was done in the past; Council decided that the City could no longer do that [not fund infrastructure]; tough choices will need to be made. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Matarrese stated that he is not overly concerned with replenishing the reserves; the reserve was built partially on the PERS bonanza that occurred in the dot.com boom. The Finance Director stated two years had a zero percent contribution; the money was allowed to flow back into the fund balance rather than setting the money aside to be used in the future for payments. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Matarrese stated that his biggest concern is balancing the budget and delivering essential services; the big difference between 2002 and today is that there was not $10 billion a month of tax dollars flowing out of the economy at the federal level; tonight's discussion sets the stage for what will be a very tough fiscal environment for the foreseeable future; it is important to put on the brakes now. Mayor/Chair Johnson inquired how department heads cut budgets when there are already built in increases. Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Alameda Reuse 1 4 and Redevelopment Authority, and Community Improvement Commission Meeting December 4, 2Q07 The Finance Department responded salary and benefits are contracted; a position can be left vacant. Mayor/Chair Johnson stated department heads are being asked to cut budgets by 1.50; however, budgets are increasing more than 1.50 because of fixed increases. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Matarrese stated Contracts are tied to salaries; the salaries are paid to people; the blunt end is either not filling the position or lay offs. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan inquired how long the City had the 25o reserve. The Finance Director responded Council was presented with a policy for adoption in late 1997 or early 1998. Cauncilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Matarrese requested a copy of said policy. Vice Mayor/Board Member/Commissioner Tam stated Alameda is one of the few cities that has a reserve; many cities are being hit hard; the League of California Cities cautioned all cities regarding Proposition 1A; it is .easier for the Legislature to raid local government than it is to go up against the educational lobbyists. Mayor/Chair Johnson stated the City of Oakland was audited; $3 million is questionable on payroll; inquired whether an operational review or audit would be beneficial to Alameda. The Finance Director responded an operational review never hurts; there is a great deal of coordination between Human Resources and the Finance Department; a review could be scheduled later in the fiscal year and there has been some practice with the conversion of the new payroll system. Mayor/Chair Johnson stated operational reviews were performed with significant findings for AP&T and the golf course. Vice Mayor/Board Member/Commissioner Tam stated that the City of Oakland did a performance audit; inquired what would be the cost for such an audit. The Finance Director responded a Request for Proposal ~RFP~ would need to be done. The City Manager/Executive Director stated AP&T and the golf course Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Alameda Reuse 1 5 and Redevelopment Authority, and Community Improvement Commission Meeting December 4, 207 are enterprise funds and are different. The Finance Director stated a RFP could be issued in the spring. Mayor/Chair Johnson stated expenditures are 23a to 25o generally; some are lower; inquired whether some categories are over budgeted, such as Police Contract overtime, abandoned vehicle abatement, and advance life support. The Finance Director responded the Police Contract overtime does not follow a straight line and is based upon the need of outside persons to contract with the Police Department for overtime, such as for school dances. Mayor/Chair Johnson inquired whether there is enough in the budget for additional animal shelter staffing and improvements. The City Manager/Executive Director responded a grant fund could be used; stated funding impacts would need to be identified. Mayor/Chair Johnson stated the golf course had more of a shortfall than was anticipated; inquired how much is left in the golf course fund, to which the Finance Director responded $1.9 million. Mayor/Chair Johnson stated the golf course fund is burning through approximately $60,000 per month. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan stated the $15.5 million [reserve]is pretty well obligated; he believes that staff has the skills in getting requirements in order; having an outside review process would be a shame; actions have to be weighed; AP&T and the golf course are other concerns. Mayor/Chair Johnson inquired whether a 1.5o reduction is aggressive enough for the next six or seven months. The City Manager/Executive Director responded the 1.5a reductian is a beginning; stated the matter will be monitored; she believes that the reduction fits at this point; direction can be changed if necessary. Mayor/Chair Johnson stated Council needs to consider how cuts are made. The City Manager/Executive Director stated the matter would be brought back to Council mid year. Vice Mayor/Board Member/Commissioner Tam moved approval of the Special Joint Mee~.ing Alameda City Council, Alameda Reuse 1 6 and Redevelopment Authority, and Community Improvement Commission Meeting December 4, 2pp7 first quarter financial report and requested recommende d appropriations. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. ADJQURNMENT There being no further business, Mayor/Chair Johnson ad'ourned t ~ he Special Joint Meeting at 11:41 p.rn. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger, City Clerk Secretary, Community Improvement CommlSSlon The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Bro ACt. ~ Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Alameda Reuse 1 and Redevelopment Authozity, and Community improvement Commission Meeting December 4, 2007 UNAPPRQVED MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING WEDNESDAY- -DECEMBER 5, 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: X07- ~ Public Employee Performance Evaluation X54957; Title: City Manager. X07- 7 Public Employee Performance Evaluation X549577; Title: City Attorney. *~~ Mayor Johnson called a recess to hold the Regular Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority Meeting at 7:10 p.m. and reconvened the Special Meeting at 11:00 p.m. *~~ Following the Closed Session, the Special Meeting was reconvened and Mayor Johnson announced that regarding City Manager, Council met with the City Manager to review her annual performance; a performance bonus of 3.5o was approved in accordance with her existing Contract terms; regarding City Attorney, the matter was not heard. Adjournment There being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the Special Meeting at 11:15 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger City Clerk The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act. Special. Meeting Aiameda City Council December 5, 2QQ7 UNAPPROVED MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING WEDNESDAY- --DECEMBER 5, 20D7- -7 : O1 P. M. Mayor Johnson convened the Special Meeting at 8:50 p.m. ROLL CALL - Present: Councilmembers deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese, Tam, and Mayor Johnson - 5. Absent: None. X07- } Charter Revision Workshop. Council reviewed and discussed proposed revisions; the Senior Assistant City Attorney provided an Annotated Charter incorporating ideas and suggestions received Bill Smith, Alameda, discussed micromanagment. Adjournment There being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the Special Meeting at 11:02 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger City Clerk The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act. Special Meeting Alameda C~.~y Council December 5, 2007 UNAPPROVED MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING TUESDAY- -DECEMBER 11, 2007-- -6:00 P.M. Mayor Johnson convened the Special Meeting at 6:20 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: X07- } Conference with Labor Negotiators; Agency Negotiators: Craig Jory and Human Resources Director; Employee Organizations: All Public Safety Bargaining Units. Following the Closed Session, the Special Meeting was reconvened and Mayor Johnson announced that Council received a briefing on the status of public safety negotiations. Adjournment There being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the Special Meeting at 8:30 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 December 11, 2D07 []NAPPR~VED MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING TUESDAY-~ -DECEMBER 18, 2407- -6:00 p.m. Mayor Johnson convened the Special Meeting at 6:15 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: X07- } Public Employee Performance Evaluation X54957}; Title: City Attorney. Following the Closed Session, the Special Meeting was reconvened and Mayor Johnson announced that Council met with the City Attorney for the annual performance evaluation. Adjournment There being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the Special Meeting at 6:55 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lara weisiger City Clerk The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act. Special Meeting Alameda City Council December 18, 2aa~ UNAPPROVED MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING TUESDAY - - - -- - - DECEMBER 18 , 2 0 0 7 -- - - - 7 : 3 0 P . M . Mayor Johnson convened the Regular City Council Meeting at 7:55 p.m. ROLL CALL - Present: Councilmembers deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese, Tam, and Mayor Johnson - 5. Absent: None. AGENDA CHANGES X07- } Mayor Johnson announced that the recommendation to accept the Corica Golf Complex Operational Review [paragraph no. 07-- ] would be continued to January 2, 2008. PROCLAMATIONS, SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY AND ANNOUNCEMENTS (07- } Proclamation thanking the Social Services Human Relations Board Sister City Workgroup for coordinating the trip to China. Mayor Johnson read and presented the proclamation to Jim Franz, Social Services Human Relations Board Member. Mr. Franz thanked Council for the proclamation; stated that he enjoyed traveling with Council; Alameda had the largest representation; Council scored high in citizen to citizen diplomacy. Mayor Johnson stated that organizing the trip was a lot of work; the experience was valuable and beneficial to the City. Councilmember deHaan stated Council gathered information is still being sorted out. Vice Mayor Tam stated that Council appreciates Mr. Franz's personal contribution. Councilmember Matarrese stated that Mr. Franz and his wife performed to a packed house in Wuxi; thanked the Board Members for making the trip happen. Mayor Johnson stated Vice Mayor Tam's mother was born in China and was a great resource. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council December ~8r 2~~~ Councilmember Gilmore thanked the Board for organizing the trip and keeping everyone on track and on schedule. CONSENT CALENDAR Councilmember Matarrese moved approval of the Consent Calendar. Councilmember deHaan seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. [Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk preceding the paragraph number. (*07- } Minutes of the Special and Regular City Council Meetings held on December 4, 2007. Approved. (*07µ } Ratified bills in the amount of $3,165,851.00. (*07- } Recommendation to accept the Special Tax and Local Bond Measure Report. Accepted. (*07- } Recommendation to approve the Amended and Restated Employment Agreement for the City Manager. Accepted. (*07- } Recommendation to award Contract in the amount of $150,000 to Pacific Municipal Consultants to prepare the 2009-2014 Housing Element and conduct the Housing Element/Measure A Workshop. Accepted. ~*07- } Recommendation to award Contract in the amount of $114,605 to Ruth Metz Associates for long-range planning for future Library services and recommendations for the improvements of the neighborhood libraries. Accepted. (*47- } Recommendation to appropriate $144,707 in Fiscal Year 2007-2008 Citizen's option for Public Safety Program (COPS AB 3229} grant funding to enhance frontline police services. Accepted. (*07- } ordinance No. 2976, "Approving Development Agreement Amendment DA-06-0003 to the Development Agreement (Alameda Landing Mixed Use Commercial Project} By and Between the City of Alameda and Palmtree Acquisition Corporation, dated January 16, 2007." Finally passed. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS (07- } Public hearing on Housing and Community Development needs for Community Development Block Grant Fiscal Year 2005-2009 Annual Plan. Regular Meeting 2 Alameda City Council December 18, 2007 The Community Development Housing Manager gave a Power Point presentation. Proponents: ~In favor of recommendations}: Jim Franz, Red Cross; Lillian Galedo, Filipinos for Affirmative Action; Doug Biggs, Alameda Point Collaborative; Tracy Jensen, Alameda Unified School District. Vice Mayor Tam stated there have been a lot of discussions regarding safety net programs and trying to provide programs for at risk youth; inquired which programs could help some of the Filipinos for Affirmative Action needs and issues. The Community Development Housing Manager responded a Request for Proposals ~RFP} process would be used to evaluate applications; there is a clear connection from an eligibility standpoint based upon priority needs; said group would fit in Public Services under the five year consolidated plan. Mayor Johnson inquired whether staff was looking for general feedback. The Community Development Housing Manager responded the agenda item addresses holding a public hearing to hear the community needs. X07- } Introduction of Ordinance Amending the Alameda Municipal Code by Adding Section 4-~4 to Article I Littering and Maintenance of Property} of Chapter IV tOffenses and Public Safety} to Prohibit Polystyrene Foam Food Service ware and Amending Section 1-5.6 of Chapter I General} to Authorize Additional City Employees to Serve as Code Enforcement Officers. The Public Works director gave a Power Point presentation. Mayor Johnson stated that she spoke with Oakland Councilmember Quan regarding Oakland's ordinance; inquired whether the proposed ordinance would become effective in January and enforcement would start in July. The Public Works Director stated that he understands that the City of Oakland made the ordinance effective six months after passage. Mayor Johnson inquired whether restrictions would not start until July or whether enforcement would not take place until July, to which the Public Works Director responded both. Regular Meeting 3 Alameda City Council December 18, 2007 Mayor Johnson inquired why meat products would be exempt. The Public Works Director responded the exemption is based on the model ordinance that the State has recommended and is similar to Oakland's exemption. Mayor Johnson stated criteria should be developed for hardship exemptions. The Public Works Director stated the proposed ordinance provides details on what would constitute a hardship. Mayor Johnson inquired whether exemptions for prepared or packaged foods outside a City are typical, to which the Public Works Director responded in the affirmative. Mayor Johnson inquired whether other cities feel the exemption is necessary, to which the Public Works Director responded that he would check. Mayor Johnson inquired why outside businesss would be exempt and not be required to follow the same requirements as Alameda businesses; questioned whether said exemption should be taken out. Vice Mayor Tam inquired whether prepackaged meats are packaged outside the City and delivered to Safeway and Lucky. The Public Works Director responded ground beef is ground on the premises and placed in Styrofoam containers. Vice Mayor Tam inquired whether the ban would preclude vendors from bringing prepackaged meat products sold in grocery stores into Alameda. The Public Works Director responded prepackaged meat products would be exempt if prepared outside the City; butcher case meats would be exempt. Proponents: ~In favor of ordinance}: Michael John Torrey, Alameda; Robb Ratto, Park Street Business Assocaation ~PSBA}; Kathy Moehring, West Alameda Business Association ~WABA}; Ken Peterson, Alameda; Jerome P. Harrison, Alameda. Opponents: Not in favor of Ordinance}: Tom Knox, Plastic Food Service Packaging Group; Doug Biggs, Alameda. Regular Meeting 4 Alameda City Council December 18, 2007 Councilmember Matarrese stated he would like to clarify the exemption language in 4-4.6 that states that exemptions may be granted for up to a one-year period and that an exemption extension may be granted if undue hardship continues to exist; said language is open for interpretation in that an exemption may be granted for up to a one-year period from the date the ordinance becomes effective ar when a vendor comes into Alameda next August and requests a year. The Public works Director responded exemptions would be on a case- by-case basis. Councilmember Matarrese proposed that exemptions be granted for existing businesses from a one-year period from the effectiveness of the ordinance; otherwise, someone could get an unfair advantage in perpetuity; the extension should have a cap. Mayor Johnson stated that she has a hard time imagining the need for a one-time exemption; Councilmember Quan's office received concerns regarding restaurants selling hot soup; she does not see why a business could not comply within three or six months of implementation; a year is too long. The Public works Director stated the exemption would be for an undue hardship. Mayor Johnson stated that she cannot imagine what an undue hardship would be when all businesses are very similar. The Public Works Director stated there may be a business that needs a unique packaging; containers may not be available to meet the need; everyone would need to met the ordinance by July 1, unless there is an undue hardship. Mayor Johnson stated that she does not think some businesses should have to comply while others do not. Councilmember Matarrese suggested putting a one~year timeframe from the date of implementation; stated new businesses would not get an exemption. Councilmember deHaan stated that he thinks that one year would be more than adequate; McDonalds still serves coffee in Styrofoam cups that have a "Recycle #6" logo; inquired whether said cups can be recycled. The Public works Director responded the cups could not be recycled Regular Meeting 5 Alameda City Council December 1$, 2007 if soiled; stated some cities are trying to recycle polystyrene; the cost is over $3,000 per ton; glass is less than $100 per ton; styrofoam is not recyclable in Alameda's program and belongs in the gray garbage bins. Coucilmember deHaan stated in-stare recycle bins need to be the encouraging factor because the replacement material should not end up in the landfill; Acapulco and La Pinata have been using cardboard and aluminum for take out for ages; vegetables are pre- packed in trays. The Public Works Director stated currently Trader Joe's brings said vegetables from outside the City and would be exempt from the proposed ordinance. Councilmember deHaan stated Trader Joes's should be encouraged to be observant; packing material needs to be segregated and disposed of in a good orderly manner; the issue should be addressed at some point. The Public Works Director stated future steps could be taken to address the issue. Councilmember Gilmore stated that cities should ban together and tactfully suggest that Trader Joe's change ways of dealing with pre-packaged vegetables. The Public Works Director suggested keeping the exemption regarding packaging outside the City in place for now; stated the issue could be brought back in a year and would allow enough time to work with businesses to make a change. Councilmember Matarrese stated packaging outside the City is self- explanatory; Lucky packages eggs in styrofoam; Section 4-4.6 ~a7 exemption could state foods packaged outside the City; a caterer could come to Alameda with prepared food and dish the food out in styrofoam containers; suggested that exemptions be granted up to one year from the date of the effectiveness of the ordinance and apply only to existing businesses. Mayor Johnson stated people need to understand that things that go into the landfill, even though recyclable, do not decompose very easily, if at all. Councilmember Matarrese stated styrofoam can break down and is recyclable, but the infrastructure is not there to handle it; eventually, infrastructure will need to be in place to recycle Regular Mee~.ing Alameda City Council December 18, 207 s tyrof oam. Mayor Johnson stated the polystyrene industry needs to be a leader in setting up recycling and reuse. Mr. Knox stated that he would like to correct the record; 950 of paper food service is not recyclable; only plastic and aluminum are recyclable. Mayor Johnson stated Alameda recycles food service containers. The Public Works Director stated said containers are placed in green bins which are composted. Mr. Knox stated polyethelyne is added into the compost output. The Public Works Director stated the compost meets the high standard. Mr. Knox stated some amount of polyethelyne will increase as more paper food service goes into the stream; extinguishing between corn plastic and oil base plastic is difficult. Mayor Johnson stated hopefully the industry will be able to help sort out the issue. Councilmember deHaan inquired whether contaminated pizza boxes are accepted. The Public Works Director responded said boxes go into the green bins. Mayor Johnson stated people need to be educated; inquired whether the pamphlet provided by is on the City's website. The Public Works Director responded in the affirmative; stated staff can work with ACI to include a pamphlet with the next bill cycle. Councilmember Matarrese moved introduction of the ordinance with the following alterations to Section 4-4.6 Exemptions: 1} 4--4.6 fib} include that the exemptions may be granted for up to a one year period from the date of enacting the ordinance and that exemptions will only be offered to existing businesses within Alameda, and 2} Section 4-4.6 ~a} delete reference to prepared foods. vice Mayor Tam seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. Regular Meeting 7 Alameda City Council December 18, 207 X07- } Recommendation to accept the Corica Golf Complex operational Review and authorize staff to begin the process to secure a long-term operator for the Golf Complex. Continued to January 2, 2008. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA X07- 7 Johnathan Stuart, LaRouche Political Action Committee,~submitted handout}; discussed foreclosures. ~07~- } Shawn VanLeevwen, LaRouche Political Action Committee, discussed the Home Owners and Bank Protection. (07- } Robb Ratto, PSBA, stated that the Public Works Department has always been responsive to inquiries. X07- } John Michael Torrey, Alameda, wished everyone happy COUNCIL REFERRALS None. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS X07-- } Consideration of Mayor's nominations for appointment to the Youth Commission. Mayor Johnson nominated Michelle Blackman, Hannah Bowman, Jordan Flores, Ilya Pinsky, Anjuli Sastry, Priscilla Szeto, Ben Ulrey, and Angela Sterling Vick. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the Regular Meeting at 9:36 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger City Clerk The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act. Regular Meeting 8 Alameda City Council December 18, 200'7 December 27, 2007 Honorable Mayor and Councilmembers: This is to certify that the claims listed on the check register and shown below have been approved by the proper officials and, in my opinion, represent fair and just charges against the City in accordance with their respective amounts as indicated thereon. Check N umbers 205079 - 20551 0 EFT 453 EFT 454 EFT 455 EFT 456 EFT 457 EFT 458 Void Checks: 204349 204957 ~ 5fio2D 204678 Amount $2,302,212.36 $122,222.28 $3,754.00 $39,771.14 $11,244,50 $396.50 $33,947,45 ($328.68) ($56.80) ($1,070.71) ($841.24) GRAND TOTAL $2,511,250.80 Respectfully submitted, r ~> 5,°., Pamela J. Sible BILLS #4-B Council UUarrants 01/02/08 1/2/2008 CfTY QF ALAMEDA Memorandum To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council From: Debra Kurita City Manager Date: January 2, 2008 Re: Approve Amendment No. one to the Agreement Between the Navy and the City for Conveyance of the Fleet Industrial Supply Center FISC} Property June 6, 2000} Attaching as a Neva "Exhibit J" a Memorandum of Agreement Among the Navy, the City, and Palmtree Acquisition Corporation PAC} Allowing PAC to Carry Qut Remediation of the FISC Property in Order to Construct the Alameda Landing Development BACKGRQUND 0n June 6, 200D, the City and the Navy entered into an Agreement for the Conveyance of the Fleet Industrial Supply Center FISC} the June 2000 Conveyance Agreement}, which was conveyed to the City pursuant to Federal legislation. Under the conveyance agreement, the Navy retained environmental clean up responsibility for FISC. As a part of defining the required environmental clean up activities, the City, the State of California Department of Toxic Substances Control ~DTSC}, and the Navy recorded an Interim Covenant containing a land use restriction prohibiting residential use at FISC unless the Navy and DTSC determine that the property has been remediated to make the area safe for residential use. The Navy's Quitclaim Deed conveying FISC to the City contains the same interim covenant. Qn December 5, 2006, the Community Improvement Commission ~CIC} and Palmtree Acquisition Corporation PAC} Successor-in-Interest to Catellus} entered into a Disposition and Development Agreement DDA} to construct the Alameda Landing development at the former FISC site. Alameda Landing is a mixed-use project containing up to 300 residential units, 300,000 square feet of retail development, 400,000 square feet of office space, and aten-acre waterfront park. Section 4.1 of the DDA includes, as a condition precedent to the first phase of development, that PAC obtain an "Interim Covenant Modification" to release and replace the existing Interim Covenant and to amend the existing Quitclaim Deed to allow for residential use and child care facilities on at least a portion of the property. The DDA requires the Develaper to pay for all costs associated with securing the Interim Covenant Modification and requires the CIC to cooperate with the Developer in its efforts to obtain the Interim Covenant Modification. City Council Agenda item #4-C ~'I -g~-08 Honorable Mayor and January 2, 2048 Members of the City Council Page 2 of 3 PAC and the C1C have been working with the Navy and DTSC over the last nine months to obtain the Interim Covenant Modification, Amendment No. Qne to the Agreement for the Conveyance of the Fleet Industrial Supply Center, Alameda which is on file in the City Clerk's Office} modifies the Conveyance Agreement to provide for Navy and DTSC approval of residential use, and a child care facility as part of the Clif Bar project, following remediation as required in a Health Risk AssessmentlFeasibility StudylRemedial Action Plan ~HRAIFSIRAP} prepared by PAC and approved by DTSC. DISCUSSION Amendment No, Qne to the Conveyance Agreement adds a new Exhibit J that is a Memorandum of Agreement MQA} between the Navy, the City, and PAC regarding remediation at FISC. The MQA outlines the process for securing the Interim Covenant Modification to permit residential and child care uses at FISC. The MQA also includes several additional documents as exhibits that wil[ be executed by various parties to fully implement the remediation process, including a Federal Facilities Site Remediation Agreement ~FFSRA} and a Voluntary Clean Up Agreement. The Navy and DTSC will sign the Amendment to the FFSRA, which governs the Navy's responsibilities for remediation of FISC; PAC and DTSC will sign the Voluntary Clean Up Agreement to enable DTSC to oversee the portion of the remediation responsibilities assumed by PAC. The City and the Navy will sign the amended quitclaim deeds to remove the land use restrictions in the Navy Quitclaim Deed, and PAC, the City, and the Navy will sign the escrow instructions for handling the amended quitclaim deeds. When the remediation is complete, DISC and the Navy will release the parallel restrictions in the Interim Covenant. Amendment No. Qne also adds PAC as a party to the Conveyance Agreement solely for purposes of Article 16 of the Agreement. Article 16 addresses liability for environmental contamination and provides that, except as contained in Exhibit J the new MQA}, the City and its assigns have no obligation, liability, or responsibility for environmental impacts or damage caused by the Navy's use of FISC. The Navy continues to retain all environmental clean up responsibilities except those related to remediation necessary to allow residential and childcare uses. The MQA and its related documents are an integral part of carrying out the Alameda Landing development. Without these documents and agreements, it would not be possible to build residential units or a childcare facility in support of the Clif Bar project. While the responsibility for paying for and implementing the requirements of the MQA lies with PAC, the City will have several obligations pursuant to the MQA. The City is agreeing to waive its rights to recover its past expenses incurred on activities related to modifying the Interim Covenant from the Navy, The City did incur some expense when it approved a contract in the amount of $294,545 with ERM West to prepare a sampling strategy and conduct field testing for the presence of various environmental contaminants at FISC. This work was funded through reimbursements to the Bayport project of Economic Development Administration grant monies. This work Honorable Mayor and January 2, 2008 Members of the City Council Page 3 of 3 was done in 2005, as part of the CIC's due diligence efforts in determining the feasibility of new residential development at FISC. The City never anticipated seeking reimbursement from the Navy for those costs. In addition, the City is agreeing that, in the event that it incurs any future costs far environmental remediation associated with allowing construction of residential use, it will preclude its insurer from seeking reimbursement from the Navy for those expenses. The City does not anticipate incurring any future costs as the MBA specifies that the future costs be borne solely by PAC. Lastly, the City is agreeing to mutual cooperation with PAC, the Navy and DTSC to carry out the MDA and its related documents. BUDGET C4NSIDERATI~NIFINANCIAL IMPACT The Alameda Landing DDA specifies that PAC is required to pay all costs associated with modifying the Interim Covenant to allow for residentia! and child care uses at FISC. Amending the June 2000 Conveyance Agreement for FISC does not impact the City's General Fund. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The Supplemental Environmental Impact Report ~SEIR} for Alameda Landing analyzed the impacts of residential development and a childcare center at FISC. No further environmental review is required. REC~MMENDATI~N Approve Amendment No. Qne to the Agreement between the Navy and the City for Conveyance of the FISC Property June 5, 2000} attaching as a new "Exhibit J" a Memorandum of Agreement among the Navy, the City, and Palmtree Acquisition Corporation PAC} allowing PAC to carry out remediation of the FISC property in order to construct the Alameda Landing Development. Respe tf submitted, Leslie A. Little Development Services Director By: Debbie Potter Base Reuse and Community Development Manager DKILALIDP:dc CITY ~F ALAMEDA Memorandum To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council From: Debra Kurita City Manager Date: January 2, 2008 Re: Adopt a Resolution Approving the Amended Boundary Map for Community Facilities District No. 03-1 Bayport Municipal Services District BACKGROUND In October and November 2003, the City Council conducted and concluded proceedings establishing the Community Facilities District No. 03-1 Bayport Municipal Services District, the CFD} pursuant to the City of Alameda Special Tax Financing improvement Cade, commencing with Subsection 3-70.1 of the Alameda Municipal Code the Act}, to finance certain municipal services the Services} as provided in the Act. The City Council also adopted an ordinance of the City of Alameda levying Special Taxes within the CFD. The Notice of Special Tax Lien was recorded with the Alameda County Recorder on November 13, 2003 Series No. 2003675105}. As part of implementing the Alameda Landing project, it is now necessary to amend the boundary map for the CFD, DISCUSSION The Bayport development is situated on the site of the former U.S. Navy East Housing and Fleet Industrial Supply Center FISC} Annex, The nearly complete Bayport development, which includes 495 single-family homes, 52 multi-family rental units, a new elementary school, and a community park, was mapped in three sequential phases. The Final Maps for each of these three subdivision phases included Tract No. 7357 X197 lots plus affordable housing, school, and park sites}, Tract No. 7511 X155 lots}, and Tract No. 7512 X133 lots}. The recently entitled Alameda Landing Development is situated on the former FISC South and North sites. Entitlements for the project include up to 300 new units of housing, 300,000 square feet of retail, 400,000 square feet of office, and aten-acre waterfront park. The former FISC South and North property has not yet been mapped. The boundary for the CFD encompasses Bayport and that portion of the Alameda Landing development between Stargell Avenue and Mitchell Avenue FISC South}. The City Council Report Re: Agenda Item #4-D 01-D2-o8 Honorable Mayor and January, 2008 Members of the City Council Page 2 of 3 original boundary for the CFD included Bayport and a portion of Alameda Landing because the former East Housing, FISC Annex and FISC South properties were all part of the same parcel, a portion of the remainder parcel for Tract No.1381. The properties could not be legally separated within the timeframe required under the approved Subdivision Improvement Agreement for Tract 1381. In addition, prior to the re- entitlement of Alameda Landing, there was not a need to amend the boundary for the CFD because the Bayport CFD Rate and Method of Apportionment applies only to residential land uses. With the approval of a mixed-use project, including residential uses, at Alameda Landing, it is now necessary to amend the CFD boundary to remove FISC South from the existing CFD and include it in the new Alameda Landing CFD that will be formed pursuant to the Alameda Landing Disposition and Development Agreement ~DDA}. The DDA requires the Developer to work with the City on the formation of a CFD that will fund maintenance and operation of City services and infrastructure at Alameda Landing. If the CFD boundary is not amended to remove FISC South, the future homeowners could be subject to the unintended consequence of being taxed in both CFDs. Amending the boundary for the CFD will allow the City to implement its policy of fiscal neutrality by providing for the cost of municipal services for the Alameda Landing development without consequence to the existing Bayport development. BUDGET CONSIDERATIONIFINANCIAL IMPACT The requested action to amend the existing boundary of the CFD will not change the adopted maximum special tax, increase the maximum special tax rate, rate and method of apportionment, manner of collection, or services. There is no impact to the General Fund. MUNICIPAL CODEIPOLICY DOCUMENT CROSS REFERENCE City of Alameda Special Tax Financing Improvement Code, commencing with Subsection 3-1D.1 of the Alameda Municipa! Code. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The proposed action does not require any additional California Environmental Quality Act ~CEQA} review. RECOMMENDATION Adopt the Resolution Amending the Boundary Map for Community Facilities District No. D3-~ Bayport Municipal Services District}. Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council es tfuily submitt d, Les ie A. Little Development Services Director By: eb ie otter Base Reuse and Community Development Manager DKILALIDPIDC: do Attachments 1. Existing Bayport MSD Boundary Map 2. Amended Bayport MSD Boundary Map January 2, 2008 Page 3 of 3 ~Ix~wcwuMar+a•widl t7o!frrq-I.DO-use-r~s-~ s~/~~/o~ ~oa~ ~ mitts ~-+~r+ 1 I 1 _...,_ ' ' 1 ..........~' JJ .. ,... fl ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 1 ~ ~ ~ ,~ 1 ~ ~ 1 + a ~ ,; ~ E ~ ~ ; , ~E w_.. ........ ......_,,,,,,.........,..,.,,.....,..,.,,.... -~~ .... _.._ .w......... ~ ............ .............................. ~ .~ _........... ~.......r . ~ ~ ~1 -....__.._.-..._,~..~...........,......_,_...,_,,......... ...._..__.,... -~, I ~ i ss~ ~ ~ F ~~~. ~ #, _~ ._.w._,.....,..~.._..............._. ,_..,.,. r..._....... e ~ _ 1 ~ ~~ .7 ' \ f~~. ~~ a~`y ~ ~ ~~ ~:. ~ ~ y ~ili•G ~ ~ j r VI ~~ ' ~ ~ ~~r,I ~7 I r ~~' .' ~ I I ~ 1 r. I 1f • ~~ ~ ~ ~ yx'}~ i ~ ~, k ~ /1 ! ~ ~~~. , , r,. -....m..~.~..~.~~ti.,,, / ,- .i~'~~ .,y,41M1 ,~ ~,~ , C ~ m ..r.. ,_,~, , _~ ... ,...._ ,...w...Y.........r....w. ~ ••~, _z m ~_ .~..,......_.._.~ _._.~... ~._..._.. _~l I~1 ~ mZ N ~~~ r a ~ ~ rn ~ ~°a ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~ rn ~" ~ ~o o ~ z ~ .~ .., .. ~ ~ oo vv rn v ~ y ~~~ roc ^ , ~ .~ c z c R Z 'U ,,,~ C~Z~ ~~ v~~-J ... r ! ~ i^ a a ~o !n ~ 70 Z ~ ~ ~ ,~ ~ Ci#y Councrl ~ '~ r ~ Attachment 1 to ~ ~ R . W ~ •~ eport Re. ~ Q Agenda Item #4-D o~-oz-os 4F.~1~LAI~A~IAl1)MIQ~1110\ AHENO[Q-IAO-il56-CAI-1 17/11/07 iO:~A aMn JIBLCi; ~-lopo ~~~ °~ ._._ ........~ _. ..... ` i_... - ~ ~ ;~ I~ i ~ ~ ~ ~ `, E ,. ~ I ~ ~, ` 1 ~ ~, `~ ' ~:1 ~ t ~ ~ ~l ~ ,~, ~;~ ~ .l. ~ t ,...,,. ~ ...__...,r ~...,,,... ,.C. ~- , ._ ~. ,......, ..,,~ ,.,.,,.,,...,......,,,.., ~ ...,..,._....w.. ~~.~~ ~ ~., ,., .. ,,.._..,..,,-- ~~. ~ ti ~ ~~ I ~ I ~ '~ ' ~ ~ ~,~ ~~~~ ~~ f ,~ b ~ f ,,.~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ '~`'~ ' ~ r ..! ~ ~ r ! f ~ ,, ~ ~, ~ ~ i ~ ....1 III., . ,,. ,,,..,,,., .,.. ~`•.,, ' ~ ~ ~ I~ ~,, ,~~ III •, f~ ~ L '~, +`,~ ,~,`~~ ... ,. ~ ..... ......~~.,,,,, .....r...... .. .~~.~ rn G) ' o a t rn o C ~ .. n ' v Z ~~ ~ o v ~ City Council () Attachment 2 to ~ Report Re: Agenda Item #4-D 01-0208 E 0 0 s~ 4 ~ ~ W ` ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~, y ~~ ~ ~ .. CITY CFALAMEDA RESCLUTICN NC. APPROVING AMENDED BOUNDARY MAP FOR COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 03-1 (BAYPORT MUNICIPAL SERVICES DISTRICT) vVHEREAS, in connection with proceedings taken on September 16, 2003, pursuant to the City of Alameda Special Tax Financing Im rovement p Code, commencing with Subsection 3-10.1 of the Alameda Munici al Cade, for . ... . p the establishment of Community Facilities District No. 03-1 Bayport Munici al . p Services District} CFD No. 03-1 }, this City Council this "Council"} approved a map of the boundaries of CFD No. 03-1 the "Criginal Boundary Map"}, and the Criginal Boundary Map was thereafter recorded on Cctober 6, 2003, in Ma . p Book 15, at pages 82-86, official records of the Alameda County Recorder; and IIVHEREAS, the purpose of establishing CFD No. 03-1 was to provide for the levy and collection of a special tax on certain property within CFD No. 03-1 expected to be developed for residential land uses the . ~, .. ~ Residential Land } to fund certain authorized municipal services; and v11HEREAS, due to the requirement that the entirety of any given assessor's parcel number must be included within CFD No. 03-1 if any portion thereof was to be included, the result was that certain property was included within the boundary even though such property was then zoned MX~Mixed Use and designated for officelresearch and development use in the applicable Master Plan the "Commercial Land"} and was not therefore intended to be taxed; and vvHEREAS, had it been permissible to do so at the time of establishment of CFD No. 03-1, the City would have excluded the Commercial Land from CFD No. 03-1; and vIIHEREAS, since that time, and in connection with a planned development project commonly known as the "Alameda Landing Project," the Commercial Land has been split off from the Residential Land and has been designated in the applicable Master Plan to authorize residential land uses thereon, and it is proposed that the Commercial Land be included in a second community facilities district the "Alameda Landing CFD"} to be established to provide special tax revenues to finance authorized municipal services to the property within the Alameda Landing Project; and Resotutron #4-D CC 01-02-OS 1NHEREAS, consistent with the intentions of the City at the time of establishment of CFD No. 03-~, this Council wishes to exclude the Commercial Land from CFD No. 03-1 to enable the City to include it within the Alameda Landing CFD without subjecting it to the unintended and unfair result of taxation in both community facilities districts; and VIIHEREAS, excluding the Commercial Land from CFD No. 03-~ is consistent with the initial intentions of the City, will not prejudice the owners of the Residential Land in that their property will remain subject to taxation at the same level as at present and will continue to be provided the same municipal services as have been provided up to the present time, and will facilitate the orderly delivery of municipal services to the Alameda Landing Project by inclusion of the Commercial Land in the Alameda Landing CFD; and WHEREAS, an amended boundary map for CFD No. 3 the "Amended Boundary Map"}which excludes the Commercial Land therefrom has been filed with the City Clerk and submitted to this meeting, and this Gouncil wishes to approve the Amended Boundary Map and to direct that it be filed for record in the officio! records of the Alameda County Recorder; NOW, THEREFaRE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Gity Council of the City of Alameda that: ~. The foregoing recitals are true and correct, and this Council hereby so finds and determines. 2. This Council hereby approves the Amended Boundary Map, and the City Clerk is authorized and directed to cause the Amended Boundary Map to be filed for record in the official records of the Alameda County Recorder. 3. The officers and employees of the City are authorized to execute such further instruments and to take such further actions as may be necessary or appropriate to implement the exclusion of the Commercial Land from CFD No. 03-~ and to discharge the lien of the special tax of CFD No. 03-~ therefrom. 4. This resolution shall become effective immediately upon adoption. ****~ D V ~ Q z ~ a Q °z ~ ~ ~~ ~e "- Z W c~ W S a a m o m ' J ir~~+, f _ ~ .~ ~ J r ~ -.....,.r,,, ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~`~ ~_..- . ` f , r ~ ~y I ~ ~ 1 ~ ~ ~. ~ q ~ T ~ ~~ ~ I [ `•ti ~ ~ y~~ I ~ ~q. ~ ~ ~ ~ ... ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~,., ~- _ 1....,..,_,_,.,.,, ......,,.-,...,,,.. .~~ -~~ ,~ ~ ~ ~ , ~ ~ ~ i i ,: i ~ ~ i i _ ..... _ .._ .._ ,~~ -, _.. __.._.__._._ _..__...~_.... _ __.. -~lr ...._.,....,..._ ~._ _ .. ..........~ ~ ~ ,I ~ .~ ...... ~ i ~ ~~~ ~ ~ ;, ~__ _ ~' ~'~ r ~ ik i ' ~ ~ i ~ 1 ~.. ~ ~ w..........- , ~ ~ ~,~ ~_ i ~y .~ ~~-~ 's]~efr ~a o~~o~ colail:~ ~-~~n-osK-aai-a~aH3rtr lasrt-aMar~lvo3mxl~H 1, the undersigned, hereby certify tha# the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly adopted and passed by the Council of the City of Alameda in a regular meeting assembled on the 2nd day of January, 2DO8, by the following vote to wit: AYES NOES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: IN 1NITNESS, UIIHERE~F, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of said City this day of , Zppg, Lara Weisiger, City Clerk City of Alameda CITY OF ALAMEDA Memorandum To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council From: Debra Kurita City Manager Date: January 2, 2008 Re: Adopt a Resolution Revising the Park-Time Classifications Salary Schedule BACKGROUND State law requires an increase in the minimum wage from $1.50 to $8.00 per hour effective January 1, 2008. The recommended action incorporates this increase in the City's Part-Time Classifications Salary Schedule Attachment 1}. DISCUSSION The Human Resources Department has revised the Park-Time Classifications Salary Schedule to incorporate the increased minimum wage requirements and to accommodate departmental park-time staffing needs. This was done in concert with the Recreation and Parks, Golf, and Library Departments, which are the primary departments employing part-time workers. The ranges for all of the park-time classifications are extended to accommodate both the rates based on the new minimum wage and the existing rates of incumbents currently employed on a park-time basis. The increase in the minimum wage is integrated into the schedule by eliminating those salary steps that are below the $5.00 per hour level. The only exception is for the Recreation Learner or Counselor-in-Training classification. This classification, which is exempt from the $5.00 per hour minimum wage requirements, will increase from $1.00 to $1.50 an hour. Work in this classification provides an opportunity for individuals with limited or no experience to enter the City's workforce as a trainee, in conformance with the State Learner and Federal Youth Opportunity programs. The employees hired at this level are in a training program for approximately four weeks and, contingent upon successfully completing all of the requirements, will then transition into a Recreation Leader I position. BUDGET CGNSIDERATIaN1FINANCIAL IMPACT The increases in part-time employment costs resulting from these changes will be absorbed within the existing departmental budgets. The departments estimate that City Council Report Re: Agenda Item #4-E o ~ -oz-os Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Cauncii January 2, 2005 Page2of2 increased costs for the second half of Fiscal Year 2007/2008 will be as follows: Recreation and Parks, $5,500; Golf, $3,200; and Library, $500. RECCMMENDATICN Adopt a resolution revising the Part-Time Classifications Salary Schedule effective January ~ , 2008. Respectfully submitted ~_ Karen Willis Human Resources Department Attachment: 1. Part-Time Classifications Salary Schedule CITY CF DA PART~TIME CLASSIFICATIONS -SALARY SCHEDULE _ EFFECTIVE 01/01/200$ CODE CLASSIFICATION HOURLY STEP 1 STEP 2 STEP 3 STEP 4 STEP 5 STEP fi STEP 7 STEP 8 STEP ~ Recreation 5021 Recreation Learner 7.50 5023 Recreation Leader I 8.00 5.10 8.40 5.51 8.82 8.94 9.39 9.86 10.35 5013 Recreation Leader II 9.95 10.45 10.97 11.52 12.10 12.71 13,35 5003 Recreation Spec I 11.63 12.21 12.82 13.46 14.13 14.84 15.55 5004 Recreation Spec II 16, 36 17.1 S 1 S, 04 18.94 19.89 20.88 21.92 23.02 5014 Aquatics Lifeguard 9.11 9.57 10.05 10.55 11.08 11.63 12.21 12,82 13.46 5022 Aquatic Instructor 9,57 10.05 10.55 11.08 11.63 12.21 12,82 13.46 14.13 5011 Aquatic Specialist 13.46 14.13 14.84 15.58 16.36 17.1 S 18.04 15.94 19.89 5044 Tiny Tat Aide 9.56 10.35 10.87 11.41 11.98 12.55 13,21 5043 'luny Tot Instructor 12.55 13.21 13.87 14.56 15.29 16.05 16.85 5052 Scorekeeper 9.57 10,05 10.55 11.08 11.63 12.21 Goff 5271 Golf Cart 8.00 8.10 5.27 8,65 9.11 9.57 10.05 10.55 11.08 & Range Crew worker 5272 Golf Course 5.27 8.68 9.11 9.57 10.05 10.55 11.08 11.63 12,21 Starter/Cashier 5277 Golf Crew Lead worker 12.21 12.82 13.46 14.13 14.54 15.58 16.36 17,18 18.04 Library 3522 Library Aide 8.00 8.10 8.40 8.51 8.82 9.26 9.72 10.21 10.72 3524 Sr Library Aide 9.26 9.72 10,21 10.72 11.26 11.82 12,41 13.03 13.68 3523 Library Assistant 11.82 12.41 13.03 13.65 14.36 15.08 15.83 16.62 17.45 3526 Library Associate I 16.85 17.45 18.32 19.24 20.20 21,21 22.27 23.35 24.55 3527 Library Associate II 21.21 22.27 23.35 24.55 25.78 27.07 28,42 29.84 31.33 3528 Library Spec I 19.24 20,20 21.21 22.27 23.35 24.55 25.75 27.07 28.42 3529 Library Spec II 23.38 24, 55 25.78 27.07 25.42 29.84 31.33 32.90 34.55 Police 4061 Crossing Guard 9.11 9.57 10.05 10.55 11.08 11.63 12,21 12.82 13.46 4060 Lead Crossing Guard 14.84 15.58 16.36 17.18 18.04 18.94 19.89 4081 Police Assistant I 13.21 13.87 14.56 15.29 16.05 4052 Police Assistant II 16.85 17.69 15.57 19.50 20.45 4057 Police Officer 22.58 23,71 24.90 26.15 27,46 28.53 -Recruit Admin/ Prof 2051 Admin Clerk 8.00 8.40 5.82 9.26 9.72 10.21 10.72 11.26 11,82 2052 Admin Assistant I 12.82 13.46 14.13 15.08 15,55 16.36 16.85 18,04 18,57 2053 Admin Assistant II 15.94 20.20 21.21 21.92 24.17 24,89 25.38 26.13 27.98 2054 Admin Spec I 29,38 31.33 32.90 34,55 35.71 36,28 35.09 41.35 44.09 2055 Admin Spec II 46.29 48, 60 50, 26 53.58 56.26 58.18 62.02 65.12 68.38 Maintenance 2061 Mtce Assistant i 8.00 8.40 8.68 8.82 9.26 9,72 10.05 11,08 11,63 2062 Mtce Assistant II 12.21 12.58 13.46 13.87 14.13 14.84 15.53 16.36 17.28 2063 Mtce Assistant III 15.32 19.24 20.20 21.92 22.27 23.38 24.55 25.78 27.07 2064 Mtce Spec I 28.42 29.84 31.33 32.90 34,55 36.28 38.09 39,99 41.99 2065 Mtce Spec II 44.09 46.29 48.60 51.03 53.58 56,26 59.07 62.02 65,12 City Council Attachment to Step/classification assignment of incumbents maybe adjusted upon implementation of this schedule. _ Movement through the above steps is not automatic or annual. Step assignment wlll be as determined by the depar Re ort Re: p Human Resources Department approval. Agenda Item #4-E December 20, 2007 (1:40PM] C:IDOCUME~ 11CM_USERIL4CALS~ 11TEMPIJAN O1 21 o~-oz-os CITY OF ALAMEDA RESOLUTION NO. E v 4 ,~ APPROVING REVISED PART-TIME CLASSIFICATIONS SALARY SCHEDULE EFFECTIVE JANUARY 1, 2008 WHEREAS, there has been submitted to this Council apart-time classification salary schedule; and WHEREAS, the Council of the City of Alameda has fully examined said proposed schedule, and thereby finds and determines adoption of said document to be in the best interest of the City. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Alameda that said Council hereby approves and adopts said revised Salary Schedule, attached hereto as Exhibit A. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the position classifications, salary rates, salary ranges and salary steps set out in said schedule are hereby designated as those applicable to the respective classifications in the service of the City of Alameda, effective January 1, 2008. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the provision of this Resolution shall supersede any other resolution in conflict herewith. ~~~*** Resolution #4-E CC 01-02-OS y CODE CITY OF ALAMEDA ATTACHMENT 1 PART-TIME CLASSIFICATIONS -SALARY SCHEDULE EFFECT~E 01 J 01 J 2008 CLASSIFICATION HOURLY $TEP 1 STEP 2 $TEP 3 STEP 4 $TEP 5 STEP 6 STEP 7 STEP $ STEP 9 Recrea tion 5021 Recreation Learner 7.50 5023 Recreation Leader I 8.00 8,10 8.40 8.51 8.82 8.94 9.39 9,86 10.35 5013 Recreation Leader II 9.95 10,45 10,97 11,52 12,10 12.71 13.35 5003 Recreation Spec I 11,63 12,21 12,82 13.46 14,13 14.84 15,58 5004 Recreation Spec II 16.36 17,18 18.04 28.94 19.89 20.88 21.92 23.02 5014 Aquatics Lifeguard 9.11 9.57 10.05 10.55 11.08 11.63 12.21 12,82 13.46 5022 Aquatic Instructor 9.57 10,05 10.55 11,08 11.63 12.21 12.82 13.46 14.13 5011 Aquatic Specialist 13,46 14.13 14,84 15.58 16,36 17,18 18,04 18.94 19.89 5044 Tiny Tot Aide 9.86 10.3 5 10.87 11, 41 11, 98 12.58 ~ 3, 21 5043 Tiny Tot Instructor 12,58 13,21 13.87 14.56 15.29 16,05 16,85 5052 Scorekeeper 9.57 10,05 10.55 11,08 11.63 12,21 Golf 5271 Golf Cart 8.00 8.10 8,27 8.68 9.11 9.57 10.05 10.55 11.08 & Range Crew Worker 5272 Golf Course 8.27 8.68 9,11 9.57 10.05 10.55 11.08 11,63 12.21 Starter/Cashier 5277 Golf Crew Lead Worker 12,21 12.82 13,46 14.13 14,84 15,58 16,36 17.18 18.04 Library 3522 Library Aide 8.00 8,10 5,40 8.51 8,82 9,26 9,72 10.21 10,72 3524 Sr Library Aide 9,26 9.72 10,21 10.72 11.26 11.82 12,41 13.03 13.68 3523 Library Assistant 11.82 12.41 13,03 13,68 14,36 15.08 15,83 16.62 17.45 3526 Library Associate I 16.85 17,45 18.32 19,24 20,20 21.21 22.27 23.38 24.55 352? Library Associate II 21.21 22,27 23,38 24.55 25.78 27,07 28.42 29.84 31.33 3528 Library Spec I 19.24 20.20 21,21 22.27 23,38 24,55 25.78 27.07 28.42 3529 Library Spec II 23.38 24.55 25.78 27.07 28.42 29.84 31.33 32.90 34.55 Police 4061 Grassing Guard 9.11 9, 57 10.05 10.55 11,08 11,63 12,21 12.82 13.46 4060 Lead Crossing Guard 14.84 15.58 16.36 17,15 18.04 18.94 19,89 4081 Police Assistant I 13,21 13.87 14,56 15.29 16.05 4082 Police Assistant II 16,85 17.69 18.57 19.50 20,48 4057 Police Officer 22,58 23.71 24.90 26.15 27.46 25.83 -Recruit Admin J Prof 2051 Admin Clerk 8,00 5.40 5,82 9.26 9.72 10.21 10.72 11.26 11.82 2052 Admin Assistant I 12,82 13.46 14.13 15.08 15,58 16.36 16.85 18.04 18.57 2053 Admin Assistant II 18,94 20,20 21.21 21,92 24.17 24,89 25.38 26.13 27.98 2054 Admin Spec I 29.38 31,33 32.90 34.55 35.71 36.28 38.09 41.35 44.09 2055 Admin Spec II 46,29 48.60 50.26 53,58 56.26 55.18 62.02 65,12 68.38 Maintenance 2061 Mtce Assistant I 8.00 8.40 8.68 8.82 9.26 9,72 10,05 11.08 11,63 2062 Mtce Assistant II 12.21 12.58 13,46 13,87 14,13 14.84 15,83 16.36 17.28 2063 Mtce Assistant III 18.32 19.24 20,20 21.92 22.27 23.38 24,55 25,78 27.07 2064 Mtce Spec I 28.42 29,84 31,33 32,90 34,55 36.28 38.09 39.99 41.99 2065 Mtce Spec II 44.09 46,29 48.60 51.03 53,58 56,26 59,07 62,02 65.12 Step Jclassification assignment of incumbents may be adjusted upon implementation of this schedule, ' Movement through the above steps is not automatic or annual. Step assignment will be as determined by the department supervisor pending Human Resources Department approval. December 20, 2007 (1:14PMy C:~DOCUME-1~CATT_U~1~LOCALS-1~TEMP~XPGRPWISE~JAN O1 2008 PART-'T`IME SCHEDULE.DOC I, the undersigned, hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly adopted and passed by the Council of the City of Alameda in a regular meeting assembled on the 2nd day of January, 2008, by the following vote to wit: AYES NDES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: IN UVITNESS, ~lIIHERE~F, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of said City this day of , 2008. Lora ~eisiger, City Clerk City of Alameda CITYGFALAMEDAGRDINANCE N0. New Series E ~i o ' a~ a v a a AMENDING THE ALAMEDA MUNICIPAL CODE BYADDING SECTION 4-4 TO ARTICLE I (LITTERING AND MAINTENANCE OF PROPERTY) OF CHAPTER IV (OFFENSES AND PUBLIC SAFETY) TO PROHIBIT POLYSTYRENE FOAM FOOD SERVICE WARE AND AMENDING SECTION 1-5.6 OF CHAPTER 1 (GENERAL) TO AUTHORIZE ADDITIONAL CITY EMPLOYEES TO SERVE AS CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS BE IT GRDAINED by the City Council of the City of Alameda that: Section 1. The Alameda Municipal Code is amended by adding Section 4-4 ~PROHIBITIGN OF POLYSTYRENE FGAM FGGD SERVICE WARE } to Article 1 FLITTERING AND MAINTENANCE OF PROPERTY} of Cha ter IV p ~GFFENSESAND PUBLIC SAFETY}, which shall read as follows: 4-4 POLYSTYRENE FGAM FGGD SERVICE 1NARE 4~4, ~ Title This section shat! be known as theAlameda Polystyrene Foam Food Service Ware Reduction Law. 4-4.2 Purpose and Findings The City Council finds thatpolystyrenefoamfood serviceware constitutes a significant adverse environmental impact. Solid waste that is non-de radable or 9 non-recyclable poses an acute problem for any program of integrated waste management. Such waste covers the City's streets, parks, public places, and open spaces. It clogs storm drains, arch culverts, and catch basins thereb . .. Y signif~cantiy ~ncreas~ng time and expense to public works maintenance crews during a storm event. It enters the marine and natural environment and is damaging to the environment and marine wildlife. Products which are degradable or recyclable offer environmentail sound Y alternatives to non-degradable and nvn-recyclable products current) used. B Y Y decaying into their constituent substances, degradable products, com ared to their p non-degradable equivalents, are less of a danger to the natural environment, less likely to be a permanent blight an the urban landscape, less like) to en ender . Y 9 storm drainage system maintenance expenses, and less likely to cause floodin g due to clogged storm drains, arch culverts, and catch basins. Rec clin of Y g products reduces costly waste of natural resources and energy used in roduction p of new products as well as costly disposal of waste in landfills. Ordinance #4-FCC 01-02-OS 4-4~3 Definitions "Affordable" means purchasable by the Food Vendorof anon-polystyrene form container for the same or less purchase cost than the non-biodegradable, non-compostable alternative. "ASTM Standard" means meeting the standardsof theAmerican Societyfor Testing and Materials ~ASTM} International Standards D640g or D6S68 for biodegradable and compostable plastics, "Biodegradable" meanstheentire productorpackagewillcompletelybreak down and return to nature, i.e., decompose into elementsfound in naturewithin a reasonably short period of time after customary disposal and is consistent with the materials accepted at the composting facility used by the City's franchisee for integrated waste management. "compostable" means all materials in the product or package will break down into, or otherwise become part of, usable compost ~e.g., soil-conditioning material, mulch} in a safe and timely mannerconsistentwith the composting facility used by the City's franchisee fore integrated waste management, compostable disposable food service ware must meetASTM standards for compostability and must be clearly labeled. iiCity facilities" means any building, structure or vehicle owned or operated by the City of Alameda, its agencies, departments and the integrated waste franchisee that are located within the City of Alameda. "Customer" means any person obtaining prepared food from a restaurant ar retail food vendor. "Disposable food service ware" means all containers, bowls, plates, trays, cartons, cups, lids, straws, forks, spoons, knives and otheritemsthatare designed for one-time use and on, or in, which any restaurant or retail food vendor directly places or packages prepared foods ar which are used to consume foods. This includes, but is not limited to, serviceware fortakeoutfoods andlorleftoversfrom partially consumed meals prepared at restaurants or retail food vendors. "Food vendor" means any restaurant or retail food vendor located or operating within the City of Alameda. "Polystyrene foam" means and includes blown palystyrene and expanded and extruded foams sometimes called Styrofoam, a Dow Chemical Company trademarked form of polystyrene foam insulation} which are thermoplastic 2 petrochemical materials utilizing a styrene monomer and processed by any number of techniques including, but not limited to, fusion of polymer spheres expandable bead polystyrene}, injection molding, foam molding, and extrusion- blown molding extruded foam polystyrene}. Polystyrenefoam isgeneraily usedto make items such as cups, bowls, plates, trays, clamshell containers, meat trays, and egg cartons. "Prepared food" means food or beverages, which are served, packaged, cooked, chopped, sliced, mixed, brewed, frozen, squeezed or otherwise prepared for consumption. For the purposes of this ordinance, "prepared food" does not include raw, butchered meats, fish andlor poultry sold from a butcher case or similar retail appliance. Prepared food may be eaten eitheron oroff the premises, also known as "takeout food." iiRestaurant", for the purposes of this Article, means any establishment located within the City of Alameda that sells prepared food for consumption on, near, or off its premises by customer. "Restaurant," for purposes of this Article, includes itinerant restaurants, pushcar#s and vehicular food vendors. "Retail food vendor" means any store, shop, sales outlet, or other establishment, includingagrocerystoreoradelicatessen, otherthanarestaurant, located within the City of Alameda that sells prepared food. 4-4.4 Prohibited food service ware a. Food vendors are prohibited from providing prepared food to customers in disposable food service ware that uses polystyrene foam. b. Afl City facilities are prohibited from using polystyrene foam disposable food service ware and all city departments and agencies will not purchase or acquire polystyrene foam disposable food service ware for use at city facilities. c. Except as provided in Section 4-4.6 of this Article, agents, contractors and vendors doing businesswith the cityshall be prohibitedfrom using polystyrene foam disposable food service ware in City facilities oron City projects within the City of Alameda. 44.5 Required biodegradable and compostable disposable food service ware a. All food vendors using any disposable food service ware will use biodegradable orcompostable disposable food serviceware unless they can show an affordable biodegradable orcompostable product is notavailablefora specific application. ,Food vendors are strongly encouraged to provide reusable food service ware in place of disposable food service ware. In instances where food 3 vendors decide to use a biodegradable or compostable disposable food service ware product that is not affordable, a food vendor may charge a "take out fee" to customers to cover the cast difference. b. All City facilities will use biodegradable or compostable disposable food service ware unless they can show an affordable biodegradable or compostable product is not available for a specific application. c. City contractors and vendors doing business wi#h the City will use biodegradable food service ware in City faciii#ies or on City projects within the City of Alameda, unless they can show an affordable biodegradable or compostable product is not available for a specific application. 4-4.6 Exemptions a. Prepared foods packaged outside the City of Alameda are exempt from the provisions of this Article. Purveyors of food prepared or packaged outside the City of Alameda are encouraged to follow the provisions of this Article. b. Food vendors that are currently existing or are established in the City by July 1, 2008, will be exempted from the provisions Qf thisArticle prohibiting the use of polystyrene foam food service ware if the City Manager or hislher desi nee g finds thatan undue hardshipexists. Exemptions may be granted for upto a one- yearperiod from the effective date of the Ordinance. The phrase "undue hardship" shall be construed to include, but not be limited to a food vendor demonstrating to the satisfaction of the City Manager or hislher designee that there is significant difficulty or expense incurred by meeting the prohibitionwhichdirectly impactsthefood vendor's abilityto conductbusiness or the food vendor has been deprived a legally protected right. Significant difficulty wilt be established based on, but not necessarily limited to, thefood vendordocumentingthe listof suppliers contacted and explaining hove it has determined that no acceptable alternative is available at a commercially reasonable price, for reasonswhich are uniquely burdensome to the food vendor and its type of operations} or the food being served. Significant cost will be established by, but not necessarily limited ta, demonstrating that the acceptable alternative food ware is not available at a commercially reasonable price and the additional cost associated with providing the acceptable alternative food ware is uniquely burdensome to the food vendor based on the type of operations} affected, the overall size of the business, the number, type and location of its facilities and the impact on the overall financial resources of the food vendor, it shall also consider the ability to recover the additional costs through existing expenses and resources, the availability of tax credits and deductions, andlor outside funding. 4 c. Polystyrenefoamcnolers and ice cheststhatare intended forreuse are exempt from the provision of this Article. d. Disposable food service ware composed entirely of aluminum is exempt from the provisions of this Article. e. Emergency supply and services procurement: In a situation deemed by the City Manager to be an emergency for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health or safety, City facili#ies, food vendors, agents, contractors, and vendors doing business with the city shall be exempt from the provisions of this Article. 4-4.1 Liability and enforcement a. The Public Works Director or hislher designee will have prima ... rY responsibility for enforcement of this Article. The Public Works Director or hislher designee is authorized to promulgate regulations and to take any and all other actions reasonable and necessary to enforce this Article, including, but not limited to, entering the premises of any food vendor during regular business hours to verify compliance. b. Anyone violating orfailingto complywith anyofthe requirementsof this Article will be subject to an administrative citation pursuant to Section 1.7 et seq. of the Alameda Municipal Code. c. The City Attorney may seek legal, injunctive, or other equitable relief to enforce this Article. 4-4.8 Violations -- Penalties a. Enforcementof the provisions of thisArticle shall be pursuanttothe provisions adopted for the imposition of administrative citations and the hearin . 9 procedures related to those citations adopted under Section ~ -7 et seq. of the Alameda Municipal Code. Section 2. Section 1-5.6 ~AUTH~RIZATI~N ~F C4DE ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS; LIMITATIONS} of Chapter 1 GENERAL} of theAlameda Munici al p Code is amended to add new categories of employees empowered to issue citations, which shall read as follows: ~ -5.6 Authorization of Code Enforcement officers; Limitations a. The following classification of City employees and agents shall have the authority under Penal Code Section 836.5 to issue citations for violations of the Alameda Municipal Code: 5 1. Firel6uilding Code Compliance Officer; 2. Planning and Building Director; 3. Public Works Director; 4. Public Works Maintenance Superintendent; 5. City Engineer; 6. Building Official; 7. Combination Building Inspector; 8. Supervising Building Inspector; 9. Environmental Services Manager; 10. Environmental Services Program Specialist i and II. 11. Any other position designated by the City Manager Section 3. Ifanysection, subsection, sentence, clauseorphrase of this ordinance is, for any reason, held invalid or unconstitutional, such decision shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of the remaining portions of this ordinance. The City Council of the City of Alameda hereby declares that itwould have passed this ordinance, and each section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase hereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared unconstitutional. Section 4. All former ordinances or parts thereof conflicting or inconsistentwith the provisions of this ordinance hereby adopted, to the extentof such conflict only, are hereby repealed. Section 5. The City hereby finds and determines that this Ordinance is not subject to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act CEQA}. Specifically, the basis for the exemptions include, without limitation, the following beach providing a separate and independent basis and when viewed collectively providing an overall basis for an exemption}: ~1 } CEQA Guidelines section 15x61 ~b}~3}; ~~}CEQA Guidelines section 153?8~a}; ~3}CEQA Guidelines section15378~b}~2}; ~4}CEQA Guidelines section 15308; and ~5}CEQA Guidelines section 15307. Section 6. The City Glerkofthe City ofAlameda is herebydirected to cause this ordinance to be published in the Official Newspaper of the City of Alameda. Section 7. This ordinance and the rules, regulations, provisions, requirements, orders and mattersestablished and adopted herebyshalltakeeffect and be in full force and effect on July 1, 2408. Presiding Officer of the Council 6 Attest: Lara Weisiger, City Clerk Gity of Alameda ***** 1, the undersigned, hereby certify thatthe foregoing ordinance was duly and regularly adopted and passed by Council of the City of Alameda in regular meeting assembled on the day of , 2008, by the following vote to wit: AYES: NDES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS; IN 1NITNESS, vUHERE~F, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of said City this day of , 2008. Lara Weisiger, City Clerk City of Alameda 7 CITY aF ALAMEDA RESGLUTIGN N0. E L 0 0 ~v a~ 0 a s: a ~. a APPGINTING MICHELLE BLACKMAN AS A MEMBER nF THE ALAMEDA YOUTH ADVISGRY CGMMISSIGN BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Alameda that pursuant to Section ~-~9 of the Alameda Municipal Code, and upon nomination of the Mayor, MICHELLE BLACKMAN is hereby appointed to the office of member of the Alameda Youth Advisory Commission of the City of Aiameda, for a term commencing January 2, 2008, and expiring pursuant to staggered term requirements of the Alameda Municipal Code. ***~* 1, the undersigned, hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was du! y and regularly adopted and passed by the Council of the City of Alameda in a regular meeting assembled on the 2nd day of January, 2008, by the followin g vote to wit: AYES NGES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIGNS: IN vVITNESS, VIJHERE4F, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of said City this day of , ZOOg, Lara Ulleisiger, City Clerk City of Alameda Resolutzans #5-A CC 01-02-Q$ CITY OF ALAMEDA RESOLUTION N0. APPOINTING HANNAH BO~IJMAN AS A MEMBER OF THE ALAMEDA YOUTH ADVISORY COMMISSION ~ BE IT RESOLVED b the Council of the Cif of Alamed L y y a that pursuantto u°. Section 2-19 of the Alameda Munici al Code and u on na ' p p minatfon of the Mayor, HANNAH BODUMAN is hereby appointed to the office of member of the ~ ~ Alameda Youth Advisory Commission of the City of Alameda, for a term ~ ~, commencing January 2, 2008, and expiring` pursuant to sta eyed term ._ , , g9 c ~ requirements of the Alameda Municipal Code. °~ ~*~~** a I, the undersigned, hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly adopted and passed by the Council of the City of Alameda in a regular meeting assembled on the 2nd day of January, 2008, by the followin g vote to wit: AYES NOES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: IN VIIITNESS,INHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of said City this day of , 2008, Lara Weisiger, City Clerk City of Alameda CITY OFALAMEDA RESOLUTION N0. APPOINTING JORDON FLORESASA MEMBER OF THE ALAMEDA YOUTH ADVISORY COMMISSION E 0 0 N ~v a~ v L ~. ~. a .~ U BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Alameda that pursuant to Section 2-19 of the Alameda Municipal Code, and upon nomination of the Mayor, JORDON FLORES is hereby appointed to the office of member of the Alameda Youth Advisory Commission of the City of Alameda, for a term commencing January 2, 2048, and expiring pursuant to staggered term requirements of the Alameda Municipal Code. * * ~ * ~ I, the undersigned, hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly adopted and passed by the Council of the City of Alameda in a regular meeting assembled on the 2nd day of January, 2008, by the following vote to wit; AYES NOES: ABSENT; ABSTENTIONS: IN UvITNESS, WIIHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of said City this day of , 200$. Lara Weisiger, City Clerk Gity of Alameda CITY ~FALAMEDA RES~LUTI~N N~, APPaINTING ILYA PINSKYASA MEMBER ~F THE ALAMEDAY~UTH ADVISORY C4MMISSI~N 0 u~ ~i 0 d a a a U BE lT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Alameda that pursuant to Section 2-19 of the Alameda Municipal Code, and upon nomination of the Mayor, ILYA PINSKY is hereby appointed to the office of member of the Alameda Youth Advisory Commission of the City of Alameda, for a term commencing January 2, 2008, and expiring pursuant to staggered term requirements ofthe Alameda Municipal Code. ~***** I, the undersigned, hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly adopted and passed by the Council of the City of Alameda in a regular meeting assembled on the 2nd day of January, 2008, by the following vote to wit: AYES NOES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: IN 111JITNESS, WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of said City this day of , 2008. LaralNeisiger, City Clerk City of Alameda CITY OF AI_AMEDA RESOLUTION NO. APPOINTINGANGULI SASTRYASA MEMBER OF THE ALAMEDA YGUTH ADVfSORY COMMISSION 0 0 a ~. a a A 0 .~ c~ BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Alameda that pursuant to Section 2-~ 9 of the Alameda Municipal Code, and upon nomination of the Mayor, ANGULI SASTRY is hereby appointed to the office of member of the Alameda Youth Advisory Commission of the City of Alameda, for a term commencing January 2, 2008, and expiring pursuant to staggered term requirements of the Alameda Municipal Code. ****~* 1, the undersigned, hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly adopted and passed by the Council of the City of Alameda in a regular meeting assembled on the 2nd day of January, 2008, by the following vote to wit: AYES NOES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: IN WITNESS, WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of said City this day of , 2008, Lara Weisiger, City Clerk City of Alameda CITY OF ALAMEDA RESOLUTION NO. APPOINTING PRISCILLA SZETO AS A MEMBER OF THE I ALAMEDA YOUTH ADVISORY COMMISSION E o BE 1T RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Alameda that pursuantto ~' Section 219 of the Alameda Munici al Code and u on nomination of the p p ~, o Mayor, PRISCILLA SZETO is hereby appointed to the office of member of the `~ ~ Alameda Youth Advisory Commission of the City of Alameda, for a term ~ ~ ~ ~ commencing January 2, 2008, and exp~r~ng pursuant to staggered term ° requirements of the Alameda Municipal Code. ~ * * ~ ~ ~ I, the undersigned, hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly adopted and passed by the Council of the City of Alameda in a regular meeting assembled on the 2nd day of January, 2008, by the following vote to wit: AYES NOES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: IN WITNESS, WIJHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of said City this day of , 2008, Lara Weisiger, City Clerk City of Alameda CITY OFALAMEDA RESOLUTION N0. APPOINTING BEN ULREYASAMEMBEROFTHE ALAMEDA YOUTH ADVISORY COMMISSION 0 a a a 0 .~ BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Alameda that pursuantto Section 2-~ 9 of the Alameda Municipal Code, and upon nomination of the Mayor, BEN ULREY is hereby appointed to the office of member of the Alameda Youth Advisory Commission of the City of Alameda, for a term commencing January 2, 2008, and expiring pursuant to staggered term requirements of the Alameda Municipal Code. *****~ I, the undersigned, hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly adopted and passed by the Council of the City of Alameda in a regular meeting assembled on the 2nd day of January, 2008, by the following vote to wit: AYES NOES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: IN VIIITNESS,INHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of said C ity th is day of , 2008. Lara UVeisiger, City Clerk City of Alameda CITY GF ALAMEDA RESGLUTIGN NG. APPGINTING ANGELA STERLING VICKASA MEMBER GF THE ALAMEDAYGUTH ADVISORY CGMMISSIGN E L N as v a a BE 1T RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Alameda that pursuant to A Section 2-~ 9 of the Alameda Municipal Code, and upon nomination of the Mayor, ANGELA STERLING VICK is hereby appointed to the office of member ~ . ~ of the Alameda Youth Advisory Commission of the City of Alameda, for a term commencin Janua 2, 2008, and ex iris ursuant to sta erect term g ry p g p gg requirements of the Alameda Municipal Cade. ****~~ I, the undersigned, hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly adopted and passed by the Council of the City of Alameda in a regular meeting assembled on the 2nd day of January, 2008, by the following vote to wit: AYES NGES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIaNS: IN VIJITNESS, VIIHEREaF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of said City this day of , 2008. Lara 1Neisiger, City Clerk City of Alameda CITY of ALAMEDA Memorandum To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council From: Debra Kurita City Manager Date: January 2, 2008 Re: Hold a Public Hearing to Consider Adoption of a Resolution Amending Master Fee Resolution 12191 to Revise Permit Fees Charged for the Installation of Photovoltaic Systems BACKGRaUND In 2005, the Planning and Building Department conducted an extensive fee study to determine the City's cost of providing servicesfor permits and planning entitlements. The results of this study were adopted into the City's Master Fee Schedule. One of the specific flat rate fees established at thattime was a fee of $533 forthe installation of photovoltaic solar panel} systems. Minimum permitfees for projects valued at less than $5,004 were also established in the Fee Schedule. DISCUSSION Fees established in the 2005 fee study were based on the time it took to process, review, approve and inspect a similar project in preceding years. At the time of the study, the Planning and Building Department's experience with photovoltaic system projects had been limited, andthe costof the reviewand inspection processwas established inthe Fee Schedule at a higher level than what the department has experienced to date. Staff has now determined that the actual work effort involved with photovoltaic system permits is consistent with projects valued between $2,501 and $5,000, which are charged a minimum permit fee of $104. BUDGET CGNSIDERATIONIFINANCIALlMPACT The Planning and Building Department has issued an average of three photovoltaic system permits per year over the past five years. Based on the limited number of photovoltaic permits issued annually, reducing the permit fee from the current rate of $533 to the proposed rate of $104 will have a negligible impact on City revenues. MUNICIPAL CODEIPQLICY DOCUMENT CRGSS REFERENCE This action does not affect the Municipal Code. City Council Public Hearing Agenda Item #5-B o~-o~-oa Honorable Mayvr and Members of the City Council ENVIRONMENTAL REVIE~IJ January 2, 2008 Page 2 of 2 A modification of the Master Fee Schedule to reduce permit fees for residential photovoltaic systems is statutorily exempt under California Environmental Quality Act ~CEQA} Guidelines section ~ 5273 Rates, Tolls, Fares and Charges}, in that the permit fees collected are for the purpose of meeting operating expenses for building permits and inspection services. RECOMMENDATION Adapt a resolution modifying the Master Fee Schedule to reduce permit fees for residential photovoltaic systems from $533 to the minimum permit fee of $104. Respectfully submitted, Cathy oodbury Planning and Building Director By: Gregory J. McFann Building Official CITY OF ALAMEDA RESOLUTION N0, AMENDING MASTER FEE RESOLUTION N0.12191 TO REVISE PERMIT FEES CHARGED FOR THE INSTALLATION OF PHOTOVOLTAIC SYSTEMS WHEREAS, the Alameda Municipal Code and the California Government E Code provide that the City Council shall set fees reasonable to recover cost of ~, providing various services by resolution; and o N o WHEREAS the Cit Council at the Au ust 2l 1991 ' ~ ~ y g , Special City Council ~ ~, meeting, directed City staff to amend the Alameda Municipal Code to reflect that ~ ~ Git fees shall be set b Cit Council resolution; and o y yy L ~ WHEREAS, Resolution No.12191 ~"Master Fee Resolution"}, as amended codifies existing fees for various City services and permits. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED bythe CityCouncilofthe Cityof Alameda that the permit fees charged for the installation of residential photovoltaic systems be reduced from $533 to $104. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that pursuant to Ordinance No. 1928, the City fees are sub~ectto administrative adjustments natgreaterthan 5°/o annually over existing recovery levels. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that all fees established by Master Fee Resolution No. 12191 that are inconsistent with the fees established by this resolution are hereby repeated, **~*~~ I, the undersigned, hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly adopted and passed by the Council of the City of Alameda in a regular meeting assembled on the 2nd dayof January, 2008, by thefoflowingvote to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of said City this day of , 2008, Lora VlJeisiger, City Cle City of Alameda Reso~u~ions #5-B CC O1-02-OS Agenda Item 5-C is continued to January 15, 2008 CITY OF ALAMEDA Memorandum To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council From; Debra Kurita City Manager Date: January 2, 2005 Re; Accept the Corica Golf Complex Operational Review and Authorize Staff to Begin the Process to Secure along-term Operator for the Golf Complex _ .... ._. ...._.._ ..... .._ .---- BACKGROUND In early 2007, the City retained a consultant to conduct a comprehensive operational review of the Chuck Corica Golf Complex in order to protect, preserve, and enhance this community asset and ensure its economic viability. A team consisting of the Assistant City Manager, the Golf Complex General Manager, and representatives from the Golf Commission was assembled to prepare a Request for Proposals ~RFP}. The RFP was distributed to a number of qualified firms, and three proposals were submitted in March 2001. The committee reviewed the three proposals and recommended that the City Manager select National Golf Foundation Consulting, Inc., to conduct the operational review based on their extensive experience in conducting such evaluations. National Golf began their review in early spring, and the final document, which is posted on the City's website, was submitted in early September. DISCUSSION National Coif Foundation Report The National Golf Foundation ~NGF} conducted an extensive review of the Golf Complex, including a physical and qualitative review of the golf courses and support amenities, current marketing position, marketing strategies, management structure, staffing, operational practices, and contractual agreements. The goal of the study was to "identify strategies and policies that can be practically implemented to increase the overall economic performance of the golf complex, and maximize the economic return to the City." In conducting its review, NGF found that activity at the golf complex declined by nearly 73,000 rounds, or 35,2%, between FY 2001-02 and FY 2005-06, while total receipts fell City Council Agenda item #5-D o~-oz-o~ Honorable Mayor and January 2, 2oa8 Members of the City Council Page 2 of 4 by $1.35 million, or 25.3%. During the same period, wages and benefits increased by $542,000, or 21.1%, and other operating expenses also rose. NGF described this situation as a "deadly combination" of declining revenues and increased expenditures. Unless this situation changes, the mismatch in revenues and expenditures will cause the golf complex to spend all of its reserves within a matter of three years. After analyzing the golf complex operations, management, and physical plant, NGF developed a number of recommendations to ensure the Tong-term health and success of the Chuck Corica Golf Complex. First, the consultant found that the golf complex must make approximately $10 million in capital improvements, primarily to the Earl Fry and Jack Clark Courses. Investing funds in these courses will both preserve them and position them to offer a better experience for golf complex patrons, thereby attracting new and returning golfers and increasing revenues. The consultant also recommended closing the Mif Albright Course, which has seen a decline in play over the last five years and a subsequent decline in revenues. NGF's report also contains several options for future management of the golf complex, including continuing as is with the City running the facility; hiring a management company to operate all aspects of the complex; entering into a concession agreement in which a concessionaire operates the facility on behalf of the City; contracting out the maintenance of the facility; and entering into an operating lease with a private company in exchange for an annual lease payment. After analyzing the operations and finances at the golf complex, NGF recommended that the City lease the golf complex to a private operator, structuring the lease in such a way as to protect the City's interests and the golf-playing public's enjoyment of the facility while also requiring significant investment in capital improvements to the golf complex. According to the report, "we have concluded that a lease agreement is the best solution for the City if it wants to stem the financial downturn, and preserve the golf facility asset for future generations." NGF's report also includes a number of minor suggestions, such as improved signage, marketing, and minor facility improvements. These suggestions are being implemented. In addition, earlier this year, the Golf General Manager took along-term leave of absence and later separated from City service. The Director of the Alameda Recreation and Park Department has served as the Interim General Manager for the golf complex since that time, enabling the golf enterprise to recognize some salary savings by leaving the position vacant. Representatives from the National Golf Foundation presented their findings to the Golf Commission during its meeting on September 19t". The Galf Commission accepted the report and scheduled a work session for Gctober 1gt" to review the results in detail and to develop a recommendation for the City Council. Following extensive discussion and public input, the Golf Commission approved a recommendation to accept the report and support implementation of all of the associated suggestions except securing a private operator to lease and manage the golf complex in the long term. However, the Golf Commission did reluctantly support turning the long-term operations of the golf complex Honorable Mayor and January 2, 2008 Members ofthe City Council Page 3 of4 over to a private company should the City be unable to commit the $1D million in funding necessary to complete the needed capital improvements. Long-Term Lease As the consultant noted, the golf complex continues to lose money as rounds and revenues decline and expenses increase. As a result, the golf enterprise reserves continue to be reduced in order to meet ongoing obligations. As of October 31, 2DD7, the golf complex has approximately $2.1 million remaining in reserves. During the first four months of this fiscal year, the golf complex enterprise has experienced a loss of approximately $42,000 a month. Unless changes are made, the decline in reserves wilt continue until they are exhausted. NGF recommends that the City enter into along-term operating lease for the golf complex. llvith a lessee operating the complex under along-term lease, the City will be able to require a significant capital investment in the facility, an investment that the City is financially unable to undertake at this time. In addition, under along-term lease, the City would transfer ail golf complex costs to the lessee, including those related to golf management and golf maintenance personnel, and the City would receive a guaranteed annual payment from the lessee. As a means of gauging interest among potential operators, staff compiled and distributed a Request for Qualifications to a large number of golf management firms. To date, a total of ten firms have expressed interest in submitting a proposal for the long- term operation of the facility, and eight of those firms have submitted the relevant documentation. It is estimated that it would take approximately six months to a year to complete the Request for Proposal process, select along-term operator, and negotiate terms. Next Steps The following tentative timeline summarizes the next steps should Council approve staff's recommendation: January 2008 The City, in consultation with NGF, develops an RFP in order to select along-term operatorfor the golf complex. April 2005 Potential long-term operators submit proposals. June 2008 Recommendation to City Council to select a company to enter into an exclusive negotiation agreement period. October 2005 Lease agreement with long-term golf complex operator to City Council for approval. January 2009 Lessee assumes operation of golf complex. Honorable Mayor and January 2, 2008 Members of the City Council Page 4 of 4 Interim Golf Complex Management Given the financial difficulties facing the golf complex and the time needed to implement the recommendation to secure a lease with along-term operator, staff collected information on the costs and benefits of an alternative option for reducing expenditures in the near term. That option involved hiring a professional golf management company to operate all aspects of the complex while along-term operator is secured. Staff contacted four professional golf management companies, and three submitted proposals to operate the pro shop, driving range, and golf cart functions for four to six months until along-term operator can be secured. After analyzing the proposals, staff determined that utilizing a professional management company and its employees to operate the golf functions at the complex would not result in significant savings over the interim period. Staff will continue to explore opportunities for increasing revenues and decreasing expenditures at the golf complex. BUDGET CGNSIDERAT14N1FINANCIAL IMPACT Vvith declining revenues and increasing expenditures, the golf complex continues to experience a negative cash flow, a situation that will cause the golf complex to exhaust its reserves within approximately three years. Leasing the golf complex to a long-term operator willing to make the capital investments necessary to restore the Earl Fry and Jack Clark courses will address this situation, RECGMMENDATIDN Accept the Gperational Review provided by the National Golf Foundation and authorize staff to begin the process to secure a long-term operator for the golf complex. Respectfully submitted, Dale Lillard, Director Alameda Recreation and Park Department George B. Humphreys, President Chuck Corica Seniors Golf Club 25 Captains Drive Alameda, CA 94502 December 1$, 2007 Mayor Johnson And City Council Members C ity Hal l 22b3 Santa Clara Avenue Alameda, CA 94501 rntrnc~~trtinn Subject: Golf Complex operations RECEIVED iao~ oec i a P u ?2 CITY OF ALAiiEDA CITY CL[RK S OFFICE The Chuck Corica Golf Complex represents a valuable recreational asset to the City of Alameda. Its two 18-hole courses are level, scenic courses Ia able b olfers at P Y Yg various skill levels. The par-3, Mif Albright course is especially valuable because it is a course that can be played by youngsters learning the game, families with children, and older players who have physical limitations that make it difficult for them to ne otiate the g longer 1$-hole courses. There should be a substantial upturn in the profitabili of olf . tY g courses w~th~n 5 to 10 years as baby boomers start to retire. The City should be willing to invest in the maintenance and improvement of this valuable resource. ~Ve understand that the consultant firm, National Golf Foundation, has recommended that if the City is unwilling to fund some $10 million of golf course upgrades, the golf course operations should be turned over to a private operator. It is important to note that the golf course operation would be prof table at the present time if the City were not draining off money from the course in the form of Payments-in-lieu-of Taxes ~PIL4T}, Return-on-Investment ~RDI}, Surcharges, and other cost allocations. The consultant's report points out that the PILGTIRGI and surchar es .. .., g are unusual for munlc~pally operated facll~t~es. These payments are essentially comin g out of the course's reserve funds, which will be completely depleted within the next several years if the City insists on continuing such fees. Note also that if the City turns over operation to a private operator it will not be collecting these charges either. Further, the City will be burdened with substantial unreimbursed costs in the form of le al fees . .. g and staff costs associated with administering and policing the private operator's performance. f~i~r Pn~~tinn 1. we o ose turnip over o erations to a rivate o erator. It would be tra is if g the City lost control of this outstanding complex. This has been tried in the past unsuccessfully, The course was saved by the courageous efforts of the late Mayor Chuck Corica. liver 1000 members of our various service clubs would be impacted. This includes the widely admired Junior Golf Program, the men's club, the women's 18-hole and 9-hole clubs, and the senior olf g club. Most of the benef is of conversion to a private operator would be in the form of reduced labor costs, which would accrue primarily tc~ the operator. Any annual payments to the City probably would eaten up by the costs of Re: Agenda Ztem 5-D CC O1-OZ-08 negotiating and administering the private operation. Any capital improvements made by the operator would correspondingly reduce the lease payment. Finally, there is really no insulation of the City from the risks of dwindling revenues. Private operators who are losing money come back to the Cities and ask to renegotiate their contracts. 2. we o ase closin or leasin the Mif Albri ht course makin the ro e unavailable for ublic use, The two primary reasons for diminished revenues from the Mif Albright course are the unfavorable changes that were made to the course layout when the practice area was installed, and the fact that the greens fees have been raised to an uncompetitive level. The practice area not only damaged the course layout, but also drew away paying customers who might otherwise use the Mif Albright course. The course could be easily returned to its original condition, without the practice area, using in-house labor at little or no additional cost, There are only two other short courses in the area, the Marina course in San Leandro and the par-3 course at Lake Chabot. Thus, the Mif Albright course is in a much better position to be competitive than the 18-hole courses. 3. We favor buildin a ban uet facili and re airin the drivin ran e. These two items of capital improvements could be accomplished within a bud et of ., g about $ 4 million, and financed by a loan backed by the project revenue. Not all of the $1 U million of capital improvements proposed by the consultants are equally productive in terms of increasing course profitability, nor do they have to be accomplished within atwo-year timeframe. The need for a banquet facility and its potential prof tability has been demonstrated by the market survey that was done several years ago. The driving range has been a very profitable operation, but the carpet needs to be repaired and a means is needed for retrieving balls from the central drainage area of the range. Estimated casts have been mentioned of $ 2 million for the banquet facility and $1 million for the driving range improvements, but $ 4 million is suggested as a budget f gure to allow some contingency. Incidentally, the consultant's estimate of $10 million far course improvements does not include any contingency. All of the suggested capital improvements are desirable, but perhaps unaffordable at the present time. If these first two suggested steps are successful in producing increased revenues, then those revenues could be used to fund the other improvements in the future. 4. we favor streamlinin olf course o erations. There needs to bean experienced golf course manager, in charge of overall operations who can make needed organizational changes. Such changes could include reducin . g overhead and increased reliance on part-time employees to reduce labor costs. There is also a need for a Master Plan for the future improvement of the course. The consultant and everyone else who has examined the course's operation have recognized this need. Sincerel ~ ''~. .L +i George B. H phreys, Preside ,Chu C;orica Seniors Golf Club 2 CURRENT APPLICATIONS YOUTH ADVISORY COMMISSION ELEVEN VACANCIES Lamant Carter Claire Forbes Bridget Kanady Naoxse Lane Vincent Margado MaXlory Penney Bhaani Singh Kaeleigh Thorp Re: Agenda Item #8-A ~ •2.08