2007-05-15 Regular CC MinutesMINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
TUESDAY- -MAY 15, 2007- -7:30 P.M.
Mayor Johnson convened the Regular City Council Meeting at 7:46
p.m. Councilmember Matarrese led the Pledge of Allegiance.
ROLL CALL - Present: Councilmembers deHaan, Gilmore,
Matarrese, Tam and Mayor Johnson - 5.
Absent: None.
AGENDA CHANGES
None.
PROCLAMATIONS, SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY AND ANNOUNCEMENTS
(07 -219) Proclamation declaring May 17, 2007 as Bike -to -Work Day.
Mayor Johnson read and presented the proclamation to Dan Wood, Bike
Alameda.
(07 -220) Proclamation declaring May 13 through 19, 2007 as
National Police Memorial Week.
Mayor Johnson read and presented the proclamation to the Chief of
Police.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Councilmember deHaan moved approval of the Consent Calendar;
requested a 10 -year sales tax profile [regarding the recommendation
to accept quarterly sales tax, paragraph no. *07 -2241.
Vice Mayor Tam seconded the motion.
Councilmember Matarrese noted that he would abstain from voting on
the May 1, 2007 minutes [paragraph no. *07 -221].
On the call for the question, the motion carried by unanimous voice
vote - 5. [Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an
asterisk preceding the paragraph number.]
( *07 -221) Minutes of the Special Joint City Council and Community
Improvement Commission meeting held on April 17, 2007, the Special
and Regular City Council Meetings held on May 1, 2007, and the
Special Joint City Council, Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment
Authority, and Community Improvement Commission Meeting held on May
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council 1
May 15, 2007
8, 2007. Approved.
[Note: Councilmember Matarrese abstained from voting on the May 1,
2007 minutes.]
( *07 -222) Ratified bills in the amount of $5,285,161.40.
( *07 -223) Recommendation to set hearing date for June 5, 2007 for
establishment of Proposition 4 Limit for Fiscal Year 2007 -2008.
Accepted.
( *07 -224) Recommendation to accept Quarterly Sales Tax Report for
period ending March 31, 2007. Accepted.
( *07 -225) Recommendation to award Contract in the amount of
$240,000, including contingencies, to Shaaf & Wheeler Consulting
Engineers for Storm Drainage Study, No. P.W. 03- 07 -08. Accepted.
( *07 -226) Recommendation to adopt Specifications and authorize Call
for Bids for Roof Structure for Maintenance Service Center Transfer
Pad and Dumpsters, No. P.W. 04- 07 -14. Accepted.
( *07 -227) Recommendation to adopt Plans and Specifications and
authorize Call for Bids for pruning of City trees within the City
of Alameda for the Fiscal Year ending June 30, 2008, No. P. W. 04-
07-13. Accepted.
( *07 -228) Recommendation to accept the work of SpenCon
Construction, Inc., for Fiscal Year 2005 -2006 repair of Portland
Cement concrete sidewalk, curb, gutter, driveway, and minor street
patching, No. P.W. 03- 06 -06. Accepted.
( *07 -229) Resolution No. 14086, "Preliminarily Approving Annual
Report Declaring Intention to Order Levy and Collection of
Assessments and Providing for Notice of Public Hearing July 3, 2007
- Island City Landscaping and Lighting District 84 -2." Adopted;
( *07 -229A) Resolution No. 14087, "Preliminarily Approving
Annual Report Declaring Intention to Order Levy and Collection of
Assessments and Providing for Notice of Public Hearing July 3, 2007
- Island City Landscaping and Lighting District 84 -2, Zones 2 and
3." Adopted.
( *07 -230) Resolution No. 14088, "Preliminarily Approving Annual
Report Declaring Intention to Order Levy and Collection of
Assessments and Providing for Notice of Public Hearing July 3, 2007
- Maintenance Assessment District 01 -01 (Marina Cove)." Adopted.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council 2
May 15, 2007
( *07 -231) Resolution No. 14089, "Approving a Second Amendment to
the Agreement for Additional Funding from the State of California
Coastal Conservancy to Implement Spartina Eradication and
Mitigation Measures and Authorizing the City Manager to Enter into
All Associated Agreements." Adopted.
( *07 -232) Resolution No. 14090, "Accepting $138,000 in Fiscal Year
2007 -2008 Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Funds for the
Signal Coordination and Interconnect for Eighth Street, Park
Street, and Otis Drive Projects." Adopted.
( *07 -233) Resolution No. 14091, "Authorizing Open Market Purchase
from Moss Brothers Dodge, Riverside, California Pursuant to Section
3 -15 of the Alameda City Charter for One Dodge Charger in an Amount
Not to Exceed $23,470." Adopted.
( *07 -234) Resolution No. 14092, "Authorizing the City Manager to
Complete and Execute a Cooperative Agreement Between the City of
Alameda and the State of California Department of Transportation
for the Stargell (Formerly Tinker) Avenue Extension Project (CIP
No. 04- 105 /CalTrans Project No. EA448200)." Adopted.
( *07 -235) Resolution No. 14093, "Resolution of Intention to Levy an
Annual Assessment on the Alameda Business Improvement Area of the
City of Alameda for Fiscal Year 2007 -2008 and Set a Public Hearing
for June 5, 2007." Adopted.
REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS
(07 -236) Public Hearing to consider a Call for Review /Appeal of
the Planning Board's appointment of an Ad Hoc Committee to work
with the Planning and Building Director on a Housing
Element /Measure A Workshop.
The Planning and Building Director gave a brief presentation.
Mayor Johnson opened the public portion of the hearing.
Proponents (In favor of Appeal): former Councilmember Barbara Kerr,
Appellant; Pat Bail, Appellant; Dr. Alice Challen, Appellant; Diane
Coler -Dark, Appellant; Jim Sweeney, Appellant; former Councilmember
"Lil" Arnerich, Appellant; "Lil" Arnerich for Norma Arnerich,
Alameda; former Councilmember Barbara Thomas, Appellant; Robert
Pardee, Alameda; Dorothy A. Freeman, Alameda; Joseph Woodard,
Alameda; Susan Battaglia, Alameda; Eric Scheuermann, Alameda; David
Howard, Action Alameda; Scott Brady, Alameda; Ashley Jones,
Alameda; Len Grzanka, Alameda; Nita Rosen, Alameda; Noel Folsom,
Alameda; Robert Rodd, Alameda; Robert Todd, Alameda; and Mercedes
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council 3
May 15, 2007
Milana, Alameda.
Opponents (Not in favor of Appeal): Marilyn Ezzy Ashcraft, Planning
Board Member; Ann Cook, Planning Board Member; Kate Quick, League
of Women Voters of Alameda (submitted handout); Michael Schmitz,
Alameda; Lois Pryor, Alameda; Doug Linney, Alameda; Mark Irons,
Alameda; Mi'Chelle Fredrick, Alameda; Diane Lichtenstein, Housing
Opportunities Makes Economic Sense (HOMES); Susan Decker, Alameda;
Walter Schlueter, Alameda; Lauren Do, Alameda; Dan Wood, Alameda;
Helen Sauce, HOMES; Jon Spangler, Alameda; Sam Sauce, Alameda; Carl
Halpern, Alameda; Liz Rogers, Alameda; Michael Kruger, Alameda;
John Knox White, Alameda; Laura Thomas, Alameda; and Eve Bach, Arc
Ecology.
Neutral: Pamela Kurtz, Alameda; and Bill Smith, Alameda.
Mayor Johnson left the meeting at 8:18 p.m. and returned at 9:21
p.m.
Following the Appellants' comments, Councilmember deHaan stated the
City is going through the Metropolitan Transportation Commission's
(MTC) Station Area Plan; the initial meeting was held; inquired
whether the Planning Board submitted information and inquiries for
discussion at said meeting.
The Planning and Building Director responded in the negative.
Councilmember deHaan stated that he was concerned that the Planning
Board talked about wanting to see design and land usage; inquired
what the Station Area Plan is to do.
The Planning and Building Director responded the Station Area Plan
looks at land development patterns for Alameda Point; stated as
part of the grant MTC awarded the City, the City is required to
look at a land use development pattern that would be denser around
a multi -modal transit station, which would be a non - Measure A
alternative; the land development alternative in the Alameda Point
Preliminary Development Concept (PDC) will be compared to something
with a different form to see how transit would or would not be
supported.
Councilmember deHaan inquired why would said avenue not be used as
the platform for discussion.
The Planning and Building Director responded said avenue is part of
the discussion.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council 4
May 15, 2007
Councilmember deHaan stated the
position at the [Planning Board]
policy and should be considered
contrary to the staff report.
Planning and Building Director's
meeting was that the decision is
at the Council level, which is
The Planning and Building Director responded a bigger discussion of
Measure A, not in context of the Housing Element update or MTC
grant funded project, is a policy discussion in her opinion.
Councilmember deHaan stated the Council is going through stages
right now; the Alameda Point Master Developer was just selected;
the Master Developer will return with various ideas and direction;
the MTC Station Area Plan was to set up the dialogue on
transportation; there was a very small sub - element on Measure A,
which became a prime element at the first meeting; the Housing
Element has been under discussion for ages and is an on -going
legitimate discussion; the Chinatown Agreement and lawsuits facing
the City are important and put certain limitations on the amount of
housing that can be built; the Collins property plans rejected by
the Planning Board and Council is in a lawsuit; these are the
things in which the Council needs to be involved; there is going to
be a different disposition of how Coast Guard housing will be
handled; said matters are the concerns that require better
understanding of how to go forward; the Transportation Master Plan
(TMP) will come forward; all said matters intertwine together; the
Council took a position when the League of Women Voters requested
the matter [Measure A amendment] be put on the ballot; density,
traffic and number of houses are important issues; in 2000, the
Sierra Club and ARC Ecology did a survey of around 300 homes to ask
if there was support to change Measure A; the response was not to
change Measure A; the other question was whether there would be
support to change Measure A for Alameda Point; the study indicated
the matter would not pass if it were not brought through the
Council; a year later the Chamber of Commerce surveyed its
membership regarding changing Measure A; the membership decided not
to take any action because the resounding response was the
membership did not support changing Measure A; Measure A continues
to get good dialogue; there is not good understanding of Measure A;
the dialogue has to be out there to ensure people understand why
Measure A was put in place; Alameda Landing entitlements increased
housing and added retail; that he supports additional retail;
however, saturation is being reached; the Tube congestion is
getting worse; full build out is not even close; reducing the
amount of housing at Alameda Point has been discussed; a rough
study indicated that it would take 3,100 homes to make Alameda
Point economically viable; there will be further study; 12 -150 of
people in Alameda use public transit; the Alameda Point PDC states
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council 5
May 15, 2007
that the largest percent achievable would be 200 [using public
transit]; the matter is how traffic will flow and move in an
orderly fashion throughout Alameda, not Measure A; the Council
needs further discussion of how to look at Alameda as a whole
rather than individual parts; discussion is important and healthy.
Following the last public speaker, Mayor Johnson closed the public
portion of the Hearing.
Mayor Johnson called a recess at 10:25 p.m. and reconvened the
meeting at 10:40 p.m.
Mayor Johnson stated that she appreciated everyone's civility.
Councilmember Matarrese requested the City Attorney to answer the
question about whether the Planning Board action was within the
Board's legal authority.
The City Attorney responded the Planning Board has no jurisdiction
over amending or changing Measure A, which would be a Charter
amendment and requires a vote of the people; stated the Planning
Board also has no jurisdiction over advocating the changing of
Measure A; the Planning Board can look at and talk about Measure A
as long as it does not take an advocacy position; establishing a
subcommittee for the sole purpose of looking at various ways a
public forum could be structured is not outside the authority of
the Planning Board; under the Brown Act, the subcommittee must
report back to the Planning Board at an open meeting with public
participation; the action the Planning Board took was within the
Board's jurisdiction.
Councilmember Matarrese inquired whether the Planning Board's
action that was appealed was legal; whether the Board cannot take
an advocacy position; whether the subcommittee would not make any
decisions and would only make recommendations to the Planning
Board; and whether the Planning Board would not make any decision
about whether Measure A stays or goes because it is outside the
Board's purview.
The City Attorney responded in the affirmative to all of
Councilmember Matarrese's inquiries.
Vice Mayor Tam inquired whether there are any constraints on the
direction the Council can give regarding the composition of the
subcommittee.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council 6
May 15, 2007
The City Attorney responded there are no constraints on the City
Council to condition the Planning Board's action; Council can
uphold the appeal, deny the appeal or make a different
recommendation to the Planning Board and remand the decision for
the Planning Board to do in a different way.
Councilmember deHaan stated the Council determines how individual
elements move forward, which has an impact on the overall
development of Alameda; the overall development of Alameda should
be reviewed; Measure A is a segment of it [development]; Measure A
could be discarded if there were a limit on the number of overall
housing units and design were different; there needs to be an
understanding of what might be built out and how impacts will
affect the City; the Council should look at how the overall growth
of Alameda is going to be built out and understand all the segments
together and the TMP's impacts; decisions should start being made
as a big picture; the Measure A portion is going to be and has been
discussed, maybe not in the proper context, in the Station Area
Plan; that he has not seen what the Station Area Plan next meeting
will look like, which is important to him; the first meeting
started off on the wrong foot; another three meetings will be held,
which is a good starting point; MTC's funding provided a great
opportunity since the City could not afford the staff time and
effort; that he would prefer looking at the overall picture and
making a determination of how the City will handle this
[development] as a whole; the other [formation of a subcommittee]
should be put on the side and the appeal should be upheld because
the Planning Board has a heavy agenda for the next three or four
months.
Mayor Johnson stated that she does not disagree with Councilmember
deHaan's comments; questioned whether the normal process is to
start with the Planning Board and then have the matter come to
Council; stated that she agrees there should be an overall
strategy, which has been done in different areas; there should be a
comprehensive review.
Councilmember deHaan stated it [comprehensive review] has been done
somewhat in the Alameda Point PDC.
Mayor Johnson stated parts have been completed, such as
transportation and retail analysis.
Councilmember deHaan stated the Northern waterfront and the impact
of South Shore have not been done; all of the elements have not
been considered together as a whole; the West End has to be one of
the most important corridors and is already impacted now; Measure A
might not change that [West End corridor] at all and would not
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
May 15, 2007
effect the numbers being discussed if the intent were not to have
more housing units; the transportation corridor has become so much
more important; there is a situation with Alameda Landing - -only
$400,000 was designated for remediation of transportation
corridors; Oakland is developing out which is inundating Alameda's
corridors; the Council would be remiss if the proper context is not
taken.
Mayor Johnson inquired whether Councilmember deHaan is stating that
more housing units should not be included if the Planning Board is
reviewing, for example, planning at the Base.
Councilmember deHaan responded that he is just telling about the
impact of traffic itself; stated no more housing started to be
discussed when the City lost the last developer; reducing the
number of homes started being discussed more; the developer has
been told the City wants jobs out there [at Alameda Point]; another
developer was just selected; there is time to review and
understand; the new developer is a new set of fresh eyes and will
bring a new dimension to it [Alameda Point development]; there is
no urgency at this point in time; adaptive reuse has been talked
about; individuals have stated adaptive reuse cannot be done under
Measure A, but it can; it [development] may not be as good under
Measure A as it could be, but it can be done; Cardinal Point is an
excellent example; needs can be met under Measure A; Alameda
Landing will include building housing above commercial space and is
Measure A compliant; Measure A is not the driving force; there is a
bigger problem - -the constraints and opportunities facing the City.
Councilmember Matarrese stated several of Councilmember deHaan's
comments, such as the statement that the impacts are not known,
support the Planning Board action; the City is facing the largest
development, which is really reuse, in Alameda's history; the
development is probably the most important in the Bay Area and
every single option is worth review; the ground rules are
specifically to establish the facts on the limitations and benefits
of Measure A; it [the workshop] is to obtain public input; the
deliverable is to provide a written account of the workshop that
will include facts that can be used in support of the Housing
Element and to provide the City Council with information for making
policy decisions; doing it [the workshop] now is fortuitous because
Alameda Point development is at least a year away; Measure A has
been discussed every two years on a regular basis in the context of
political campaigns; taking the discussion outside the context of a
political campaign and making it fact based is good; that in
addition to the Housing Element, he would like to include the
transportation component, which is inextricably intertwined; the
forum should be facilitated by someone outside the City who is
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council 8
May 15, 2007
independent; having the discussion is timely and must be done.
Vice Mayor Tam stated the formation of a committee to plan a public
forum has raised the concern that there may be a group that is
headed in the direction of amending Measure A; Measure A permeates
through the City's land use planning and affects the quality of
life as it pertains to dealing with traffic through the Tube,
saving open space, and public transit ridership; both sides agreed
that institutional knowledge could be conveyed through a public
forum that is fair, honest, balanced, realistic and helps define
the future, particularly with the Alameda Point development; there
is a concern that the committee may not be able to fulfill some of
the expectations of the fair, open, transparent debate; therefore,
she suggests that the committee be expanded to include three
members from the seven Appellants.
Councilmember Gilmore thanked the members of the public for
participating in the discussion; stated people mentioned that
Measure A came to be when there was concern about a large
development at one end of town and people were worried about what
the density and traffic would do to the rest of the town; now,
there will be another very large development at one end of town;
the City is facing a situation very similar to the situation that
spawned Measure A and there is a lot of discussion about the pros
and cons of Measure A; concerns raised at the Planning Board
meeting were legitimate; including Appellants on the committee is a
good idea; that she was going to suggest that the structure formed
by the committee return to the Planning Board for full debate; the
committee might come up with a structure that does not include any
Planning Board members; a method might be to choose members of the
public.
Mayor Johnson stated there is a perception that the City is
advocating; having no members of the Planning Board might be good;
the Council appoints other committees that do not involve members
of boards, commissions or Council.
Councilmember Gilmore stated good suggestions were made tonight,
such as having Woody Minor present a history of Measure A; that she
does not know enough about what the structure will be to decide
whether it [the forum] will be good or bad; on a personal basis,
she does not like to tell anyone that they cannot talk about
something; open meetings are held in order to allow people to talk;
a fair, unbiased forum that would allow people to give viewpoints
and be educated would be good for the City; that she likes the fact
that it [the forum] will be done in a non - election year and is not
being done while there is a signed agreement with an Alameda Point
developer; not having a signed developer should eliminate concerns
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council 9
May 15, 2007
that the forum is developer driven; the development at Bay Farm
gave rise to Measure A; the discussion on Alameda Point development
might give rise to a tightening of Measure A, which will not be
known until the discussion is held.
Vice Mayor Tam stated that she is concerned that the leadership
which the Planning Board would bring to the debate would be lost if
the committee is made up of members of the public; the Planning
Board is the Council's land use advisory body and has a significant
amount of expertise that should not be lost; combining the Planning
Board members with people on the other side of the debate brings a
richer framework for how the public forum would be shaped, as well
as inviting Woody Minor to be a panelist at one of the workshops.
Councilmember deHaan stated similar thoughts were raised at the
Planning Board meeting; adding other parties to the committee was
discussed and was not pursued; starting with Woody Minor was
brought up a couple of meetings prior; understanding pros and cons
that have occurred during the last 34 years has to be done to make
the forum meaningful; the forum is not needed to address design and
land usage issue, which are already being addressed at the MTC;
there has to be much more to the dialogue.
Mayor Johnson recognized Planning Board Member Marilyn Ezzy
Ashcraft.
Ms. Ezzy Ashcraft stated the three subcommittee members met after
the Planning Board appointed the subcommittee and prior to the
Appeal /Call for Review; at said meeting, one of the first names
that came up as a good starting point was Woody Minor; that she
takes copious notes and no one expressed a desire to overturn
Measure A; the discussion was about what the Council would want as
a deliverable, probably at least three alternatives; the
subcommittee also discussed wanting to hear from people in as many
different areas as possible and how to do as much as possible on a
very limited budget; urged Council to give the subcommittee 30 days
to come up with something and return to the Planning Board or
Council; the subcommittee is looking for a way to have a full, fair
discussion.
Mayor Johnson recognized former Councilmember "Lil" Arnerich.
Mr. Arnerich inquired whether the Council has the right to select
the committee members; stated the rooster is guarding the hen
house; people think the three Planning Board members selected for
the subcommittee are anti - Measure A; the subcommittee should be
made up of unbiased people who would look at the matter
objectively.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council 10
May 15, 2007
Mayor Johnson inquired whether Mr. Arnerich would support the
Council adding him, former Councilmember Barbara Kerr and Woody
Minor to the committee.
Mr. Arnerich responded that he did not want to serve; stated Golf
Commissioner Bob Wood would be good.
Councilmember deHaan stated Woody Minor should give a presentation
[at the forum]; actual Appellants should be added to the committee.
Mayor Johnson inquired whether the Appellants could select three
designees.
Mr. Arnerich responded many excellent people could serve; going to
people outside the Planning Board to carry out the Council's wishes
is the most appropriate way to go.
Mayor Johnson stated there is a perception that the subcommittee
members have a preference.
Councilmember Gilmore stated the three subcommittee members along
with three the Appellants, selected by the Appellants, could get
together and come up with structure for going forward with the
Measure A discussion; inquired whether putting more people on the
subcommittee means that the meetings would have to be noticed;
stated the group would meet to set up a forum; the six people
should be able to meet and bring a recommendation back to the City
Council or Planning Board at which time the public could comment on
the structure.
The City Attorney stated the Planning Board set up a subcommittee
composed of less than a quorum of the Board; the Council is
entertaining the establishment of an Ad Hoc Committee, which is
slightly different; meeting outside a noticed, public hearing would
be permissible since the officials involved are still less than a
quorum of the legislative body because no action will be taken; the
group would have to return to the Planning Board or City Council
and report on its findings and recommendations; the Planning Board
or Council would make a decision on the context of the forum after
the public has an opportunity to provide input.
Mayor Johnson inquired whether the Council could give direction to
notice the meetings, to which the City Attorney responded in the
affirmative.
Councilmember deHaan stated the public should be able to attend the
meetings.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council 1 1
May 15, 2007
The City Attorney stated the Brown Act does not constrain the
Council from setting up a meeting that has more public
participation than is legally required.
Councilmember Gilmore stated a Task Force set up to address Harbor
Island [apartment evictions] allowed members of the public to
attend the meetings and listen to deliberations, but not provide
input.
Mayor Johnson inquired whether said meetings were noticed, to which
Councilmember deHaan responded the meetings were announced at
Council meetings.
Councilmember Matarrese stated said idea is good; the Ad Hoc
Committee will work on the structure that would return to the
Planning Board for consideration; the Planning Board would make a
decision on the structure of the forum and there would be
discussion.
Councilmember Matarrese moved approval of denying the Appeal and
upholding the Planning Board's decision to assign an Ad Hoc
Committee to work on a structure for a public forum on Measure A
with the following conditions: that it includes in the context of
the housing element and transportation issues, that it is limited
to establishing the facts on limitations and benefits of Measure A
and prohibits advocacy, that it obtains public input and a written
record of the workshop and its deliberations be provided, that its
intent is to be used as a basis for the upcoming housing element as
well as other decisions related to future development in Alameda,
and that the Ad Hoc Committee be expanded to include three members
of the Appellant group to be determined by the Appellants.
Mayor Johnson suggested the motion be kept simple since structuring
the forum itself is being discussed; stated the end result should
not be set.
Councilmember Matarrese stated the end result can be struck from
the motion, but knowing the goal is important to know the work
product.
Mayor Johnson stated the goal is getting to the workshop itself.
Councilmember deHaan inquired whether the Ad Hoc Committee would
report back to the Council or Planning Board.
Councilmember Matarrese responded the Ad Hoc Committee would report
to the Planning Board; the Planning Board would have public
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council 12
May 15, 2007
deliberation and make a decision; then, the forum would occur;
there would be a work product; there would be a record of what
happened [at the forum], including what people said and what was
discussed; the discussion should be written down and memorialized.
Councilmember Gilmore stated that she concurs with Councilmember
Matarrese; the Planning Board had a lengthy discussion several
years ago and the only record was that a meeting was held to
discuss Measure A; that she would not want to take time and effort
to establish a structure to have an impartial forum and not have a
record of the forum; that she supports having full minutes of the
discussion written down and memorialized.
Councilmember deHaan inquired whether the discussion would be
limited to Alameda Point only, to which Councilmember Matarrese
responded in the negative.
Councilmember Gilmore stated the Ad Hoc Committee should determine
the parameters.
Councilmember deHaan inquired whether there would be an impact on
any lawsuits, to which the City Attorney responded that she would
prepare a confidential opinion for the Council.
Councilmember Gilmore stated regardless of the Ad Hoc Committee's
structure or its decisions, Measure A is still the law in Alameda;
unless citizens circulate a petition to have the matter placed on
the ballot and voted upon, Measure A remains the law.
Vice Mayor Tam seconded the motion with the clarification from
Councilmember Gilmore.
Councilmember deHaan requested the motion be restated.
Councilmember Matarrese restated the motion to deny the appeal and
uphold the decision of the Planning Board with the following
conditions: that the context is both the Housing Element and
transportation; that the Ad Hoc Committee be expanded to include
three members of the Appellant group to be determined by the
Appellants; workshop deliverables are establishing facts,
limitations, and benefits of Measure A, to obtain public input and
to provide a written account of deliberations and outcomes of the
workshop.
Mayor Johnson inquired how people would be informed of the Ad Hoc
Committee's Meetings; stated the motion should include direction
that the Ad Hoc Committees meeting schedule be made public.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council 13
May 15, 2007
Councilmember Gilmore stated the meetings could be announced at
Council or Planning Board meetings.
Councilmember Matarrese agreed to amend the motion.
Vice Mayor Tam seconded the motion.
Councilmember deHaan inquired whether the motion included
Councilmember Gilmore's comments that Vice Mayor Tam included when
she originally seconded the motion.
Vice Mayor Tam stated Councilmember Gilmore's clarification on the
process in which the deliverables come back to the Council was
articulated when Councilmember Matarrese restated the motion.
Mayor Johnson stated the comments were that there should be a
written record.
Councilmember Gilmore stated the main point was that there be a
written record of what was discussed, how it was discussed, and
what conclusions, if any; there needs to be a full record, not just
one line that a meeting was held.
Councilmember deHaan stated that Councilmember Gilmore alluded to
Measure A itself being the will of the people and would come back
through said means via the will of the people.
Mayor Johnson stated the statement could be made for the record.
Councilmember Gilmore stated the statement could be made for the
record; however, it [statement] did not have anything to do with
the motion.
Mayor Johnson stated the statement should be made as part of the
record: that the Council recognizes Measure A is part of the
Charter and can only be changed by a vote of the people; further
stated that she personally, and she has heard a majority of the
members of the Council state, that they do not believe that the
Council should put Measure A on the ballot; the discussions are not
leading towards a campaign; Measure A was originally a grassroots
effort; if there is support to change Measure A, it should be
through the same grassroots effort; the matter can be made very
clear as part of the record.
Councilmember deHaan stated Councilmember Gilmore had stated the
same thing, which he was reiterating.
Councilmember Gilmore stated that she meant her statement, but does
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council 14
May 15, 2007
not think it needs to be stated as part [of the motion].
Councilmember deHaan stated that he thinks it does.
Mayor Johnson stated people need to understand that Measure A can
only be changed by the voters.
Councilmember Gilmore requested clarification [to the motion] of
whether the three additional Ad Hoc Committee members selected by
the Appellants would be Appellants or designees; stated that she
would prefer the actual signed Appellants, not designees.
Mayor Johnson concurred that three of the Appellants should be
selected.
Councilmember deHaan noted that there was also a clarification [to
the motion] that the meetings would be posted in some way.
Mayor Johnson inquired whether everyone was clear.
Hearing no objection, on the call for the question, the motion
carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON- AGENDA
(07 -237) Michael John Torrey, Alameda, stated dead bees are inside
the Fort Knox building on Webster Street.
Mayor Johnson stated City Hall had a bee problem; the beehive was
removed and transplanted; requested that information be provided to
Fort Knox.
(07 -238) David Howard, Alameda, stated that he hopes Council stays
focused on job creation and job preservation when working with Sun
Cal [Alameda Point developer]; questioned whether the three person
sub - committee meeting referenced by Ms. Ezzy Ashcraft [under the
Public Hearing, paragraph no. 07 -236] constituted a Brown Act
violation.
(07 -239) Jon Spangler, Alameda, urged everyone to ride bikes on
Bike to Work Day.
(07 -240) Barbara Kerr, Alameda, stated a newspaper article noted
that the new Work /Live building would draw 50,000 cars; the
Work /Live ordinance prohibits any impacts on the surrounding area;
parking is not available on Blanding Avenue except the shopping
center area; urged Council to direct the City Manager to
investigate whether a use permit or variance was issued; stated the
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council 15
May 15, 2007
Metropolitan Transportation Commission grant is a big joke if it
does not consider electric carts; new developments need to address
paths for electric carts; the idea is not revolutionary and works;
further stated special paths can be developed for electric carts
storage can be established at transit hubs, such as the ferry and
bus terminals.
Mayor Johnson noted Palm Desert legalized driving golf carts on the
streets.
COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS
(07 -241) Mayor Johnson requested that electric car charging
systems in new homes be considered as part of the green building
ordinance.
(07 -242) Mayor Johnson stated the Harbor Island Task Force
recommended a condominium conversion ordinance; requested an update
on the status.
Councilmember deHaan stated the issue was raised as a home
ownership effort; the City was to come up with a model.
Mayor Johnson stated Council gave direction to move forward on the
matter.
Councilmember Gilmore stated Council was concerned about the
economic feasibility for an owner to convert.
(07 -243) Councilmember deHaan requested that the Tube lighting
system be placed on the Public Works project list; stated he
appreciates the cleanup of the entrance on the Oakland side.
Councilmember Gilmore stated the lighting has been removed on one
side.
The City Manager stated the lighting removal is part of the
improvement; the Public Works Director would receive an update from
CalTrans.
(07 -244) Councilmember deHaan stated control boxes are covered
with graffiti throughout Alameda; he hopes that the Police
Department makes an effort to find the responsible individual; the
Central Avenue telephone company switching station and the Atlantic
Avenue building near the old railroad housing are disasters; he
would be happy to provide pictures.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council 16
May 15, 2007
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the
Regular Meeting at 11:47 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Lara Weisiger
City Clerk
The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown
Act.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council 17
May 15, 2007