2009-10-06 Regular CC MinutesMINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
TUESDAY- - OCTOBER 6, 2009- -7:30 P.M.
Mayor Johnson convened the regular meeting at 7:48 p.m.
ROLL CALL - Present: Councilmembers deHaan, Gilmore,
Matarrese, Tam, and Mayor Johnson - 5.
Absent: None.
AGENDA CHANGES
(09 -373) Mayor Johnson announced that the Recommendation to Amend
the Measure WW Proposed Project List [paragraph no. 09 -3911 would
be continued; and the Resolution of Appointment [paragraph no. 09-
377] was addressed before the Consent Calendar.
The Interim City Manager stated receiving the bond counsel opinion
[on Measure WW funding] could take thirty days; the item would be
placed on the next City Council agenda if the letter is received in
time.
PROCLAMATIONS, SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY AND ANNOUNCEMENTS
(09 -374) School Board Member Tracy Jensen stated tomorrow is the
Ninth Annual Walk & Roll to School Day; the Alameda County Safe
Routes to Schools Program selected Alameda as one of the cities to
work with on a year -round basis; announced Councilmembers would be
at various schools.
(09 -375) Proclamation Recognizing the Benefits of Public Power and
Honoring Alameda Power and Telecom for Its Contributions to the
Community.
Mayor Johnson read and presented the proclamation to Public
Utilities Board Member Peter Holmes; stated Alameda is much greener
than other competitors.
Mr. Holmes stated approximately seventy percent of all energy used
in Alameda is green, renewable energy; thanked Council for the
recognition; stated this week is the national celebration of Public
Power Week.
Mayor Johnson inquired what percentage of Pacific Gas & Electric's
(PG &E's) portfolio is renewable, to which Mr. Holmes responded
significantly less than Alameda.
The Alameda Municipal Power (AMP) General Manager stated PG &E's
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council 1
October 6, 2009
percentage is approximately 12 to 13 ; the State is setting a goal
of 33 2020.
Vice Mayor deHaan stated Alameda is 83 carbon free and 63
renewable.
The AMP General Manager stated that Alameda owns hydroelectric
power, which counts as carbon free, but the law does not recognize
it as renewable; Alameda is number one in the State in terms of
renewable power.
Mayor Johnson stated plugging in an electric car in Alameda is
truly green.
(09 -376) Proclamation Declaring October as Disability Awareness
Month.
Mayor Johnson read and presented the proclamation to Audrey Lord -
Hausman, Commission on Disability Issues Chair.
Ms. Lord - Hausman thanked Council for the proclamation; stated that
she is accepting the proclamation in memory of Commissioner
Adrienne Longley -Cook, who passed away two weeks ago; noted the
Special Services Resource Faire will take place on October 24.
REGULAR AGENDA ITEM
(09 -377) Resolution No. 14387, "Appointing Cullen L. Jones as a
Member of the Housing Commission (Senior Tenant Seat)." Adopted.
Councilmember Matarrese moved adoption of the resolution.
Councilmember Tam seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous
voice vote - 5.
The City Clerk administered the Oath of Office and presented a
certificate of appointment to Mr. Jones.
Mr. Jones stated that he is honored to serve.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Mayor Johnson announced that the Recommendation to Authorize the
Purchase of Four Marked Ford Crown Victoria Police Vehicles
[paragraph no. 09 -380] and Introduction of Ordinance [paragraph no.
09 -3851 were removed from the Consent Calendar for discussion.
Councilmember Matarrese moved approval of the remainder of the
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council 2
October 6, 2009
Consent Calendar.
Councilmember Tam seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous
voice vote - 5. [Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an
asterisk preceding the paragraph number.]
( *09 -378) Minutes of the Regular City Council Meeting held on
September 15, 2009.
( *09 -379) Ratified bills in the amount of $2,936,123.46.
(09 -380) Recommendation to Authorize the Purchase of Four Marked
Ford Crown Victoria Police Vehicles Through the Los Angeles County
Vehicle Bid Contract at a Cost Not to Exceed $100,000.00.
Vice Mayor deHaan stated Dodge
inquired whether Dodger Chargers
2008] would be replaced.
Charger models did not pan out;
[purchased in Fiscal Year 2007-
The Police Lieutenant responded in the negative; stated the four
cars recommended for replacement are older Ford Crown Victoria's.
Vice Mayor deHaan inquired how many miles are on the older cars.
The Police Lieutenant responded three of the four cars have been
taken out of the fleet due to irreparable damage; stated two were
involved in traffic accidents; another car has 135,000 miles and
has rear axel damage; stated the fourth car has 107,000 miles.
Vice Mayor deHaan inquired whether any purchases were made last
year, to which the Police Lieutenant responded in the negative.
Vice Mayor deHaan moved approval of the staff recommendation.
The Interim City Manager stated staff has been working with an
outside consultant who has been very successful in converting large
agency fleets to totally green; staff is committed to making the
conversion over the next eighteen to twenty -four months; currently,
some older cars are a challenge; opportunities exist for
departments to go to clean fuel; petroleum based cars are needed
sometimes.
Councilmember Matarrese inquired whether two of the cars are old
and two were damaged in accidents.
The Police Lieutenant responded all of the cars are old; two of the
cars were damaged in accidents and not repaired.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council 3
October 6, 2009
Mayor Johnson inquired whether other Police Departments quit
ordering Dodge Chargers.
The Police Lieutenant responded that he has not heard any positive
comments regarding Dodge Chargers.
Vice Mayor deHaan inquired whether Ford has announced that it will
not make police cars next year.
The Police Lieutenant responded Ford has made the statement several
times; interceptor models were to be phased out in 2008; now, the
date has been pushed out to 2011 or 2012.
Councilmember Tam seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous
voice vote - 5.
( *09 -381) Recommendation to Adopt Plans and Specifications and
Authorize a Call for Bids for the Alameda Harbor Bay Barge
Replacement Project, No. P.W. 06- 09 -19. Accepted.
( *09 -382) Recommendation to Reject the Sole Bid and Resolution No.
14388, "Authorizing Open Market Negotiations of a Contract Pursuant
to Section 3 -15 of the Alameda City Charter for the Alameda Harbor
Bay Channel Dredging Project, No. P.W. 06- 09 -14, and Authorizing
the Interim City Manager to Enter into Such an Agreement." Adopted.
( *09 -383) Resolution No. 14389, "Authorizing the Interim City
Manager or Designee to Negotiate and Execute a Financial Assistance
Agreement from the State Water Resources Control Board and Any
Amendments or Change Orders Thereto and Certify Financial Agreement
Disbursements on Behalf of the City of Alameda for the Installation
of Mechanical Trash Racks at Storm Water Pump Stations." Adopted.
( *09 -384) Resolution No. 14390, "Authorizing the Interim City
Manager or Designee to Negotiate and Execute a Financial Assistance
Agreement from the State Water Resources Control Board and Any
Amendments or Change Orders Thereto and Certify Financial Agreement
Disbursements on Behalf of the City of Alameda for the
Rehabilitation of the Structural Stability of Approximately 3,000
Linear Feet of the Southshore Lagoon Seawalls Adjacent to City
Streets." Adopted.
(09 -385) Introduction of Ordinance Amending Ordinance No. 2497,
New Series, By Amending Subsection 19(a) (Medical Insurance) and By
Amending Subsection 19(b) (Dental) of Section 19 (PERS Pension
Fund) Regarding Public Safety Employees Hired After November 1,
2009. Introduced.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council 4
October 6, 2009
Councilmember Tam stated the Public Safety contract process calls
for a committee to be formed to have management and public safety
unions sit at a table and develop a mutually agreeable retiree
medical benefit; one of the public safety contracts states that the
committee would begin meeting within thirty days of the Memorandum
of Understanding (MOU) which was adopted on August 3; that she
assumes the committee met.
The City Attorney stated the proposed ordinance is the first step
necessary to make changes to the retiree medical benefits for
future public safety employees; public safety employees hired after
November 1, 2009 would have medical retirement benefits suspended
until the group meets to determine the benefits; the process may
take a while; the first step in the process is to have Council
change the benefits for future public safety hires.
Councilmember Matarrese inquired whether future negotiations would
set benefits, not proposed ordinance, to which the City Attorney
responded in the affirmative.
Councilmember Gilmore inquired whether amending the ordinance is a
prerequisite to getting negotiators together.
The City Attorney responded in the affirmative; stated otherwise,
an overlap would occur; until the ordinance is changed, the
provision for fully paid medical and dental benefits for retirees
and spouses would apply to [public safety] employees hired; the
ordinance needs to be changed so that there is some certainty about
benefits for new hires.
Councilmember Gilmore inquired whether introduction of the
ordinance is being done as an abundance of caution, not necessarily
because there are plans to add new hires to either of the public
safety units.
The City Attorney responded in the affirmative; stated the
ordinance would also be a notice to future hires that retiree
medical benefits will be whatever is negotiated.
Councilmember Tam inquired whether [public safety] employees hired
after November 1, 2009, retiree healthcare benefits would be
pending and contingent upon the group reaching a mutually agreeable
provision, to, which the City Attorney responded in the
affirmative.
Councilmember Tam inquired whether a mutually agreeable provision
would need Council approval and to go through the public safety
labor groups' process before being incorporated into the respective
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council 5
October 6, 2009
MOU's, to which the City Attorney responded in the affirmative.
Councilmember Tam inquired what would happen if a mutually
agreeable option does not occur, to which the City Attorney
responded it is possible that it could reach an impasse.
Councilmember Tam inquired whether new hires are represented
through a bargaining unit.
The City Attorney responded existing employees are represented by
the MOU; people who have not been hired have no rights under the
MOU; amending the ordinance is important so that confer rights are
not placed upon people who have not yet been hired.
Councilmember Gilmore inquired whether an individual hired in
December 2009 would take the position knowing that they are not
entitled to any retiree healthcare benefits, to which the City
Attorney responded in the affirmative.
Vice Mayor deHaan inquired whether a new hire would not be entitled
to healthcare benefits for five years, to which the City Attorney
responded it depends on the bargaining group.
Mayor Johnson stated that she does know of any other city that has
the same retiree medical benefits; hopefully, the committee can
work together to agree on a proposal to the Council that works for
the City long term; the current healthcare benefits provided to
public safety retirees and spouses is much too generous; other
employees' retirement benefits are much lower.
The Human Resources Director stated newly hired public safety
employees would be entitled to the same retirement healthcare
benefits as other [non public safety] employees, which is the
minimum employer contribution of approximately $101 per month
toward the premium.
Mayor Johnson stated amending the ordinance would wipe the slate
clean to work out a new agreement.
Councilmember Gilmore stated the City cannot sustain the current
benefits provided to public safety; inquired whether the bargaining
units would need to ratify whatever the committee comes up with for
Council approval.
The Human Resources Director responded the process would be very
similar to any meet and confer issue; stated the matter would go to
the bargaining unit for a ratification vote and would then come to
Council for a vote before being implemented.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council 6
October 6, 2009
Councilmember Tam stated that she would like clarification on the
City Attorney stating that a new hire [public safety] would not
receive any benefits versus the Human Resources Director stating
that a new hire would receive the same benefits as other City
employees.
The Human Resources Director stated a newly hired public safety
employee who is vested and retires under PERS would be eligible for
the PERS medical retiree health benefit of approximately $101 per
month that the employers pays toward the medical premium in
accordance with the PERS contract.
Mayor Johnson stated moving forward on the matter is necessary;
retirees receive a more extensive benefit than employees because
there is no cap; taxpayers pay the full cost of whatever plan the
retirees picks for themselves and their spouse; changes need to be
made; that she is glad the first step has come to Council.
Councilmember Matarrese moved introduction of the ordinance.
Vice Mayor deHaan seconded the motion, which carried by the
following voice vote: Ayes: Councilmembers deHaan, Gilmore,
Matarrese, and Mayor Johnson - 4. Abstention: Councilmember Tam -
1.
( *09 -386) Ordinance No. 3001, "Amending the Alameda Municipal Code
by Adding Section 59 at Article IV to Chapter II Pertaining to
Contracts in Writing." Finally passed.
( *09 -387) Ordinance No. 3002, "Amending Ordinance No. 1277, N.S. to
Rezone Approximately 4.7 Acres Located at 1 Singleton Avenue, APN
074 - 0905 - 010 -01, from M -2 -PD, General Industrial (Manufacturing)
Planned Development District, to R -4 -PD, Neighborhood Residential
Planned Development District Zoning Designation." Finally Passed;
( *09 -387 A) Ordinance No. 3003, "Amending Ordinance No. 1277, N.S.
to Rezone Approximately 5 Acres Located at 2189 and 2201 Clement
Avenue, APNs 071- 0289 - 007 -03 and 074 - 0289 - 004 -00, from M -2, General
Development Residence District, to R -2 -PD, Two - Family Planned
Development District Zoning Designation." Finally Passed;
( *09 -387 B) Ordinance No. 3004, "Amending Ordinance No. 1277, N.S.
to Rezone Approximately 4.14 Acres Located at 2015/2025 Grand
Street, APN 072 -0381- 002 -00 and 072 - 0381 - 001 -00, from M -2, General
Industrial (Manufacturing) District to R -4 -PD, Neighborhood
Residential Planned Development District." Finally Passed;
( *09 -387 C) Ordinance No. 3005, "Amending Ordinance No. 1277, N.S.
to Rezone Approximately 2.78 Acres Located at 2100 Clement
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council 7
October 6, 2009
Avenue /1924 Willow Street, APN 071- 0228 - 001 -02 from M -1,
Intermediate Industrial (Manufacturing) District to R -2 -PD, Two
Family Residence Planned Development District Zoning Regulation."
Finally Passed;
( *09 -387 D) Ordinance No. 3006, "Amending Ordinance No. 1277, N.S.
to Rezone Approximately 1.9 Acres Located at 1913 Sherman Street,
APN 074 - 0906 - 031 -08, from M -1 -PD, Intermediate Industrial
(Manufacturing) Planned Development District to R -2 -PD, Two Family
Residence Planned Development District Zoning Designation." Finally
Passed; and
( *09 -387 E) Ordinance No. 3007, "Amending Ordinance No. 1277, N.S.
to Rezone Approximately 2.1 Acres 1590/1616 Fortmann Way, APN 072-
0381- 018 -00, from M -2, General Industrial (Manufacturing) District
to R -4 -PD, Neighborhood Residential Planned Development District
Zoning Designation to Bring Zoning Designations for Six Properties
into Conformance with the General Plan and Housing Element."
Finally passed.
CITY MANAGER COMMUNICATIONS
(09 -388) Telephone Contract Update
The Deputy City Manager gave a brief presentation.
Councilmember Gilmore inquired whether the new system would provide
the exact location of a 911 call, to which the Deputy City Manager
responded that she would check.
Councilmember Gilmore stated that she would like the new system to
have clear transfer and conference buttons.
Councilmember Tam inquired whether the new system would have
conferencing ability, to which the Deputy City Manager responded in
the affirmative.
Councilmember Gilmore inquired whether the City has the bandwidth
to handle everything.
The Interim City Manager responded staff initially estimated a cost
savings of $165,000 per year; the $165,000 savings could be used to
do something with the overall City computer system, turning a
liability into an asset.
(09 -389) Proposition lA Securitization Proposal
The Deputy City Manager gave a brief presentation.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council 8
October 6, 2009
Councilmember Matarrese inquired whether the State has to pay money
back or can choose to keep the money until it borrows money again.
The Deputy City Manager responded the State has to pay the money
back in three years; continued the presentation.
In response to Mayor Johnson's inquiry, the Interim City Manager
stated the State is running a revolving loan program at cities'
expense; the City should participate if there is no downside in
terms of loss of money to the City; the City should participate as
long as the interest rate comes out in the City's favor; that she
has a philosophical problem with the issue.
Mayor Johnson inquired whether the interest rate has been set.
The Deputy City Manager responded the interest rate has been set at
2`; the City is making a little more; the State Department of
Finance rate will stay fixed through 2013.
Vice Mayor deHaan inquired whether the State would take three years
to pay the money back, to which the Deputy City Manager responded
in the affirmative.
Vice Mayor deHaan stated the City participated in the program last
time, and then the State came up with the money within two months.
The Deputy City Manager stated the State is paying the full cost
associated with the issue this time.
The Interim City Manager stated the construct is that cities would
participate because the market is down; staff would not recommend
participation unless it is in the City's best financial interest.
Vice Mayor deHaan stated the State can take money within a ten year
window; inquired when the ten year window is up.
The Deputy City Manager responded the first take was in FY 2004-
2005 or FY 2005 -2006.
Vice Mayor deHaan inquired whether the League of California Cities
is contemplating any other action.
Councilmember Tam responded in the affirmative; stated that she
would report on the League proposed ballot measure [under Council
Communications].
Councilmember Gilmore inquired whether the City has lost $6.8 this
fiscal year between property taxes and redevelopment funds.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council 9
October 6, 2009
The Interim City Manager responded $7.8 million has been taken in
fifteen months.
Vice Mayor deHaan inquired whether staff has any idea of what the
State's shortfall will be next year.
The Interim City Manager responded estimates are approximately $15
billion; however the State's last error factor was 30`.
(09 -390) City- School District Linkages Update
The Interim City Manager gave a brief presentation.
Councilmember Matarrese stated that he hopes to discuss the notion
of the State allowing school districts to dispose of assets for the
purpose of funding operations; that he would not like to aid and
abet something that five years from now would cause lots of
trouble.
The Interim City Manager stated a recurrent revenue streams
solutions are needed; housing has some opportunities.
Councilmember Matarrese stated the matter should be discussed and
proceeding needs to be done very careful.
Vice Mayor deHaan inquired whether the amount of funding the City
provides to support schools has been reviewed.
The Interim City Manager responded the list has not been updated.
REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS
(09 -391) Recommendation to Amend the Measure WW Proposed Project
List to Include a $2 Million Grant to the Boys & Girls Club for the
Completion of Construction of Its Youth Development Center in
Accordance with the Terms and Conditions Outlined Herein.
Continued.
(09 -392) Recommendation to Accept the Report of the Economic
Development Commission's (EDC) Business Retention Subcommittee.
Justin Harrison, EDC Subcommittee Chair, gave a brief presentation.
Mayor Johnson inquired whether the high start up fees are building
department fees.
The Economic Development Director responded start up and build out
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council 10
October 6, 2009
permit fees are expensive in addition to the time involved; stated
some fees are out of the City's control, such as the Health
Department, ABC Licenses, and School District.
Councilmember Tam stated people think that parking costs are an
issue; the City's parking costs are only fifty cents per hour.
Mr. Harrison stated that people think costs businesses pay as fees
for providing clientele parking are high.
Mayor Johnson inquired Mr. Harrison is referring to an in -lieu fee,
to which Mr. Harrison responded in the affirmative.
Councilmember Tam stated most of the positive survey responses seem
to be around 22 24 ; inquired at what threshold does the EDC
consider a matter to be worth addressing.
Mr. Harrison responded the survey revealed that a lot of people do
not know about certain programs.
Councilmember Tam stated the public loves the Police Department;
that she is puzzled to find that over sixty percent do not want to
be contacted by a City representative or EDC member.
Mr. Harrison stated a lot of people participated in the anonymous
survey; a lot of people just wanted to provide input.
Vice Mayor deHaan stated past EDC surveys indicated a strong desire
for an ombudsman; inquired whether there is better interface with
retailers now.
The Economic Development Director responded assistance is provided;
stated the idea of having one person take an individual through the
whole process for a fee still is mentioned; working with the same
person and having consistency are important; hopefully, merging
Economic Development with the Community Development Department will
improve customer service.
Councilmember Gilmore stated for years the Community Development
Department had a customer service team; the one stop permit center
was one of the recommendations; inquired whether the EDC reviewed
the matter; stated many areas overlap.
The Economic Development Director responded one of the EDC
recommendations is to continue customer service review; stated the
report provides helpful recommendations, such as updating the
City's website.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council 1 1
October 6, 2009
Mr. Harrison stated the Subcommittee did not receive responses on
immediate issues, such as advertising or City help to attract new
businesses; responses dealt with long -term issues; a separate
Subcommittee reviewed at business attraction; the process will be
refined in the future.
Councilmember Matarrese thanked the EDC for the hard work; stated
having permit information available on the website is necessary;
people expect to do business through mobile locations; that he
wholeheartedly supports the website recommendation which could reap
benefits with a relatively small output.
Mayor Johnson stated improving facilities has always been an issue
for new businesses; consolidating the Economic Development and
Community Development Departments will help; time is money for
businesses; that she hopes to see big improvements in the next
several months.
Mr. Harrison thanked Economic Development staff for working so hard
on the report.
Mayor Johnson stated Economic Development seems to have a good line
of communication with businesses; the street scaping project has
done great things for individual business as well as the entire
business district.
Mr. Harrison stated the Subcommittee heard good things about what
Economic Development does for businesses.
Vice Mayor deHaan moved approval of the staff recommendation.
Councilmember Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by
unanimous voice vote - 5.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON- AGENDA
(09 -393) Jean Sweeney, Alameda, submitted a handout; discussed the
Alameda Point Development Initiative; encourage the Initiative be
thrown out.
Councilmember Tam stated the submitted Election Code page is in
very small print; inquired whether said page is from the City's
website, to which the City Clerk responded the page is from the
State's website.
Vice Mayor deHaan stated concerns have been raised; inquired who
would be the staff point person to address the concerns.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council 12
October 6, 2009
The Interim City Manager responded the initiative is not the City's
initiative.
The City Clerk stated the City Clerk's office verified that all
Election Code requirements were met, verified that the proponent is
a registered voter, and followed the typical process before
accepting the initiative petition.
Vice Mayor deHaan inquired whether the City Clerk saw the petition
that was circulated.
The City Clerk responded the format and every signature and
declaration of circulation page was reviewed.
Vice Mayor deHaan inquired whether there is a discrepancy in the
title.
The City Attorney responded that she does not know the facts;
stated the summary and title prepared by the City Attorney's office
should have been used.
Vice Mayor deHaan inquired where an individual would go to discuss
the issue.
The City Clerk stated the title in the text of the initiative
differs from the City Attorney's title; the same situation applies
to the firefighter initiative; the City only has control over the
title drafted by the City Attorney's office; the City Attorney's
title was published and was on the front page and every signature
page of the circulated petition.
Vice Mayor deHaan inquired whether there should be some
consistency, to which the City Attorney responded that she does not
know the facts.
Vice Mayor deHaan inquired whether people could come to the City
Attorney to discuss the matter.
The City Attorney responded that she is always willing to discuss
the matter; stated the City Attorney's office cannot provide legal
advice to community members.
Mayor Johnson stated people could challenge the issue; the City is
limited and cannot be the resource for every question that comes
up.
Councilmember Matarrese inquired what process would need to be used
to challenge the issue; further inquired whether someone would need
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council 13
October 6, 2009
to hire an attorney and file a lawsuit.
The City Attorney responded in the affirmative; stated the City
Attorney's office cannot provide legal support services to the
general community.
COUNCIL REFERRALS
None.
COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS
(09 -394) Consideration of Mayor's nominations for appointment to
the Commission on Disability Issues, Library Board and Recreation
and Park Commission.
Mayor Johnson nominated Nielsen Tam for the Commission on
Disability Issues; Suzanne Whyte for the Library Board; and Michael
B. Cooper and Terri Bertero Ogden for the Recreation and Park
Commission.
(09 -395) Councilmember Tam stated that she attended the League of
California Cities Annual Conference along with Vice Mayor deHaan
and Councilmember Gilmore; the voting delegates passed three
resolutions; one dealt with encouraging local jurisdictions to
enact ordinances or policies that would hold the host responsible
for under aged drinking that occurs at property under the host's
possession, control, or authority; the voting delegates also passed
a resolution that requests the League to put forth a ballot measure
for the November 2010 election that would clean up the loopholes of
Proposition 1A; the League conducted a poll in May 2009 that showed
the level of public confidence with the State Legislature and
Governor declined to a historic low; it is the right time to demand
reforms.
Mayor Johnson stated that she is glad people are paying attention
to what the State is doing.
Councilmember Tam stated the League is eliciting the help of the
local officials to try to gather at least 100 signatures from each
City.
Mayor Johnson inquired whether Councilmember Tam would get
signature forms.
Councilmember Tam responded in the affirmative; stated City
resources cannot be used for political activity; further stated the
last resolution passed by the voting delegates dealt specifically
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council 14
October 6, 2009
with Southern California Edison and requested sending a letter of
opposition to their desire to place some equipment above ground in
underground districts; some Southern California people are upset
that Southern California Edison is requesting exemptions; Southern
California Edison feels the exemptions are necessary for worker
safety.
Councilmember Matarrese stated it is important to ensure that the
City does not have issues that might be parallel to what Southern
California Edison is attempting to do; the City has a major
underground effort; the City has to ensure that workers are not put
at risk and that the City does not run into the same problem.
(09 -396) Councilmember Gilmore stated that she attended an e-
services session at the League Conference; the City of West
Sacramento just instituted its first electronic service for
citizens; Cupertino has approximately twenty plus e- services; the
Cupertino technology person stated that instituting e- services is
wonderfully convenient for residents and business people but does
not take the place of the old fashion way of doing things; certain
people will always like to interface with human beings versus
computers.
Mayor Johnson stated providing more information on the website is
important; court documents can be obtained on the website.
The City Clerk noted LaserFiche is now live on the website and the
Municipal Code is completely searchable and will be kept current.
(09 -397) Vice Mayor deHaan stated that he attended a session
regarding the economic situation at the League Conference; some
municipalities will be flattening out in 2011; property taxes are a
key element; the news is not good.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the
meeting at 9:49 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 1 5
October 6, 2009