Loading...
1999-02-16 Special and Regular CC Minutes50 MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING TUESDAY- -FEBURARY 16, 1999- -7:10 P.M. Mayor Appezzato convened the Special Meeting at 7:10. Roll Call - Present: Councilmembers Daysog, DeWitt, Johnson, Kerr and Mayor Appezzato - 5. Absent: None. The Special Meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider: (99-73) Conference with Legal Counsel - Anticipated Litigation; Initiation of litigation, pursuant to Subdivision (c), Section 54956.9; Number of potential cases: 1. Following the Closed Session, the Mayor reconvened the Special Meeting and announced that Council gave direction to Legal Counsel. Adjournment There being no further business before the City Council, Mayor Appezzato adjourned the Special Meeting at 7:40 p.m. Respectfully submitted, e B Felsch, City Clerk The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act. Special Meeting Alameda City Council February 16, 1999 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING TUESDAY- - FEBRUARY 16, 1999- -7:30 P.M. Mayor Appezzato convened the Regular Meeting at 8:00 p.m. Councilmember DeWitt led the Pledge of Allegiance. Pastor Robert Broekema, First Christian Reformed Church gave the Invocation. ROLL CALL - Present: Councilmembers Daysog, DeWitt, Johnson, Kerr and Mayor Appezzato - 5. sent: None. AGENDA CHANGES (99 -74) Councilmember Johnson moved that Alameda Historical Museum matter [paragraph no. 99 -84] be addressed first on the Regular Agenda. Councilmember DeWitt seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. PROCLAMATIONS, SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE D4Y AND ANNOUNCEMENTS None. Vice Mayor Daysog moved approval the Consent Calendar. Councilmember DeWitt seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote 5. [Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk preceding the paragraph number.] ( *99 -75) Minutes of the Special and Regular City Council Meetings held on February 2, 1999. Approved. ( *99 -76) Recommendation to approve the Bureau of Electricity Out - of -Town Travel Budget Supplement for Fiscal Year 1999 -2000. Accepted, ( *99 -77) Recommendation to accept Quarterly Financial Report for the period ending December 31, 1998, including midyear adjustments; and ( *99 -77A) Recommendation to authorize two full -time positions, a Management Analyst and an Intermediate Typist Clerk, for the Housing Development Division. Accepted. ( *99 -78) Recommendation to accept Quarterly Investment Report for Regular Meeting Alameda City Council February 16, 1999 ro 0 4 the period ending December 31, 1998. Accepted. (*99-79) Recommendation to accept the work of McGuire & Hester for the Maintenance Service Center Urban Runoff Control Project, No. P.W. 06-98-15. Accepted. (*99-80) Recommendation to accept the work of Gallagher & Burk, Inc. for Repair and Resurfacing of Certain Streets, Phase 19, No. P.W. 03-98-06. Accepted. (*99-81) Resolution No. 1309, "Supporting the City and County of San Francisco's Resolutions to Work with the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC), and CalTrans to Retain the Current Transbay Transit Terminal as the Terminus for AC Transit Inter-City Bus Service and Provide for Future Passenger Rail Service in the Design of the Bay Bridge." Adopted. (*99-82) Ordinance Approving and Authorizing the Execution of Lease Agreement between GTE Mobilnet, as Lessee, and the City of Alameda, as Lessor, for the Installation of a Telecommunication Transmission Facility within the Chuck Corica Golf Complex. Introduced. (*99-83) Ratified bills in the amount of $3,925,584.62. 014 (99-84) Written Communication from the Alameda Historical Museum requesting Council to consider a Mid-Year Budget Adjustment to provide funding for rent for the month of June, 1999 and Fiscal Year 1999-2000; and (22m84A) Recommendation regarding request from the Alameda Historical Museum for Council to consider a Mid-Year Adjustment to provide funding for rent for June, 1999 and Fiscal Year 1999-2000. Jane Felker, Library 2000, stated Library 2000 would like a new main library; if Library 2000 succeeds, the Carnegie building would house the Museum beautifully. Bill Galli, Alameda Historical Museum Vicc, President, stated storage costs would be more expensive than the Museum's current rent; 1/3 of the Museum's collection belongs to the City; the Museum and its supporters have contributed to the community greatly; urged Council to vote for [staff report] Option 4 [reject the mid-year request for June rent of $3,200 and appropriate money in FY 1999-2000 for annual rent in the amount of $38,400 from general fund reserves]. Herb Shelmadine, Alameda, stated the Museum does a fine job; the Museum is a nice place to take out-of-town visitors. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council February 16, 1999 Diane Coler -Dark, Alameda Historical Museum President, stated all historical museums she contacted were city supported; cities support museums because they contain the cities' histories; foundations are not interested in supporting a particular city's history; the City of Hayward funds their museum under the City's promotional budget; inquired whether the Alameda Historical Museum could be funded under the City's Park & Recreation Department in the same fashion as the Meyers House; a Court Order precluded the Museum from spending reserves; the Museum had to provide its own operating and fundraising expenses; operating monies were scarce; the majority of emergency money came from generous members; the Museum has gone to that well and cannot go there again; to become stable the Museum must expand fundraising and membership levels; urged Council to accept staff Option 4. Mayor Appezzato stated in honor of the Millennium, the U.S. Conference of Mayors has requested cities to join in activities; the goal is to challenge the community to enter the Millennium with enthusiasm; that he would like the Alameda Historical Museum, Library 2000, the Alamedans Rebuilding The Tower Committee, and the Parade Committee to join in planning challenges for the community; requested the City Manager to provide copies of the Millennium Communities Handbook to saia organizations; inquired wether the Museum would be willing to begin planning challenges for the community, to which Ms. Colder -Dark responded in the affirmative. Mayor Appezzato suggested the Museum have displays; further inquired whether the Museum would consider being the possible focal point where the group meets; stated that he needs a committee to begin the planning how Alameda can enter the new Millennium with the theme "Honor the Past, Imagine the Future ", and bring Council a plan, in the middle of the year, to which Ms. Coler -Dark responded it is a given. Vice Mayor Daysog stated spending $6,000 or $38,000 is a paultry sum to preserve and celebrate the City's identity; encouraged Council to consider [staff report] Option 4. Councilmember Johnson moved approval of [staff report] Option 4 [reject the mid -year request for June rent of $3,200 and appropriate money in FY 1999 -2000 for annual rent in the amount of $38,400 from general fund reserves]. Vice Mayor Daysog seconded the motion. Under discussion, Councilmember DeWitt stated that he has always supported the Alameda Historical Museum; cities need museums; the budget for the Museum is $63,000 per year; the City is being requested to pay only the rent; that he supports the recommendation. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council February 16, 1999 54 Councilmember Kerr stated the Alameda Historical Museum undertakes worthwhile goals, e.g., expansion of its role as an art center, without consulting the people they expect to pay their rent; there are other groups which would like to be, and are, working to become the City's Cultural Center for the Arts; paying the rent endorses the Alameda Historical Museum and leaves other art groups out in the cold; none of the other groups, except the Civic Light Opera, have asked for [financial] help; that she would be willing to support paying rent for one more month to get the Museum through this fiscal year, however, she does not support including payment of the Museum's rent in the next fiscal year. Councilmember DeWitt stated that during 1999, the Island Alliance, high school art students, and Alameda women artists will have exhibits at the Museum; the Museum has city -wide participation. Mayor Appezzato stated a museum is vital to any community; the first place any mayor takes a visitor is a city's museum; museums express a community's art and culture, recognize history, and teach newcomers and children about the community; a study presented at the U.S. Conference of Mayors showed that children involved with the arts are less prone to get into trouble; that he challenges the Alameda Historical Museum to embrace all art groups in the community; stated the photographic society is displaying photos in City Hall; there should be more artwork displayed in public buildings, e.g. second floor foyer at City Hall; the Museum is the heart and soul of the community and reminds the young about their past; the good of Alameda can be well represented in the Alameda Historical Museum. On the call for the question, the motion carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Councilmembers Daysog, DeWitt, Johnson and Mayor Appezzato - 4. Noes: Councilmember Kerr - 1. (99 -85) Public Hearing to consider the cost of nuisance abatement on property at 617 -B Pacific Avenue, Alameda, California, and impose a special assessment on the property; and (99 -85A) Resolution No. 13094, "Confirming the Costs of Abatement on Property at 617 -B Pacific Avenue, Alameda, California, and Imposing a Special Assessment on the Property." Adopted. Mayor Appezzato opened the Public Hearing. There being no speakers, the Mayor closed the public portion of the Hearing. Councilmember Kerr moved adoption of the Resolution. Vice Mayor Daysog seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council February 16, 1999 55 (99-86) Consideration to award the Alameda/Oakland Ferry Service Contract to Hornblower Marine Services. As an Alternate Option, Council may decide to: reject all Proposals and direct staff to enter into Open Market Negotiations with all three Proposers and Harbor Bay Maritime to operate both the East and West End Services and the West End Service only. John Waggoner, Hornblower Marine Services (HMS) President, submitted letters to Council; stated at the previous [Council] Meeting [January 19, 1999] there were statements that HMS is opposed to organized representation of labor and will pay wages below the prevailing wage--this is not the truth; HMS has had a good working relation with Local #399, Operating Engineers, which represents deckhands and oilers on a HMS vessel; HMS is currently negotiating with American Maritime Officers; HMS is very concerned with the preservation of jobs and has offered priority hiring to B&G employees on the Alameda/Oakland Ferry Service (AOFS); HMS has met with Masters, Mates & Pilots (MMP), the union which currently represents AOFS employees; Captain Raymond Shipway, MMP, is willing to answer questions; HMS's legal counsel has informed him that if over 50% of the employees hired are current B&G employees represented by MMP, HMS will have a successor employer relation; after being awarded the contract and hiring the appropriate number of crew members, HMS will negotiate in good faith with the union to reach a collective bargaining agreement; HMS has provided a letter which states HMS is willing to pay prevailing wages and benefits; HMS used the current B&G wages when preparing their budget; there has been discussion about whether HMS back-up vessels would be sufficient; HMS chartered the Flyer, a 92-foot, 149-passenger, 22- knot vessel; it is not true that this vessel would be leased only in the summer; the vessel has been leased and is undergoing interior modifications in Hood River, Oregon; said vessel will be delivered here [Alameda] before HMS begins operations; HMS is still negotiating on a vessel similar to the Ohlone Spirit, a 212 passenger catamaran, operating at 22 knots; in response to concerns regarding passenger capacity, HMS entered into a charter agreement with Catalina Cruises to charter the Catalina Monarch, an 800- passenger, 18-knot ferry; there has been concern that a vessel similar to the Ohlone Spirit would be insufficient capacity; City records indicate that only 7 times last year, all of which were weekends, the passenger loads exceeded back-up vessel capacity of 361 passengers; the probability of the Encinal being down during one of these days is remote; however, HMS has a contingency plan, a letter from Tom Escher, Red & White (R&W) President, states R&W would be glad to provide any backup needed; additionally, in the event of a disaster or strike, HMS through Hornblower Dining Yachts, has access to the largest passenger vessels in the Bay: the California Hornblower, which carries 1000 passengers; the Monte Carlo, which carries 600 passengers; and the Empress which carries 600 passengers; with three ferry boats and the three backup dinner boats, HMS could transport 2,911 passengers per hour; at this Regular Meeting Alameda City Council February 16, 1999 point, infrastructure, not the number of vessels, becomes a problem, e.g. boarding ramps, parking; R&W is also available to provide any backup capacity; with all this, HMS has more capacity than anyone on the Bay; there have been rumors HMS has never provided ferry service; HMS operates a ferry for the City of Jacksonville which runs more trips than the AOFS; said service runs daily, non-stop service from 6:00 a.m. until 10:15 p.m. with vessels departing every 15 minutes; it runs 66 trips per day, 365 days per year which is 2,490 trips annually; the staff survey revealed on-time departures are priority for riders; last year, the Jacksonville run was not late and/or did not miss a single run on 363 days of the year; following a mechanical failure one morning, it took two hours to get the backup vessel in place; also, due to fog one morning, the ferry was not operative for three hours; only 20 trips out of 2,400 were late or missed which is less than 1 in every 1,000 trips; said record is hard to compete with; the City of Jacksonville provided a letter endorsing HMS which states: "It is with pleasure that I recommend your company to any company seeking marine management services. When the City of Jacksonville chose HMS to operate the St. John's River Ferry Service, we had high expectations of your ability to improve the efficiency of the service, generate increased revenues through marketing, and set new standards for customer service. The evidence that we have to date justifies our choice. The Ferry is running great". Mr. Waggoner further stated Pier 39 access is a big issue; in the RFP, Fisherman's Wharf war defined as Pier 33 to Marina Green; HMS submitted Pier 33 [landing]; to address this concern, HMS entered into an agreement with R&W; negotiations are currently underway which will provide access to Pier 43 1/2 which is located in the heart of Fisherman's Wharf; regarding safety issues, HMS has made a name for itself by setting the standard for safety; a letter from Eric Christensen [of the U.S. Coast Guard] explains that HMS's tremendous growth is due to their commitment to safety and the professionalism HMS brings to the marine community; a letter from Jennifer Bell, Executive Vice President of Aon Risk Services, which insured more passenger vessels than anyone else in the nation, states: "HMS is the preeminent marine operator of passenger vessels in the nation". Mr Waggoner outlined HMS's actions; stated HMS: 1) responded to the City's RFP with a very competitive response; 2) chartered a [backup] vessel, the Flyer; 3) reviewed 5 other backup vessels and has a lease option for one; 4) received approval from the bank to purchase a second backup vessel; 5) obtained a performance bond for $1 Million; 6) obtained landing rights to Pier 43 1/2; 7) obtained backup vessels from R&W which are operated by organized labor; 8) met with representatives from MMP and assured them of preferential hiring; 9) is committed to prevailing wages and benefits; 10) filed a Public Utilities Commission permit which will be granted on March 17th; and 11) spent a considerable amount of time and energy considering these issues and working with [City] staff. Mr. Waggoner requested Council give HMS a chance; the same chance that B&G was given 5 years ago; promised HMS would not let Regular Meeting Alameda City Council February 16, 1999 57 the City down. In response to Councilmember Kerr vs inquiry regarding when the Jacksonville Ferry Service was started, Mr. Waggoner stated July, 1997. Councilmember Kerr stated HMS and B&G have similar crew cost, however HMS's administration costs are lower; inquired reason for low administration cost, to which Mr. Waggoner responded HMS built the exact wages B&G currently pays [into HMS's Proposal]; stated HMS cbtained a copy of the current contract from the union an calculated the same benefits, e.g. pension, medical; since Roger Murphy was a founder of B&G, he [Murphy] had that information at his fingertips; one of the reasons HMS has been so successful throughout the nation is the economies of scale in management; the Proposal shows Roger Murphy will be the General Manager, Sandra Stuart will be Controller and the person in charge of marketing will be Lisa; only 25% of Sandra's and Lisa's time will be allocated to this project and the remainder of their time will be spent on other projects; HMS has over 200 marine professionals and uses them on various projects as needed; the only allocation [of time] is what is used on that job; rather than 3 full-time staff members, there is 1 full time and 2 quarter-time employees; there are other in-house resources; it is simply good management. Councilmember Kerr stated Harbor Bay Maritime lowered its administration costs; HMS's management costs are similar to Harbor Bay Maritime. Mayor Appezzato stated HMS's management fee is $1/4 Million less than B&G [management costs]; both R&W and HMS have the same management fee. Roger Murphy, HMS, stated that he has been in the maritime business since 1959; he started B&G Fleet in 1978; B&G was under his contrel until the Loma Prieta earthquake; during which time, there were quite a few ferry projects; when the Aircraft Carrier Enterprise was in Hunters Point, there were extensive ferry runs--sometimes 50 trips a day from Alameda Naval Air Station to Hunters Point for about 50 months; B&G also ran a Berkeley Ferry Service and special services for Golden Gate Ferry District; after the earthquake, B&G took over AOFS; that he was responsible for all of its [AOFS's] operations until March/April 1997; currently, he is the President of Passenger Vessel Association which is a trade organization or almost 500 members responsible for carrying over 200 million people last year. In response to Mayor Appezzato's inquiry regarding why Mr. Murphy left B&G, Mr. Murphy responded that he wished he could answer; loves the business. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council February 16, 1999 08 Mayor Appezzato stated everyone owes former Mayor Chuck Corica a thank you; after the earthquake, he [Corica] put the ferry service into operation; also, former Mayor Bill Withrow's Council and this Council came up with subsidies to keep ferry boats operating, which is not easy; Alameda, the Port of Oakland and San Francisco have managed to keep ferry boats operating at huge subsidy to the tax payers; tomorrow, there will be a conference at San Francisco City Hall on ferries in the Bay; also Senator Don Perata will carry a Bill forward; everyone owes a debt of thanks to the people who had the foresight and tenacity to have a ferry service in 1989/90; the City supports ferry service every step of the way. Steve Hanson, Port of Oakland, stated the Port is 50% partner in the ferry operation; after the earthquake, R&W dumped 10,000 people on Jack London Square; until the earthquake, the Port was not involved; Port staff and City of Alameda staff worked together on the selection process; Port staff found HMS to be the most responsive bidder and concurs with the City staff's recommendation to award the contract to HMS; said recommendation will be presented to the Port of Oakland Board on March 2nd; Port staff has no additional subsidy and opposes any fare increase at this time. In response to Mayor Appezzato s inquiry regarding whethe_ the Port would support the City's decision, Mr. Hanson stated the Contract cannot move forward if the Port does not concur [with the City of Alameda's decision]. Kelly Kearney, Alameda, stated that she was disturbed to hear about the disparity between the subsidies for the West End and East End ferry services; the City spends $9.17 per passenger for the Harbor Bay Ferry Service and $1.25 for AOFS; it was discouraging that the City had not been in contact with the Port of Oakland, San Francisco or Transit Authorities at the Council Meeting one month ago [January 19, 1999]; the RFP was thrown together with full knowledge that the current provider was operating at a loss of $150,000 per year; it seemed the City waited until the last minute; a letter [from Public Works dated February 12, 1999] states the City can enter into negotiations for docking rights; however, the City cannot justify raising subsidy for the existing carrier; [potential] start up problems are not similar to B&G start up problems because HMS is not a ferry service provider; when B&G performs vessels maintenance, riders are informed ahead of time; that she wrote 15 letters: 7 to the Mayor, members of the City Council, City Manager, and Assistant City Manager; 8 to the Port of Oakland Members and Director Foster; she also sent e-mails to [Oakland] Mayor Jerry Brown, [San Francisco] Mayor Willie Brown and Senator Don Perata; that she only received 2 responses. Kevin Kearney, City Auditor, stated that he is disturbed over the process; inquired about the cost involved with staff negotiating the landing at Fisherman's Wharf; the existing service has the Regular Meeting Alameda City Council February 16, 1999 59 premiere landing at Pier 39; the staff letter states "both B&G and R&W stated they would consider granting [Pier 39] dock rights to the City"; inquired about the dollar impact of said docking rights; stated before Council can make a decision, said cost should be compared to the $291,000 [subsidy requested by B&G]; Council should have information on hard dollar cost; there is also cost involved with riders not getting what they get today. Carolyn Horgan, Blue & Gold (B&G), yielded her time. Pip Ellis, B&G, stated that ctaff, Council and riders agree B&G has provided a fine level of service since 1991; Council has two options: 1) to accept HMS's Proposal, or 2) reject all Proposals and enter into negotiation with the proposers; HMS's Proposal should be re-analyzed; ferry service is underfunded; B&G shows a $291,000 [funding] deficit; R&W's Proposal shows a $425,000 annual operating deficit; the renegotiated HMS budget shows an operating deficit of $20,000 annually; all three proposals show a deficit; HMS's budget is still not accurate; HMS estimates $205,000 more in revenue than B&G; $140,000 of HMS's revenue comes from snack bar concession sales which is not realistic; there is a $65,000 difference in crew costs [between HMS and B&G], HMS plans to offer more service and more runs at less cost with the same conditions of wages and benefits--that is not possible; the reason HMS shows less expense is because they are proposing to man the vessels with fewer crew members; 3 crew members is prudent; the original HMS budget showed $124,000 less [than B&G] in maintenance costs; it is not clear where additional docking fees are included in HMS's budget; B&G's general administrative line of $442,000 includes a $100,000 marketing budget; said marketing budget is not clear in the budgets of HMS and R&W; B&G's budget is even; profit was included in B&G's administration costs; since 1991, staff has struggled to keep this service operating; there is difficultly in marketing; increased ridership is part of a long-term solution; the [HMS] labor situation is an unresolv.c.d issue; HMS has agreed to unionize this portion of their operation, however, HMS will have difficulty using its other boats in backup situations because union personnel cannot be shifted into non-union lines of service; there will be a cost inefficiency and labor unrest; historically, HMS has not been a union friendly company; the RFP called for a minimum of 2 years of service; HMS has less than the 2-year experierr-c. rlinimum required in the RFP; the Jacksonville ferry service has only been in service 18 months, HMS has operated the New York ferry, which has run sporadically since its inception, for less than 18 months; staff has interpreted some of HMS's manager's experience as sufficient to qualify for 2-years operating experience; Roger Murphy is an excellent manager and resource for setting up a ferry service, however, one man does not make a cohesiva team to provide ferry service; HMS runs an excellent dinner cruise company, but does not have the extensive experience of running ferries; the Staff Report conceded there will be inherent start up problems; HMS does not Regular Meeting Alameda City Council February 16, 1999 60 have the same maintenance or PUC experience as B&G; in the RFP process, HMS matched B&G and was scored a full 10 points for experience; if experience points were revisited, B&G would match or exceed HMS's [overall] points; HMS received a total of 99 points; B&G received 94 points; R&W received 78 points. Ms. Ellis further stated B&G central docking is the best; docking shifts could cause a loss in mid-day and weekend ridership, which is essential to sustain the commute service; HMS is still negotiating for a second backup boat; even with 3 vessels, the Encinal and two backups, HMS's backup capacity is still insufficient; if any vessel breaks down or goes down for maintenance, HMS will look to R&W or B&G for backup; B&G has told City staff they would provide support in the event of an emergency; however, said service would be more efficient if B&G has the Contract; there is a shortfall [in funding]; urged the Council to review said shortfall with the experienced carrier--B&G; further stated the funding shortfall cannot be solved tonight; B&G has offered to extend service for 6 months beyond the Contract deadline of March 28th at the existing subsidy; B&G is committed to extend service for 4 weeks with no change in subsidy; however, if negotiations go beyond 1 month and less than 6 months, B&G would ask for the additional subsidy of $585 per day; if Council pursues Option 2 which is to open the process back up, B&G would offer to maintain the current fare, schedule and subsidy rate for 6 months from the Contract deadline; during the 6 month period, B&G would help craft a short-term transit plan needed to steer the service beyond its marginal status; the City of Vallejo, which is slightly different because they operate their own transit system, put together a plan and was able access $15 Million of funds from Proposition 116; Vallejo purchased brand new high-tech vessels at $7.5 Million each and increased ridership by 400%; those dramatic changes are needed [in Alameda]; operating and capital monies are needed; B&G partnered with the City to renovate and re-power the Encinal, which is a fine boat, to put it into service; B&G can partner with the City to have the quantum leap in service that the East Bay needs; there will be CalTrans mitigation funds from the Bay Bridge retrofit which B&G will help the City access; B&G will go to State and federal representatives to find discretionary dollars; the Metropolitan Transportation Commission [MTC] has a program called Transportation for Livable Communities--those monies can be had in a competitive grant process; a dynamic marketing scheme needs to be implemented; Ernest Sanchez has been involved with marketing since 1991; he needs a budget and direction; requested Council to look long and hard at B&G which has provided good service; urged Council to use time [6 months] to find a long-term solution. Mayor Appezzato inquired whether Proposition 116 was a local initiative, to which Ms. Ellis responded it was a State-wide bond, called "Blueprint for Transportation", which was passed in 1990; $30 Million of ferry monies were involved--all of which might not have been spent. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council February 16, 1999 Mayor Appezzato thanked Ms. Ellis for her comments regarding staff; stated staff has done an outstanding job; rhetorically asked who is to blame ?; further stated it makes one wonder why a RFP was done- - the Contract just should have been awarded to B &G; if the City opens negotiations and still selects HMS, would Council go through same discussions again; HMS put up a $1 Million bond; inquired whether B &G captured Contract from R &W Ms. Ellis responded the best proposer won in 1991; stated that she is asking Council who the best proposer is now. In response to Councilmember Kerr's inquiry regarding Vallejo forming a transit district, Ms. Ellis stated Vallejo has a transit district because they run City buses; ferries were blended into the existing transit district. Councilmember Kerr further inquired whether Vallejo could access sales tax, to which Ms. Ellis responded in the affirmative; stated Vallejo can access Transportation Development Act (TDA), Article 4 monies which is a 1/4 cent of sales tax earmarked for transportation; without a City agency, the money goes to regional agencies. Ron Duckhorn, B &G President, stated the Council has two options; the most sensible option is to extend B &G's Contract for 6 months while funding options are explored; the Blue Ribbon Task Force is in the process of unveiling a new study with issues relative to funding; to muddy the waters prior to knowing what will be learned from said process is getting the cart before the horse; everyone is on the verge of discovering the future of water transit on the Bay; B &G is willing to extend its service for 6 months which gives time to resolve the funding issue. In response to Mayor Appezzato's inquiry regarding whether Mr. Duckhorn is expecting the Contract will be awarded to B &G in 6 months, Mr. Duckhorn stated that he is not expecting anything; everyone will be smarter in 6 months. Mayor Appezzato further inquired what Mr. Duckhorn envisions for the next 6 months, to which Mr. Duckhorn responded the focus would be on three areas: the fare issue, the subsidy issue and staff negotiating hard with existing and proposed operators; stated the funding issue has had a blanket over it; there were no points in the RFP for funding. Mayor Appezzato stated all mass transit is taxpayer subsidized; any funding comes from the taxpayers; grants are from the taxpayers; no matter where funding comes from, it is the taxpayers; that he supports ferry riders being subsidized; however, no one should forget the money comes from the taxpayers; the 75,000 residents of the City own the ferry services, not just the riders. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council February 16, 1999 In response to Councilmember DeWitt's inquiry regarding concrete funding sources, Mr. Duckhorn stated there is nothing solid; there are many options and much discussion; as part of the Blue Ribbon Task Force, he has reviewed a two -page document with sources of funding; the funding issue has to be resolved; the City and Port cannot jump from provider to provider with a frozen subsidy; the subsidy or fares have to increase; staff has to choose a competent and cost effective operator. Ms. Ellis requested to discuss funding sources; stated there are avenues for increase revenues from State and federal sources; there has been an increase in the surplus of the federal gas tax which will provide money to regional transit agencies; CalTrans will have mitigation funds from the Bay Bridge retrofit project; MTC has bridge toll mitigation funds -- currently, 90% goes to the South District ferries and a discretionary 10% of over $100,000 per year is available; Transportation for Livable Communities money is available; the State legislature has a surplus - -some of which will go to transportation through California Transportation Commission; in order to access some funds, the City of Vallejo informed her a Ferry Transportation Plan is needed. Councilmember DeWitt requested the City Manager to explain whether any of the funds outlined by Ms. Ellis are viable for the City, to which the City Manager stated not to his knowledge. The Public Works Director stated funding sources suggested [by Ms. Ellis] are not available for operation and are not available at this time; in order to access funds which the City of Vallejo accessed, the City would need to be its own transit district; the City would have to secede from A.C. Transit to establish a transit district; solutions being brought up are not available today; the Public Works Department pursues any grants which can be obtained. In response to Councilmember Kerr's inquiry regarding whether the City can only be a member of one transit district, the Public Works Director stated the City cannot operate its own transit district while remaining a member of A.C. Transit. Councilmember Johnson inquired whether a Ferry Transportation Plan would be useful, to which the Public Works Director responded a Plan would be needed if the City were its own transit district; requested the Deputy Public Works Director to further explain. Deputy Public Works Director Cheri Sheets stated a short -range Transportation Plan would help if the City had its own Transit District; it is required that an agency be its own transit district [to have a Plan]; a study was conducted to determine whether the City should become its own Transit District; it was determined that the City would have to annex from the A.C. Transit District; the option to give the ferry service to A.C. Transit was also reviewed- Regular Meeting Alameda City Council February 16, 1999 -it did not seem viable and A.C. Transit was not interested. In response to Vice Mayor Daysog's inquiry regarding the Blue Ribbon Task Force's ability to access funds and how new State legislation plays into ferry service funding, the Deputy Public Works Director stated MTC is responsible for regional ferry planning for the Bay; Senator Lee came up with a bill which established the [Blue Ribbon Task Force] Committee to determine the future of ferry service and how funding can be found; the larger, broader scope of ferry services on the Bay is being reviewed. Councilmember Kerr inquired whether the Bay-wide system involves forming a ferry transit district, to which Deputy Public Works Director stated one of the proposals is to for a ferry district; however, there are complications, e.g., the Golden Gate Ferry Transit District was formed under federal funding regulations and might not be able to be absorbed into a district; another issue is the various agencies power. In response to Councilmember Kerr's inquiry regarding said district's formation requiring Alameda to secede from A.C. Transit, the Deputy Public Works Director stated formation would require legislation which would be a part of the Blue Ribbon Task Force. Councilmember Kerr stated a letter from Harbor Bay Maritime states they are willing to discuss a merger of the two services; inquired how Mr. Duckhorn feels about said proposal, to which Mr. Duckhorn responded possible merger is part of Option 2; stated theoretically, it makes sense; two companies are serving the same area; although operating costs would not change, there must be duplications in management; it might be cost effective to collapse the two into one Contract; B&G would be willing to explore the benefits and how merging would work. Mayor Appezzato stated that he presumes HMS would feel the same, to which Mr. Waggoner [HMS President] stated after being awarded the Contract, HMS would be willing to review said matter. Mayor Appezzato stated that he sits on the Blue Ribbon Task Force; tomorrow in San Francisco, there will be a meeting and, hopefully, an announcement regarding progress; that he was appointed to represent the 14 cities in Alameda County on the MTC; that he hopes to be a help to mass transit riders and workers; the Blue Ribbon Task Force believes gridlock is here to stay unless something is done; the water has unlimited potential; the Task Force is reviewing: interlocking cities, fast ferry boats, buses to get people to and from ferries, and on-time, cost-effective ferry service; Senator Perata will be working on ferry service; the age old question is the funding; many believe it is cheaper to create a ferry transit system because more freeways cannot be built and extending BART is expensive. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council February 16, 1999 4 Nick Melas, B &G, stated that he has been employed with B &G since 1984 and currently works on AOFS; that he will not work for HMS even if he is offered a position; there will be wage disparities; that he worked for Roger Murphy before - -there were never the same wages for employees who worked for the company the same number of years; that he has a four day work week with Friday, Saturday and Sunday off; however, he would work [for B &G] on Friday, Saturday, Sunday and Monday and have terrible days off to keep the same benefits, wages, and area standards that he currently enjoys; any agreements with HMS and the union were not brought to him or other employees; thanked the current B &G administration for presenting a fair Proposal and I.B.U. for supporting them [B &G employees] in solidarity. Mayor Appezzato stated the City of Alameda is a prevailing wage city; the City has 11 unions with Contracts; there was one major labor conflict which was resolved 4 weeks ago; Alameda is a union city and will not tolerate labor abuses by anyone. Mr. Melas responded that he appreciates the Mayor's sentiment; however, there have been abuses in the past when the ferry service was operating. * * * Mayor Appezzato called a recess at 9:37 p.m. and reconvened the Regular Meeting at 9:45 p.m. * * * Ray Shipway, Masters Mates & Pilots (MMP), stated collectively, B &G MMP members employed on the AOFS would like to stay B &G employees; there have been no agreements between MMP or anyone else with the exception of the on -going collective bargaining agreements on San Francisco Bay at this time. In response to Mayor Appezzato's inquiry regarding whether Mr. Shipway would represent union members at HMS if the Contract were awarded to HMS, Mr. Shipway responded in the affirmative. Matthew Ballin, Alameda, stated B &G has provi9cr exemplary service in day -to -day service and emergencies, e.g. BART strike; if ferry service is expanding, a larger administration should be in place. Mayor Appezzato stated there is really no question about the service B &G has provided. Marina Secchitano, I.B.U., stated modifications to the RFP were inappropriate; HMS's rezponse to experience [requirement] was not examined until I.B.U. raised questions; allowing the manager to carry the ball for the company [regarding experience] is not the Regular Meeting Alameda City Council February 16, 1999 65 way the RFP was setup; inquired how the experience requirement would be impacted, if the manager [Murphy] left the company [HMS]; stated when R&W operated the ferry service, there were wage freezes which were not brought to Council; HMS has promised they will provide more service due to marketing; the City, Ernest Sanchez, R&W and B&G have been involved in marketing and have not increased ridership; if the question of wages was not raised, the employer [HMS] would not have paid [prevailing] wages; [Dan McSweeney yielded his time]; when an employer has manning above U.S. Coast Guard requirements, additional costs are suffered because safety is elemental; HMS claimed they will increase ridership, however, the vessel capacity is 149 passengers; inquired which boats would be used for increased ridership; stated HMS refused to participate in operating Labor Day weekend Treasure Island ferry runs because boats were required to be union operated, now, HMS's [non-union] boats will be available for backup, however, will they use union crews?; there is not enough funding available for the ferry service; there is discussion about changes in ferry service [expansion]; however, the people operating the service [HMS] are not going to measure up to current provider [B&G]; if the Contract is awarded to HMS, next time [the City puts out RFP] the Contract will go to company which underbids HMS; after operating the service, HMS will have same e-penditures as B&G; a docu-lent dated January 29th explained HMS reworked their numbers; [Victoria Farr yielded her time]; B&G did not receive any points for backup vessels because they have a 16-knot vessel; stated the Monarch is a 15-knot vessel; legal counsel informed her there is no guarantee who the union will be; HMS will be required to have an election with the National Labor Board; the ferry service HMS currently operates in Jacksonville runs the same distance as Pier 33 to Pier 43, inquired about why offers which seek less than the maximum subsidy would be given priority if AOFS and Harbor Bay Maritime are combined; [Felix Thieirt yielded his time]; if ferry services are combined, staff is urging companies to say they do not need the entire subsidy; staff has stated subsidy increases will not be acceptable under any conditions; inquired if funds were identified, whether the City would refuse to take it; further stated I.B.U. is committed to finding funding sources; the City should demand that current crews be hired; vacation and sick leave will not be carried over to the new employer; elderly or disabled people will not have a leisurely stroll [to Pier 39] if HMS lands at Pier 33 or Pier 43; the best case would be for B&G to keep the Contract; [Roxanne Mead yielded her time]; the process has seemed slanted, everything has been massaged to make HMS look great; stated if Council selects Option 2, providers are encouraged to bid less than the subsidy which should be reviewed; if Council does not select Option 2, HMS's responsiveness [to RFP] should be reviewed, e.g, points for carrier experience and backup vessels. In response to Vice Mayor Daysog's inquiry regarding deficiencies in the RFP being addressed before companies responded to ot, Ms. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council February 16, 1999 66 Secchitano stated HMS's two-years of experience was not an issue until staff recommended the Contract be awarded to HMS; it was not disclosed that staff would interpret "carrier experience" as something other than the company's experience. In response to Ms. Secchitano's comments regarding selection of the lowest bidder, Mayor Appezzato stated the City uses the RFP process because of its fiduciary responsibility to the citizens of Alameda. Al Lewis, B&G, stated that he has worked for B&G for 13 years; the RFP process impacts people's lives; that he would work for HMS because of Roger Murphy; the [current] provider [B&G] should be kept; urged Council to consider B&G employees. Robert Irminger, I.B.U., stated that he is a B&G employee; urged Council to accept B&G's offer to extend service for the next 6 months; stated said time will allow Council to review HMS's qualifications; requested Council to insist B&G employees be hired by whichever company is awarded to Contract; further stated that he has concerns regarding HMS's relations with unions; there is more of a possibility for labor problems if the Contract is awarded to HMS. Charles Ward, Alameda, stated HMS won the RFP through a sealed bid [process]; B&G is now trying to come in the back door by explaining they will come up with different funding sources; said funding should have been included in the first bid [submitted by B&G]; the Council should ensure jobs are guaranteed and possibly have HMS grandfather vacation and sick leave; the union would be stabbing itself in the back if it did not work with HMS; unions might have the opportunity to make non-union divisions of HMS unionized; HMS's marketing skills might exceed other companies--they do an excellent job marketing. John Rogers, Alameda, stated that he previously worked for B&G; Roger Murphy [HMS Manager] has never been anti-union; many people present are in the union because of Mr. Murphy; competition is good for the [ferry service] industry; the people of Alameda could not pick a better person than Roger Murphy to run a ferry service; AOFS is what it is today because of Roger Murphy. Tom Palsak, Alameda, stated the City Council and staff spent time establishing the RFP and selecting HMS; there is no reason the Contract should not be awarded [to HMS]; at the [January 19, 1999] Council meeting, there were threats that HMS would not be able to dock in certain areas; another company should be given a chance to run the ferry; more than one provider is needed in the Bay Area; urged Council to award the Contract to HMS. Carl Friedrich stated HMS has exaggerated many things; HMS defeated MMP in an election; HMS has agreed to hire 50% [B&G employees] Regular Meeting - Alameda City Council February 16, 1999 67 which would be an easy percent to defeat in an election; HMS does not pay prevailing wages now; Roger [Murphy] did not pay prevailing wages when he operated B&G; urged Council to take 6 months to review the matter. In response to Mayor Appezzato's inquiry regarding whether companies working for the City must pay prevailing wages, the Acting City Attorney responded in the affirmative. Mayor Appezzato inquired whether unions would take the matter to court if there is an unfair labor practice, to which Mr. Friedrich responded the matter was legal--the National Labor Relations Board ruled in favor of HMS. Susan Lewter, Alameda, stated Update No. 3 [from Public Works Director dated February 12, 1999] reads like a marketing flyer for HMS; said letter states "draft proposal from B&G increases fares by 20%"; B&G did not commit to fare increases--a proposal is simply a proposal; letter further states "there was a 20% decrease in weekend ridership for 1998"; that she believes El Nino was a greater deterrent than the $0.50 fare increase; HMS's experience pales in comparison to B&G years of experience; riders are not concerned regarding captain and crew attire; riders main concern is safely getting across the Bay; that she believes the RFP process was biased; requested the Council to begin the process over. Jackie Pasquali yielded her time. W. Graham Claytor, Alameda, submitted letters handed out on the ferry; stated B&G distributed a document outlining their position, therefore many ferry riders will take the same position as B&G; this is a bidding process; if the City of Alameda wants to get fair and competitive bids from other tenderers, the rules must be clear up-front; putting together a bid costs a lot of money; the process was started and should be followed through with; all other issues are simply the losing bidder looking for ways to offer the Council bait in order to get back into it [being considered]; there is a low bidder [HMS] and the other company [B&G] is trying to overturn the bidding process; B&G has provided excellent service; B&G started with three boats and everyone questioned what the company would be able to do; when R&W was purchased, everything collapsed; B&G service deteriorated when Roger Murphy left and went to work for HMS; if Roger Murphy says there will be backup boats and service will run on time, he [Mr. Claytor] believes him [Mr. Murphy]; Mr. Murphy managed to provide the ferry service for 7 years under incredible circumstances; there were maybe only 3 missed runs. Patrick Fiammetta, Alameda yielded his time. Herb Shelmadine, Alameda, stated that he has 50 years experience in Regular Meeting Alameda City Council February 16, 1999 the marine industry; maintenance is very important and should be focused on daily; B&G has the shop and mechanics which maintain its boats; B&G's maintenance is the reason they operate an excellent service; boats must slow down traveling up the estuary; whether HMS will arrive 2 or 3 minutes earlier is not important; track record means a lot. Sandra Stuart, HMS yielded her time. Red Wetherill, Alameda, commended the Mayor for participating in regional transit issues; commended Council for voting to delay the matter in January; stated the issue should be reviewed regionally; expansion and strengthening of ferry service should be the goal; Council should replace this flawed selection process and negotiate with all qualified proposers. John Gatewood stated speakers have called this a bid process; the first letter received from staff in December stated: "what is the RFP process? A RFP is not a bid. Unlike the bid process, the RFP process allows the City to incorporate various evaluation criteria that emphasize passengers' needs and concerns"; this is not a closed bid; HMS had the opportunity to resubmit its Proposal; inquired whether other carriers were given the same opportunity; stated is does not seem fair to provide only one proposer the opportunity to resubmit; the broader issue is increased ridership; selecting a carrier with less capacity seems to be going backwards; inquired whether additional funding could be generated from selling advertisements on the ferry; stated there should be a coordinated marketing campaign directed at BART riders, e.g. posters at stations and on trains; when the Encinal was brought on-line, it was stated, if 1% of BART riders rode the ferry once a week, the number of boats and runs could be increased. Melissa Parlee, Alameda, stated if marketed effectively, ferry service could expand; there is increased need for this convenient, reliable form of tran=portation; BART is often delayed or has no parking; bus fares just went up; there is traffic on the Bay Bridge; with the Bay Bridge retrofit approaching, things will get worse; if the experienced service [B&G] is used, commuters could be converted to happy ferry riders; putting the service in the hands of people who have no experience running a ferry in this Bay [HMS] could jeopardize the future of ferry service; a nice business plan with neat numbers does not get people to work in the morning; means of gathering rider input is que5tionable; Ernest Sanchez only spoke to four passengers; the Public Works Director's discussions on the dock did not involve many riders; requested Council to vote against HMS and negotiate with B&G; inquired why HMS was eligible with less than the required 2-years experience; further inquired why HMS and B&G were awarded the same points for experience. The Public Works Director stated the City viewed HMS's experience Regular Meeting Alameda City Council February 16, 1999 not only as a carrier, but considered the operator, Roger Murphy has over 5 years experience; based on that alone, HMS would have qualified under the 5 year requirement; experience was modified from 5 years to 2 years because 5 years was inconsistent with the two previous RFPs; the addendum was not written to only address the experience issue. Jumoke Horton stated many things have been said which he is not sure are true; that he is in the uninformed majority; many people working for B &G will not express their opinions because they are afraid they will not get a job [with HMS]; that he enjoys his job; [Monica Barry yielded her time]; read a letter stating the position of current AOFS employees: "The current crew feels neglected and their pivotal roles have been overlooked. Crews and passengers are directly effected. HMS has not secured a contract with the current crews. HMS cannot secure Agreements until the service Contract has been awarded; however, the crew is not confident HMS will maintain service and wages. The crew requests Council to acknowledge their position "; stated on behalf of those afraid to speak, he would like to say many are happy working for B &G. Mayor Appezzato called a recess at 10:47 p.m. and reconvened the Regular Meeting at 10:58 p.m. Russ Hobung stated that he has been a captain on the Bay for over 30 years; that he is not comfortable with the way the experience issue was handled; Roger Murphy is the only full -time employee; inquired who would handle the job if Mr. Murphy were forced out; B &G has the boats to step in if there are emergencies; when more than the usual number of boats are in service, landing facilities get tight; B &G has floats which could be pressed into service [as landings] in the event of an emergency. Willard Thau yielded his time. Michael Probst, B &G Employee, stated if it is not broken why fix it; Roger Murphy's experience was used as criteria, however, he [Mr. Probst] has never seen Mr. Murphy drive a boat. C. Billington, I.B.U., stated a ferry service is responsible for maintaining vessels and docking /Pier facilities to ensure passenger and crew safety; parts work together; B &G management has done an excellent job coordinating 6 different ferry services throughout the Bay area; B &G is a safe, reliable commodity which has proven itself in disasters; the management team provided a school to train crews; B &G believes in safety first, not economics; during the 1989 earthquake, over 10,000 commuters were safely transported; Regular Meeting Alameda City Council February 16, 1999 operations were not ceased until all stranded commuters were delivered to their destination; there are always options, however, in this case the only solution is B &G. Lisa Zenner, Alameda, stated that she is a happy ferry commuter; the RFP was worthwhile because it brought the issue of funding to the table; urged Council to take Option 2 and assist B &G in accessing transit funds and finding a long -term plan; stated awarding the Contract to HMS would be taking a short -term view and missing the opportunity to address the issue of funding; that she is not willing to put up with down time; B &G provides safe and reliable service. Patrick Robles, B &G, stated at the last meeting [January 19, 1999], there was concern about whether the ferry service, would operate after the [current] Contract expires; there are still issues which need to be resolved; this decision affects people's lives; Option 2 guarantees there will be ferry service for 6 more months ar.: gives Council a chance to examine the issues; thanked ferry riders for their support. Daniel Curry, MMP, stated that he is concerned: 1) all current [AOFS] employees remain employed by whichever company is awarded the Contract; and 2) there are 3 deckhands on each boat. Richard Mead, ILWU Local 10, stated the long -term solution is the issue; 6 months time might be sufficient to find a solution that is best for the citizens, passengers and workers; even non -union companies in the Bay area pay prevailing wages; however, they do not follow area standards, e.g. benefits, crew sizes; if HMS does not provide area standards, the ILWU will be there with an area standard picket line which will affect the passengers; it is not a matter of the lowest bidder; a long -term solution needs to be found. Vice Mayor Daysog stated the decision is not easy; there are the passions voiced by residents, workers and management .ersus some of the p's and q's raised by staff and HMS; the Blue Ribbon Task Force is studying systematizing the ferry system throughout the region; Senator Don Perata is considering legislation for funding; there is also an opportunity to consider combining the East End and West End Ferries; all of the issues are somehow linked to one another; timeout should be taken; it is incumbent upon the City to take six months to determine how its ferry system fits into the larger picture; there is no guarantee that at the end of six months, Blue & Gold will get the bid [contract], or HMS; inorder to move forward, the City must consider how it can be part of a system and how the pieces fit into the larger whole; there is something to be said about continuity: rewarding quality service over a period of time; there is also something to be said about making sure the company that is most efficient dollar -wise and most reliable Regular Meeting Alameda City Council February 16, 1999 1 service-wise gets the reward; however in that context, the City can not really judge who is the most efficient or the most qualified given the shifting nature of the whole ferry system; Council should view the matter from that perspective; and a six-month reprieve, Option 2, taken. Councilmember Kerr stated that she has problems with the RFP point system; one service received full points for the experience of one person, and the day-by-day, boat-by-boat experience of the other [service provider] was ignored; she questions HMS's farebox recovery figures; HMS Ilaz a large amount of money in farebox recovery for concessions, yet only wants to carry two crew members per boat; whenever on the Encinal [ferry,] there has been one deckhand on the upper deck selling tickets, one deckhand on the lower deck selling tickets and one deckhand at the concession stand; she does not know if HMS cut personnel on board, how concessions would be increased; Council must take some responsibility; when the PFP issue came to Council last fall, Council approved staff issuing a RFP but did not request to review it; the RFP was not in the Council packet; Council should have discussed the RFP and made decisions about point valuation at that time; the Survey was very good but did not cover tourist trade which pays more per ticket than commuters; there are no points awarded for safety; from browsing through Coast Guard records, both providers are about equal in regard to safety; staff did well in negotiating; HMS's proposal changed quite dramatically in certain instances; under the RFP process, the City was allowed to negotiate with HMS, but could not negotiate with Blue & Gold; the best that can be done for Alameda's taxpayers and commuters is to approve Option 2, and allow open market negotiations with both [providers] for the best proposal. Councilmember Kerr moved approval of Option 2. Councilmember DeWitt stated the situation is a choice between HMS and Blue & Gold; Option 2 appears to be something that is neither; Option 2 provides no tangible benefit; Option 2 just puts [decision] off in hopes of finding a long term solution. Which is what?; questioned whether there are any specifics for funding or tangible [benefits] of Option 2; stated the Port of Oakland indicated it is not interested in any proi---al which increases rates; HMS states it can provide experience, service and union people, etcetera, without a fare increase; that he does not want to raise fares; he has sat back as a non-politician and watched A.C. Transit bus fares, garbage rates, and BART tickets go up; government, leaders, and boards are raising prices every time you look around; HMS provided a RFP without a fare increase; HMS is putting up a $1 Million bond; if HMS dues not perform, the City could take HMS to task; experience, service and union contracts do not register with him; he will not vote for a fare increase; the long-term life of the ferry service depends upon the ridership, Regular Meeting Alameda City Council February 16, 1999 which has a direct relationship to fare increases; Option 2 does not provide anything except delay; if there were any tangible benefits, he would be willing support Option 2; six months from now, the City may be in the same position; he accepts the staff recommendation to award Contract to HMS. Councilmember Johnson thanked staff; stated staff did an excellent job; matter is a very difficult issue; that she does not want fare increases; the two ferry operators have been very forthright with the City in providing information and willing to meet with Council to answer questions; the City would be rushing into [matter] if Council made a decision tonight without exploring all the available options; the combination of the two ferries, the Harbor Bay ferry and West End ferry, is a potential; the City needs to explore said matter; it [combining ferry services] was not taken into consideration when the City provided the RFP; Council should consider it; considering all regional issues, opportunities could be missed; she will support Option 2. Mayor Appezzato stated that he does not support Option 2; read two letters: 1) "I am a daily rider to San Francisco on the ferry that leaves the West End of Alameda; the main purpose of this letter will be simple, logical and to the point; I and my friends cannot stand another fare increase. . ." Mayor Appezzato commented that the letter goes on to state that they [letter author, Teresa Baker, and friends] will no longer ride the ferry if there is a fare increase; 2) "Those of us that ride the ferry daily don't give a hoot about who operates the ferry; Blue & Gold or HMS, or Union members or not; your priorities as leaders of this City is to provide service at the best possible price for public paying passengers; awarding contracts to unions vs. non-unions is none of the City's business, as long as prevailing wages acceptable to the City are being paid the workers; that is all that has to be considered; the purpose of A.C. Transit and BART and the ferries is to relieve traffic congestion by providing mass transportation; the ferry, at the least minimum, is $2 to $3 more to ride daily than either A.C. Transit or BART; another fare increase at the box for ferry service will put many of us back in our cars, thus rendering mass transportation a severe setback to its stated objectives and goals of getting people off the roads; it is comforting to ride the ferry and not have to put up with road rage and pollution, but not at the expense of higher and higher rates; please give the matter serious consideration when it comes up for discussion and the Regular Meeting Alameda City Council February 16, 1999 awarding of a new contract. /s/ John Raymond McIntyre "; Mayor Appezzato further stated that he would like to compliment Blue and Gold; B &G did a wonderful job; matter is not about service provided by B &G; Mr. Duckhorn and he work on the Blue Ribbon Task Force; complimented staff; criticism of staff is unfounded; HMS was the low bidder; HMS has agreed to be represented by organized labor; Masters, Mates & Pilots, a union, is comfortable with HMS; union conflicts are not the responsibility of the City; he is convinced that HMS has met union concerns; prevailing wages will be paid; the City of Alameda is a prevailing wage city; [there will be] preservation of jobs for existing crews; there will be preferential hiring; crew size will be determined by the U.S. Coast Guard; labor concerns have been addressed; HMS has operated successful ferries in Florida and Connecticut; Roger Murphy, Operations Manager for HMS, has been in the business for years and founded Blue & Gold; a new addendum is not an issue; there were three people on the selection committee: one from the City, one from the Port of Oakland, and a third person; everyone was represented; the system was fair; to challenge the RFP process is saying the City should not have done it in the first place; B &G required an additional subsidy of almost $300,000; the [B &(] RFP did not meet the RFP standard for providing twelve weekday runs within the existing fare and subsidy structure without additional subsidy; even though B &G did not meet the RFP criteria, staff did not disqualify them; no one should say there was favoritism; [the matter of] Fisherman's Wharf access, backup vessels, etcetera was covered and adequately so; the management fee structure was discussed: there was a quarter of a million dollars difference; there is a performance bond of $1 Million from HMS; the City can call upon the Bond at its discretion; ferry rider input is important; the ferries belong to all of the citizens of Alameda, the City of Oakland, and anyone else who pays taxes; recently there was a dispute between the City's two newspapers as to whom should get [legal ad] contract; Council went with the low bidder, even though one newspaper had a larger circulation; that he is concerned about the RFP process; the subsidy for the ferry boat does not come from just the riders, it comes from all of the citizens of the City; Council's responsibility is to everyone; Council talks about fiscal responsibility; some need to look at [the matter of] fiscal responsibility; even if the subsidy of $291,000 is found, it is really $600,000 [needed]; if fares go up because of an additional subsidy, it could be $2 per round trip per day under the [B &G] proposal; the Port of Oakland is opposed to a fare increase, he is opposed to a fare increase, and he is sure everyone is opposed; there are no additional subsidies at this time; fare increases will not makeup for the subsidies; a proposal by HMS with a $1 Million Bond avoids additional subsidies without a fare increase; he will support Option 1: awarding the contract to HMS, even though he knows that there are three votes to go with option 2; it would be a lot easier for him to go with the majority; however, he believes Regular Meeting Alameda City Council February 16, 1999 the process was fair; a lot of the concerns raised are invalid; Council will be back again in six months; the primary obligation of Council is to the citizens who pay taxes that maintain the subsidies. The Acting City Attorney stated before Council takes action, she would like to clarify one legal point; she has heard a lot of reference to the six month delay; Blue and Gold's proposal to Council this evening to extend their existing contract for an additional six months is not a matter that is on the Agenda tonight; Council may consider the offer in making its decision toward one of the proposals, but that is not an action on the Agenda tonight. Councilmember Kerr stated there was a motion on the floor, and questioned whether there was a second. Councilmember Johnson seconded the motion. On the call for the question, the motion carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Councilmembers Daysog, Kerr and Johnson - 3. Noes: Councilmember DeWitt and Mayor Appezzato - 2. (99-87) Recommendation to form Economic Development Strategic Plan Task Force. Frank Matarrese, Economic Development Commission [EDC] Chair, stated the EDC recommended putting a Strategic Plan together in December; Council charged the EDC with: 1) determining the makeup of a Task Force; 2) setting a time frame to accomplish the task; 3) assigning a dollar figure to the task; tonight the EDC is submitting its findings; that he can answer any questions. In response to Councilmember Kerr's inquiry regarding representatives from Alameda neighborhoods being on the Task Force to evaluate impacts on neighborhoods, Chair Matarrese stated [Staff Report] Attachment A lists categories; the list includes representatives with residential interests; read from Attachment A: "the EDC is looking for individuals to represent a diversity of interests, including but not limited to business associations, developers, educational interests, residential interests, the maritime industry, high-tech companies, manufacturing, real estate industry, public transportation interests, financial concerns, and environmental interests.' Chair Matarrese further stated the EDC formed these categories to solicit nominations and/or applications. Councilmember Kerr inquired about the Resource Team outlined in [Staff Report] Attachment B, to which Chair Matarrese responded the members of the Resource Team would not have voting rights. Councilmember Kerr stated at the last Planning Board meeting, Regular Meeting Alameda City Council February 16, 1999 approval to stack containers near a West End neighborhood was on the Consent Calendar of the Agenda; said example shows insensitivity to West End neighborhoods; staff has recommended 25 people serve on the Task Force of which none represent the livability of Alameda's neighborhoods and have voting rights; also, staff recommends the 75% residency requirement be eliminated; essentially, most of the [Task Force] composition could be out -of- town business interests. In response to Councilmember Kerr's comments, Chair Matarrese stated the EDC recommended a 75% residency requirement; the City Council can decide whether to follow the EDC's recommendation, staff's recommendation or a combination thereof; the EDC recommended the Task Force begin meeting in May and present a Plan to Council at the end of the year. Councilmember Kerr stated that she is disappointed the staff recommendation does not include the EDC's recommendation to have voting members of the Task Force represent Alameda neighborhoods. Chair Matarrese stated Council should review the recommendation, ensure concerns are met, and decide the Task Force membership. The City Manager stated staff wanted a balance of community businesses represented; there should not be discretion over whether Task Force members F e business property owners or residential property owners; there should be representation from both [residential and business property owners]; if Council is concerned, staff could eliminate several categories and include several neighborhood representatives. Mayor Appezzato stated all members of the group should be concerned about the livability of neighborhoods; however, Council could include two representatives from Homeowners' Associations - -from the West End and the East End; suggested: 1) the representative from a computer/ electronics /,oftware firm and the representative from bioscience /pharmaceutical firm be combined into one representative from a high -tech firm; 2) the representative from the manufacturing /assembly firm be eliminated; and 3) two positions be filled by Homeowners' Associations representatives. Councilmember DeWitt stated the Task Force is heavily weighted to the business community because it is forming an economic strategy; however, it would be useful to have residential interests represented on the Task Force; that he agrees with the changes [suggested by the Mayor]. Vice Mayor Daysog stated that he is pleased Alameda Unified School District is represented on the Task Force; an article in the Examiner Newspaper commented on high -tech companies in Oakland, Emeryville and the City of Alameda; Jerry Fiedler of Wind River was Regular Meeting Alameda City Council February 16, 1999 quoted as saying one of the key reasons Wind River located in Alameda, rather than Oakland, was because of the educational system; involving schools in economic development activity acknowledges the symbiotic relationship of the two; that he is not concerned whether neighborhoods are involved. * * * Councilmember Kerr moved that the meeting continue past midnight. Councilmember DeWitt _7,:ccnded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. * * * Chair Matarrese further stated the EDC has proposed to help screen and sort applications ac the Council's pleasure. Charles Ward, EDC Member, tated the EDC drafted its recommendation to allow members from each point of interest to apply and a selection committee recommend individuals for appointment. Councilmember Kerr so moved. [acceptance of the staff recommendation with changes outlined by Mayor Appezzato]. Councilmember DeWitt seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. (99-88) Ordinance No. 2793, "Amending the Alameda Municipal Code by Adding Subsection 4-10.2(h) to Subsection 4-10-2 (Definitions), of Section 4-10 (Noise Control), Article II (Noise Regulations), Chapter IV (Offenses and Public Safety) Pertaining to Noise Disturbance." Finally passed. Albert Gaster, Alameda, stated that he is opposed to the change; chronic offenders' noise is permitted if it is under 200 feet; inquired about people under the 200-foot limit; stated a neighbor approximately 80-feet from his residence makes noise which shakes his house; [Municipal Code] Article 4-10 does not nail down: 1) what the Police Department should do; 2) what a nuisance is; or 3) how to take care of nuisances; the entire [M11:-.1-ipal Code] section should be reviewed; stereo and car noise is a disturbance; that he is opposed to the revision because it does not make sense; a solution is to have the City Manager, Police Department, District Attorney and residents meet to figure out how to eliminate noise. Councilmember Kerr stated none of the existing noise controls are eliminated by the proposed amendment; use of a decibel meter is still in the Municipal Code; noise meters are in the Planning Department and are not available on weekends; the existing Code has a 50-foot rule for car radios; the proposed amendment is not a Regular Meeting Alameda City Council February 16, 1999 solution to everything; that she met with the City Attorney and Police Chief to establish regulations which would not require the Police Department to get a noise meter; noise meters require a minimum of 35 minutes to measure decibel levels; the purpose of the revision is to simplify enforcement and not require the Police to sit around for 35 minutes with a noise meter. In response to Vice Mayor Daysog's inquiry pertaining to criteria, the Acting City Attorney stated no noise disturbance could satisfy all criteria. Councilmember Johnson stated a noise disturbance could exist without violating any of the criteria. In response to Mayor Appezzato's inquiry in regard to the number of citations issued by the City, Mr. Gaster [Public Speaker] stated for the month of January, 4 citations were issued for noise violation [following the Council meeting, Mr. Gaster informed the City Council that there were no citations for noise violations over the past three months]. Councilmember DeWitt stated tile ordinance is proposed ',I allow a person without a noise meter to issue a citation; the disturbance has been put into number of feet; said regulation might not work for everyone; inquired why Mr. Gaster finds this method so objectionable. Mr. Gaster responded that he does not understand why Police Officers are not enforcing regulations; the Police Chief needs to inform Officers to issue citations. Councilmember Kerr moved final passage of the Ordinance. Councilmember DeWitt seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. oZ4 •VIviik • kok 114 (99-89) Charles Ward, Alameda, stated [regarding the Ferry Service Contract] that the Council has proved itself to be somewhat unfriendly tonight; if HMS walks away [from their Proposal], the City might be left with a company which may not be able to provide the service without additional subsidy; if the Port of Oakland chooses HMS, it would raise the question of where Alameda fits in; the RFP process needs to be air tight; Council followed emotion over process; the City needs to make sure businesses are not scared away. (99-90) John Fee, Alameda, commented on various issues. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council February 16, 1999 (99-91) Councilmember DeWitt stated the City of Alameda's relationship between homeless providers, local public agencies and the community was listed in the Housing and Urban Development [HUD] publication entitled, "Guidebook on Military Base Reuse and Homeless Assistance"; HUD cites the reuse planning process at Alameda's [former] Naval Air Station as a model program. (99-92) Councilmember Kerr requested the City Manager to provide Council with an off-agenda report regarding any possible landscaping plans on the eastern side of Constitution Way between Atlantic Avenue and Marina Village Parkway [east side of Constitution Way at the Atlantic Avenue/Marina Village Parkway interchange]; e.g. tall trees. ADJOURNMENT (99-93) There being no further business, Mayor Appezzato adjourned the Regular City Council meeting at 12:25 p.m. in memory of Kay Hickox, the City's former Cable Television Technician. Respectfully submitted, Di re:Cf3.tgsc C City Clerk The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council February 16, 1999