1991-10-15 Regular CC Minutes311
REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ALAMEDA
OCTOBER 15, 1991
The meeting convened at 7:42 p.m., (following the meeting of the
Community Improvement Commission) with President Withrow presiding.
The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Councilmember Camicia and
Reverend Mary Rowe gave the invocation.
ROLL CALL - Present: Councilmembers Arnerich, Camicia, Lucas, Roth,
and President Withrow - 5.
Absent: None.
ANNOUNCEMENT OF CLOSED SESSION ACTIONS
President Withrow announced that at the Special Council Meeting held
at 6:30 p.m., Council adjourned to Closed Session to consider:
91-714 Personnel Matters: Evaluation of Appointed Employees;
Appointment, Employment and Dismissal of Certain City Employees;
pursuant to Government Code Section 54957 of the Brown Act.
President Withrow stated the matter was not discussed; that Council
will return to Closed Session if Council completes its business in a
reasonable time this evening.
91-715 Significant Exposure to Litigation, pursuant to Subsection (b)
of Government Code Section 54956.9 of the Brown Act. President
Withrow stated no action was taken.
PROCLAMATIONS AND SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY.
91-716 Presentation of AAA Pedestrian Protection Program Award, by
California State Automobile Association, for outstanding Pedestrian
Program activities.
Tom Conrad, Assistant Manager, AAA, Oakland Office, noted Mary Banks,
Manager, Traffic Safety Department, San Francisco; John Morgan,
Traffic Safety Consultant, AAA, San Francisco; Julie Oates, Sales
Manager, Oakland District Office, were also present; commended the
City for its Pedestrian Program activities; and presented the Award
of Merit to Police Chief Shiells and Mayor Withrow, who expressed
appreciation for the honor given to Alameda.
91-717 Presentation of Certificate of Service to Paul H. Aragon,
former Member of the Golf Commission.
Mayor Withrow presented the Certificate to Mr. Aragon.
91-718 Presentation of Certificate of Service to Donald R. Sherratt,
former Member of the Recreation Commission.
Mayor Withrow presented the Certificate to Mr. Sherratt, who
expressed appreciation.
91-719 Presentation of Certificate of Appointment to Stan Shane as
October 15, 1991
,
Member of the Finance Committee.
Mayor Withrow presented the Certificate to Mr. Shane, who expressed
appreciation.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Mayor Withrow announced that 91-732, report regarding City-owned
properties, at the request of Councilman Arnerich, was removed from
the Consent Calendar for discussion; and, 91-730, Introduction of
Ordinance and Resolution regarding Film Permits, and 91-740,
Resolution approving Mortgage Credit Certificate Program and
Agreement, were removed from the agenda at the request of the City
Manager.
Councilmember Roth moved the remainder of the Consent Calendar.
Councilmember Camicia seconded the motion which was carried by
unanimous voice vote - 5.
Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk.
*91-720 Minutes of the Regular Council Meeting of October 1, 1991,
and the Special Council Meeting of October 1, 1991. Approved.
*91-721 Report from Public Works Director recommending approval of
Modified Allocation of Voting Shares among the cities in the
Congestion Management Agency (CMA). Accepted.
*91-722 Report from Public Works Director regarding request from the
Park Street Business Association for an Extension of Loan Agreement
for Parking Lots A and C Operations. Accepted.
*91-723 Report from Public Works Director recommending that the
City's Amnesty Program for Determining the Number of Legal Dwelling
Units in a Structure be extended for an additional Two Year Period,
until November 3, 1993. Accepted.
*91-724 Report from Finance Director transmitting Investment Report
for period ending September 30, 1991. Accepted.
*91-725 Report from Community Development Director regarding use of
proceeds from charity contribution by City's Recycling Contractor.
Accepted.
*91-726 Resolution No. 12160 "Urging Federal and State Agencies to
Take Actions to Encourage and Permit Development, Promotion, and Use
of Natural Gas and Electric Vehicles." Adopted.
*91-727 Resolution No. 12161 "Awarding contract to Riley & Sons
Construction, Inc. for the Construction of Wheelchair Ramps, Phase
10, No. P.W. 7-91-10." Adopted.
*91-728 Resolution No. 12162 "Approving Parcel Map No. 6108 (802
Oak Street and 801 Park Street)." Adopted.
*91-729 Resolution No. 12163 "Approving the undertaking of certain
October 15, 1991
1
public improvements by the City on behalf of the Community
Improvement Commission." Adopted.
*91-730 Ordinance No. , N.S. "Amending the Alameda Municipal
Code by Adding Chapter 4 to Title XIII thereof establishing
Procedures, Regulations and Fees for Filming Activities, and
Resolution No. establishing Film Permit Fees." Not heard.
*91-731 Bills were ratified in the sum of $505,688.42.
91-732 Report from Chair, Finance Committee, regarding City-owned
properties. Accepted.
Councilman Arnerich stated he would like the matter continued to the
next meeting for clarification purposes; he is concerned certain
public open space parcels may be included in the proposed inventory
of properties; wants an election ballot to include [a proposition
that the disposition of] public open space parcels will not be
decided by any City Council.
Councilmember Lucas stated staff recommendation is that the Finance
Committee's suggestion be addressed by the Public Work's Department,
at which time a recommendation will be forwarded to Council.
President Withrow clarified that no authority would be given to
unilaterally take action to dispose of City property; the matter [of
disposition] would still need to come back to Council.
Councilmember Roth moved to adopt recommendation that a program be
developed to inventory and catalog City owned properties.
Councilmember Lucas suggested report include zoning designations;
Councilmember Roth agreed. Councilmember Lucas seconded the motion
which was carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Councilmembers
Camicia, Lucas, Roth and President Withrow - 4. Noes: Councilman
Arnerich - 1. Absent: None. Abstention: None.
AGENDA ITEMS
91-733 Resolution No. 12164 "Appointing Larry Schulz as a Member of
the Economic Development Commission." Adopted.
Councilmember Camicia moved adoption of the resolution. Councilman
Arnerich seconded the motion which was carried by unanimous voice
vote - 5.
The City Clerk administered the Oath of Office and presented the
Certificate of Appointment to Larry Schulz.
91-734 Resolution No. 12165 "Appointing David Elefant as a Member of
the Economic Development Commission." Adopted.
Councilmember Camicia moved adoption of the resolution.
Councilmember Lucas seconded the motion which was carried by
unanimous voice vote - 5.
The City Clerk administered the Oath of Office and presented the
October 15, 1991
1
Certificate of Appointment to Mr. Elefant.
91-735 Written Communication from President, Chamber of Commerce,
transmitting Chamber's Business Plan for City Council's information
and review; and requesting assistance to accomplish its goals.
Greg Beattie, Alameda, Board Member, Chamber of Commerce, stated the
Chamber's request is for Council's assistance to allow the Chamber to
get a start; the Chamber needs to provide a higher level of service,
and would appreciate Council's consideration of its request.
Mary J. Brandenberger, President, Chamber of Commerce, stated the
Chamber has put together a business plan and proposal; noted goals,
e.g., to promote City as prime location for business, assist local
businesses; funding is needed for part-time person and Executive
Director; and Chamber is asking only for assistance to get started.
Ms. Brandenberger also noted, in response to Councilmember Roth,
that the former Chamber was duplicating what Business Associations
were providing; current Chamber does not want to compete but
cooperate, and could handle inquiries now handled by the City's
Citizen's Response Center (CRC).
Councilmember Lucas stated the CRC has other functions, not just
dispensing general City information, and was in existence
simultaneously with former Chamber.
The City Manager confirmed Councilmember Lucas's statement; and
provided the background of the CRC.
Ms. Brandenberger stated the Chamber would also like to provide a
monthly calendar of City events.
To President Withrow's question regarding business inquiries about
relocation in Alameda, the City Manager responded that businesses
contact the Community Development Department, however the City does
not have a formal recruitment effort at this time.
Robin Ablett, Coordinator of CRC, explained the purpose of the CRC;
noted that although it existed at the same time as the former
Chamber, its charge was to provide information and referral for
Municipal services, and later, inherited some Chamber duties.
Councilmember Lucas moved to refer matter to staff for analysis, and
a response be provided for November 5, 1991.
Councilmember Roth stated timing is poor; Council is moving to new
budget period, which would be a good time during which to discuss the
matter.
Councilmember Lucas agreed to sixty days in which to bring back the
matter.
Councilmember Roth suggested the Chamber of Commerce, business
associations and staff meet and discuss the matter.
October 15, 1991
31
Councilman Arnerich stated funds are not available, the City has been
cutting back, the recession will continue, and he cannot see putting
$25,000 into the Chamber, until the City is on a sound fiscal basis.
President Withrow stated he would like the analysis to include a
definition of a pay back; what it will take, in terms of increased
revenue for the City, to pay back funds, e.g., how many new
businesses and jobs.
Councilmember Lucas questioned whether Community Development funds
could provide financial assistance.
Councilmember Camicia stated he agrees with Councilman Arnerich about
the City's financial situation; Chamber's business plan is good;
however, the Chamber's first priority should be to obtain approval of
neighborhood organizations which should become part of Chamber,
committees of Chamber, and work together.
Councilmember Roth agreed; stated that is why he would like more
time, to talk to other groups, and he would like to address issue.
Councilman Arnerich stated he would be voting against [assistance]
because if money is found, some [City] programs should be reopened
that had to be closed.
The motion carried by the following voice vote: Ayes:
Councilmembers Camicia, Lucas, Roth and President Withrow - 4. Noes:
Councilman Arnerich - 1. Absent: None. Abstentions: None.
91-736 Written Communication from William P. Stier, Alameda,
regarding Business Improvement Area activities.
Kimberley Byrne, West Alameda Business Association (WABA) submitted a
letter she wrote to Mr. Stier regarding his concerns.
Councilmember Roth expressed concern regarding business associations'
administrative costs.
To Councilmember Roth's request, the Community Development Director
noted costs, and related factors, for consideration.
Councilmember Roth stated Council should look very closely at next
year's BIA budget.
President Withrow inquired whether Councilmember Roth would like to
represent Council and meet with business associations and Chamber to
discuss issues; Councilmember Roth responded in the affirmative.
Councilmember Lucas moved acceptance of communication. Councilmember
Roth seconded the motion which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.
91-737 Hearing in consideration of Rezoning, R-91-109, to change the
Zoning of six parcels classified as R-1 (One Family Residence)
District, and C-M (Commercial-Manufacturing) District to an 0 (Open
Space) District, located along the west and southwest shore of Bay
Farm Island within a portion of the existing Shoreline Park;
October 15, 1991
1
Applicants: Doric Development/City of Alameda; and Ordinance No.
, N.S. "Amending the Alameda Municipal Code by Amending Article
1, Section 11-116 to Chapter 1, of Title XI (Zoning) Relating to the
Establishment of Zoning Districts."
The Planning Director explained the background of the matter.
Dan Reidy, Alameda, stated Doric Development, favors Council's
approval of the Ordinance; the critical issue was waiting until
exact size of Shoreline Park was known; BCDC approved; land has
been dedicated to the City; this is to fulfill Conditions for
Village V and in the Development Agreement.
Councilmember Camicia moved introduction of the ordinance.
Councilmember Roth seconded the motion which carried by unanimous
voice vote - 5.
91-738 Hearing in consideration of a Zoning Text Amendment,
ZA-91-163, and Introduction of Ordinance amending the Alameda
Municipal Code by adding Article 4K to Chapter 1, of Title XI
(Zoning), relating to the regulation of tree removal on private
property. Applicant: City of Alameda.
The Planning Director explained the background of the matter.
Council discussed with Planning Director, a survey of jurisdictions
regarding tree preservation ordinances and permit fee charges; and
the role of Public Works Department concerning permits.
Tom Bowlin, stated he favors the ordinance; part of beauty and charm
of Alameda is large, older trees, and protection is needed.
Kurt Braun, Alameda, discussed visual impact of trees, size of trees,
thousands of dollars spent by City each year on tree planting and
maintenance, diverting some money to save trees the City does not
need to maintain; and urged Council adjust tree size to whatever
level of involvement Council wants the staff to have [as the smaller
the tree size, the more trees will be included involving more staff
time].
David Baker, Alameda, stated he favors the ordinance; he would like
Council to remind homeowners who consider removing a tree that the
tree was probably at that location long before the people came, and
perhaps should be allowed to remain long after they leave.
Katie Braun, Alameda, stated within 100 feet of her home, two large
old-growth trees were removed last year becau.ze persons did not like
raking fallen leaves and pine needles; average home ownership period
is short, trees considered are 30 to 100 years old sometimes, the
best interest of communities outweighs individual rights; urged
Council accept Planning Board recommendation and pass tree ordinance.
Michele Rivers, Alameda, stated protection of smaller trees should
also be considered; noted birds neighborhood trees attract; with
destruction occurring on the planet, even in small communities, the
impact of trees on people's lives should be looked at.
October 15, 1991
317
Herman Jorgensen, Alameda, stated people discuss the history of
Alameda, e.g., Victorian houses; there is also a living history to
think about.
Councilmember Camicia stated the ordinance is excellent, will affect
only the larger trees; believes [the ordinance] is worth a try; and
if a few trees are saved, that is important to do.
Councilmember Lucas stated she agrees the ordinance is excellent;
however, staff will be cut back; budget improvement cannot be seen
and workload on staff cannot be increased; the City cannot afford
the ordinance and she will not vote for it.
Councilmember Roth stated he agrees with the speaker who believes
older trees with smaller circumference should also be saved; agrees
with Councilmember Lucas the City does not have the staff nor
expertise to implement the ordinance; he does not believe that, at
this time, a tree permit is needed; and if a person wants to protect
something, then that person should buy, and control, it.
Councilman Arnerich stated what is good for one person might not be
for another; property owners should be permitted to remove their own
trees; the City has a program of planting 5000 trees within the next
ten years; he agrees with the Public Works Director's summation and
will not support the proposed ordinance.
President Withrow responded to Councilman Arnerich's comments by
stating that if Council were to look at property where cars were
parked in the front yard, the owner is using property as seen fit but
that is not good for the community; there are tradeoffs to look at;
citizens have expressed concern for trees removed; and wish to
protect the asset for the community; if there is no problem, there
will not be a financial problem [for the City] because people will
not be processing permits; putting the ordinance in place will not
be costly; the cost will be directly proportional to the problem the
City has, and if a detailed tenacious protection of buildings and
facilities is continued in this community, at least some respect
should also be given for the trees.
Councilmember Camicia stated he does not think the cost would be
great; believes President Withrow is correct that the [program]
would essentially pay for itself; this should be looked at as a
service; if an independent source can inform a person how to trim
and/or otherwise handle a situation and perhaps save them $3000 for
removal of a tree, he believes people would appreciate that.
Councilmember Lucas stated, because of a borer common in Alameda, she
needed to remove five cypress trees planted 12 years ago, which cost
her about $1000; an arborist tried injections, but she must remove
four more trees, and would not want to be required to obtain permits
for each tree; most Alamedans like trees and will be conscientious.
Councilmember Lucas moved to deny the recommendation from the
Planning Board to adopt ZA-91-163. Councilman Arnerich seconded the
motion.
October 15, 1991
18
Councilmember Camicia suggested the Citizen's Response Center be
instructed to keep a list of arborists on file so that residents can
call when they have a question about trees and want to check before
they spend a great deal of money.
The motion carried by the following voice vote: Ayes:
Councilmembers Arnerich, Lucas and Roth - 3. Noes: Councilmember
Camicia and President Withrow - 2. Absent: None.
91-739 Appeal of a Planning Board approval of Use Permit, UP-91-167,
to demolish an existing marina and to construct a new marina on a
parcel located at 2415 Mariner Square Drive within the M-2 (General
Industrial) District. Applicant: John Beery III
* Written Communication from President, Planning Board,
regarding the need to proceed with the Estuary and Tidal
Canal Rezoning in connection with appeal of Use Permit
(UP-91-167) for Mariner Square Marina.
The Planning Director explained the background of the matter.
In response to President Withrow, the City Attorney stated if the
decision of Council is to uphold Planning Board's decision, it may do
so without General Plan Amendment; if the Council is inclined to
allow development beyond the Pierhead Line, it should refer back to
the Planning Board for a General Plan Amendment.
Council discussed the Pierhead Line, estuary rezoning, and the lack
of enforcement [of the Pierhead Line] by the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers.
John Beery, Alameda, stated the Corps of Engineers looks at each case
on a case-by-case basis; he has tried two years to put in a marina
to keep business in Alameda; the process takes so long, waiting is
not worthwhile to most businesses; he owns land and would like to
improve area because some businesses are already moving to Oakland;
the boat show will move to Oakland unless he can put the marina in.
Gary Thomas, representing Mariner Square & Associates, stated in the
staff analysis, the statement is made that the General Plan assumes
no development in the area because there is nothing shown in a
diagram beyond the Pierhead Line; the General Plan speaks of Mariner
Square's preservation of existing mix of water-related uses and he
would submit that the General Plan allows exactly what Mariner Square
& Associates are trying to do; he finds nowhere in the General Plan,
other than in the glossary that there is language that construction
or remodeling cannot be done beyond the Pierhead Line; the marina
gives access, water visibility and good views; that is open space
according to the General Plan; the report analysis states a finding
cannot be made for a use permit [that favorably relates to the
General Plan], therefore this project [building outboard of the
Pierhead Line] is denied; however, there is already construction
beyond the Pierhead Line; the Chief in charge of the Regulatory
Office, Corps of Engineers, told him the Corps does not have a
formal policy about regulatory construction to the Pierhead Line but
October 15, 1991
19
looks at each situation on a case-by-case basis and their concern is
any obstruction to navigation, and stated he would would look upon
the Plan favorably with perhaps some mitigation.
Councilman Arnerich inquired if Mr. Thomas passed the information on
to the Planning staff and Mr. Thomas replied affirmatively.
Richard Krinks, Alameda, Mariner Square property manager, stated
Mariner Square currently has about 35 businesses, e.g., boatyard,
sailmaker, and over 400 employees; the boat show would like to stay
in Alameda; brokers stated they would move if marina cannot be put
in; with a better marina, more businesses would come in with more
revenue; and requested Council approve Appeal.
* * * * *
Councilman Arnerich moved to extend the meeting past 11:00 p.m.
Councilmember Roth seconded the motion which was carried by unanimous
voice vote - 5.
Councilmember Camicia stated it is clear from the speakers that there
are less berths; the solution is simple: remove the Use Permit
condition that states building cannot be done past the Pierhead Line,
and allow building to the Harbor line; a General Plan Amendment
should be requested, which should only take six months; and inquired
if Mr. Beery is unhappy with obtaining a General Plan Amendment.
Mr. Beery replied he would like to cooperate, however he would like
to be able to start submitting plans to the Corps and BCDC.
President Withrow inquired if the issue of the General Plan Amendment
could be made contingent.
The City Attorney replied Council could consider a blanket approval
subject to obtaining a General Plan Amendment; if that is done,
perhaps the General Plan Amendment may be at the same time of the
Corps' approval.
Councilmember Camicia stated he would amend his motion accordingly.
Councilman Arnerich discussed the amount of berthing with Mr. Beery.
Councilmember Camicia clarified his motion is to remove Condition No.
1 [New docks shall not be permitted to encroach beyond the U.S.
Pierhead Line.] to Use Permit 91-167; and allow Applicant to build
to the Harbor Line, subject to obtaining a General Plan Amendment.
Councilmember Lucas seconded the motion.
Councilmember Lucas stated she would like to clarify that Mr. Beery
will not be held up; she would rather give an unqualified
unconditional approval, and after approval from the Corps, the
General Plan Amendment can be done.
The City Manager stated he believes the City would be on a parallel
path with the Corps so if the Corps makes some adjustments, the City
October 15, 1991
would be in contact with them and would reflect that.
President Withrow stated he does not know why the General Plan must
take six months.
Councilmember Lucas stated Council must make clear to staff that this
is the kind of Application Council wants to support, as it is
necessary and desireable for Alameda's economy.
Councilman Arnerich stated he also does not know why [the General
Plan] must take six months and perhaps Planning staff can give this
matter top priority.
Councilmember Roth stated a reason the Plan takes so long is because
of legal requirements concerning hearings, etc.; one problem in
rezoning estuary is lack of staff and time; and inquired if Mr.
Beery would subsidize a staff person to concentrate on the issue.
Mr. Beery stated he would take the leadership to raise money from
others, as well as himself, for a staff person.
Councilmember Camicia clarified the staff person would be completely
impartial.
Mr. Beery agreed, adding the City would hire the person; he would
like only to have opportunity to input along with others.
Councilmember Camicia stated he would make that part of his motion.
Councilmember Lucas stated if Council wants to talk about estuary
rezoning and having developers contribute to staff time for that,
that should be a separate agenda item, not part of current motion.
The City Attorney agreed.
Councilmember Camicia stated he would withdraw that portion of his
motion; his motion essentially upholds the Appeal; and reiterated
the motion removes Condition No. 1 [New docks shall not be permitted
to encroach beyond the U.S. Pierhead Line.] to Use Permit 91-167;
and, allow Applicant to build to the Harbor Line, with a General Plan
Amendment.
Councilmember Lucas requested the matter of the Applicant subsidizing
a staff person be agendized for consideration.
The motion carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.
91-740 Resolution No. "Approving a Mortgage Credit Certificate
Program for the City of Alameda and Authorizing Execution of an
Agreement with the County of Alameda to Establish and Administer Said
Program." Not heard.
At the request of the City Manager, this item was removed from the
Agenda.
91-741 Resolution No. 12166 Consenting to Inclusion of City's
October 15, 1991
2
Territory in the County of Alameda County Service Area for Lead
Abatement and Authorizing Execution of Joint Powers Agreement and
Related Documents with Alameda County. (Councilmember Camicia)
John Shepherd, Assistant Planning Director, Alameda County, noted the
Center for Disease Control lowered standard for lead poisoning in
United States from 25 to 10 micrograms per deciliter, recommends
universal screening for all children below age six because this is
considered most common and societally devastating disease affecting
children today, and also recommends turning from testing to
prevention; and stated the program has great emphasis on local
control, and entities can opt out of the program.
To Councilmember Roth's question on testing children, Mr. Shepherd
explained three developments at State level, a recent settlement on a
lawsuit, and two pieces of legislation, which affect the issue of
testing.
In response to Councilmember Lucas, Mr. Shepherd stated a primary
reason for not testing previously in great number, is that children
going back into a leaded environment after removal of lead and metals
from their systems will be repoisoned and at a higher level; the
control of lead poison is by environmental remedies.
Councilmember Lucas stated one concern is whether or not Alameda
County coming into this matter makes sense, when perhaps the issue
should be addressed on a much larger scale.
Mr. Shepherd stated there is a general understanding on the State
level that locals are being looked to for implementation of program.
Larry Schulz, Alameda, stated this is an ethical issue; no question
would be raised about a mutual aid arrangement for fire protection;
this is a life and death issue, and encouraged Council to accept that
and do justice.
Janet McAfee, Alameda, stated she is a State vocational counselor;
urged Council vote to participate in the program; the Center for
Disease Control has cited lead poisoning as one of most common
environmental diseases affecting young children in our society;
described some results; stated other countries are ahead of the
United States; $10 is a small price to pay for health of children,
and compared to costs saved from affects later, is minimal.
Claudia Albano, Aide to Alameda Supervisor Don Perata, stated the
whole program is based upon concerns the cities have; noone will
argue there is a lead poisoning problem in our community; and urged
Council join the lead abatement district.
Councilmember Camicia stated the report notes the City can leave the
Joint Powers if the $10 assessment changes.
Doug Linney, Alameda, stated the lead poisoning issue has been going
on for a long time; if anything, the proposal might be too moderate
in its approach to this serious problem; proposal should be fully
supported; $10.00 is nothing compared to cost to community of
October 15, 1991
affects of lead poisoning in children.
Councilmember Lucas inquired how problems of asbestos and radon can
be addressed, to which Mr. Linney replied the problems must be
addressed on a program-by-program basis; the lead abatement program
is an opportunity to join a program at a moderate cost.
Susan Cummins, Pediatrician, Epidemiologist, California Department of
Health Services, stated she works in State's Childhood Lead Poisoning
Prevention Program; childhood lead poisoning is the most common
environmental health problem affecting California's children; unless
there are resources to abate problem, children identified with the
health problem will have no resources to turn to; if payment is not
made through the program, people will pay in other ways; and urged
support of the program.
Jenise Porter, Alameda, urged Council participate in lead abatement
program; the health or life of a child, against $10 per year, makes
clear that people need to join together in the program.
John Scott Graham, Alameda, stated the federal government will need
to pursue chemical companies and paint manufacturers; he favors
removing lead and asbestos from buildings safely, but is concerned
about funding.
To Councilman Arnerich's questions, Mr. Shepherd responded the
program is not a County program, implementation is by a Joint Powers
Authority (JPA), on which the County and each City would be
represented; JPA initially would use County staff, however it could
use City staff, private contractors, or whomever it chose; money is
collected with property tax bill, does not go to County but to JPA;
the program will not lose money; for the first three years, $10 will
be collected; if the JPA votes to exceed that amount after three
years, Council would have the right to opt out of the program; in
addition, every year thereafter, the City can opt out of the program
if it wishes; the five units and 93 testings are low but realistic
for a new program hiring staff and organizing; concerning the
subject of certification of workers and painters: no painters are
qualified to do the work in Alameda, or elsewhere, at this current
time; however painters, with 3 or 4 days training, could be
well-qualified.
To Councilmember Lucas's comments, Mr. Shepherd stated he would not
disagree with a national education program; however, that program
needs to begin at a local level; regarding only five units the first
year: in addition, 6200 homes and homeowners will be advised,
education/medical referral will reach 200r, commented on case
management and environmental screening and on affects of the
programs.
Councilmember Roth stated he is concerned; however, he feels there
is a balance, a chance to opt out, an opportunity for input through
the Joint Powers and most importantly, an investment in the future;
although he had been against the program, he will support trying it;
if it does not work, the City can opt out.
October 15, 1991
Councilmember Camicia suggested perhaps the concerns of
Councilmembers Lucas and Arnerich can be addressed if a statement is
made that there will be no increase in cost.
Councilman Arnerich stated the people that will be paying for the
program are the people in the older homes; why cannot everyone pay;
and he would like the City to take and administer the funds.
Councilmember Lucas stated education is a national program;
education of contractors should be on a statewide basis; eventually
funds will be needed to abate the problem in the homes, but first
there must be the education and testing.
President Withrow stated he must support the program; given the
magnitude of the issue, $10 per year is a small price to pay; it is
a small start.
Councilmember Camicia moved the resolution and added a stipulation
that if, during the first three years, the assessment rate of $10 is
increased, the City will withdraw from membership.
Councilmember Roth seconded, with a condition that Council receive an
agendized annual report [during the first three years].
The motion was carried by the following voice vote: Ayes:
Councilmembers Camicia, Roth and President Withrow - 3. Noes:
Councilmembers Arnerich and Lucas - 2. Absent: None.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA
91-742 John Scott Graham, Alameda, stated one million teenagers in
the United States have AIDS; schools and churches do not teach
children about safe sex, and implied City government could do so.
NEW BUSINESS AND UNFINISHED BUSINESS
91-743 Vice Mayor Lucas requested that a five-percent pay cut for the
three appointed City Officials be agendized on the November 5, 1991,
Council Meeting.
91-744 Councilmember Camicia stated the Recreation Commission will be
submitting a recommendation that Buena Vista Park be renamed Chuck
Corica Park; although he has disagreed with certain methods and
approachs of former Mayor Corica, he has a respect for Mr. Corica's
years of work and commitment, but does not believe Buena Vista Park
should be renamed for him; he has a list of suggestions he would
like to have sent back to the appropriate boards and commissions for
return to Council at some point, therefore requests the Recreation
Commission hold the renaming of Buena Vista in abeyance as he has
another suggestion: and he submitted the following proposals for
consideration:
Buena Vista Park: Rename Charles Gonsalves Park after Congressional
Medal of Honor winner;
Municipal Golf Complex: Name Chuck Corica Golf Complex;
October 15, 1991
New Golf building, or Clubhouse Memorial Road: Name after Norma
Arnerich;
New Library: Name Lois Hanna Free Library;
New Bureau of Electricity Building: Name after William McCall;
Park/Otis Senior Housing: Name George Beckam/Lloyd Hurwitz Senior
Housing;
Independence Plaza: Rename Anne Diament Plaza;
Swim Center: Name Emma Hood Swim Center;
Shoreline Park: Name Fred Cooper Shoreline Park;
New baseball diamond: Dick Bartell Field [which will also need
approval of Peralta College Board];
Corporation Yard or some better solution: Mark Hanna Corporation
Yard;
New Streets: Add all past Mayors and Councilmembers not already
honored to the list;
and noted the current Council is omitted.
ADJOURNMENT
President Withrow adjourned the meeting at 12:35 a.m.
Respectfully submitted,
g-4e-e
DIANE B. FELSCH, CMC
City Clerk
The agenda for this meeting was posted 72 hours in advance.
October 15, 1991