Loading...
1987-10-20 Regular CC Minutes29 REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ALAMEDA HELD TUESDAY OCTOBER 20, 1987 The meeting convened at 7:35 p.m. (at the conclusion of the Closed Session to discuss the City of Alameda v. Mitcheom, and the meeting of the Community Improvement Commission) with President Corica presiding. The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Councilmember Camicia. Reverend Robert Keller gave the invocation. ROLL CALL - Present: Councilmembers Camicia, Haugner, Monsef, Thomas, and President Corica - 5. Absent: None. MINUTES Councilmember Haugner noted the title "Mr." should be omitted with reference to Carroll Harrington, and the title "Dr." used, and Councilmember Thomas noted that the name of Commissioner Rasch was incorrectly spelled. Councilmember Monsef made a motion to approve the minutes of the Regular Council Meeting of October 6, 1987, with corrections as noted. Councilmember Thomas seconded the motion and it was carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. President Corica announced that Item Nos. 19 (Resolution) and 21 (Introduction of Ordinance) have been pulled from the Agenda. (See 87-727 and 87-728) 87-727 "Amending Section 2 of Resolution No. 5472 relating to the hours of parking meter enforced operation." Pulled from Agenda. 87-728 "Amending the Alameda Municipal Code by amending Chapter 3, Article 6 of Title XVII thereof relating to the hours of parking meter enforced operation." Pulled from Agenda. CONSENT CALENDAR Councilmember Thomas stated regarding Bills, Item No. 1-I, that the City Manager has made a change which should be noted for the public. The City Manager confirmed that check no. 29042 to Sally Swanson & Associates, is to be held over to the next meeting. Councilmember Thomas moved adoption of the Consent Calendar with the one correction. Councilmember Haugner seconded the motion and it was carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. All items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk. REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS *87-729 From Finance Director on City's Investment Portfolio as of September 30, 1987. Accepted. *87-730 From Public Works Director recommending acceptance of work by Fanfa, Incorporated, for closure of Doolittle Landfill Site, P.W. No. 12-86-39. Accepted. *87-731 From Public Works Director recommending acceptance of the subdivision improvements for Parcel Map 5010 (417-419 Lincoln Avenue) and release of improvement bond. Accepted. *87-732 From Public Works Director recommending acceptance of the subdivision improvements for Tract 4270 (Central Court) and release of improvement bond. Accepted. RESOLUTIONS *87-733 Resolution No. 11318 "Rejecting all bids and approving negotiation on the open market for construction of a new recreation building and related improvements at Franklin Park." Adopted. *87-734 Resolution No. 11319 "Awarding contract to Trans-Bay Construction, Inc. for construction of new rest rooms at Lincoln Park, and authorizing execution thereof." Adopted. *87-735 Resolution No. 11320 "Accepting Easement Agreement with Bay Harbor Venture for access to an existing public utilities easement at the southeast corner of Aughinbaugh Way and Sheffield Road and authorization thereof." Adopted. *87-736 Resolution No. 11321 "Authorizing appropriation of additional funds for Constitution Way, Phase II, P.W. No. 5-86-11." Adopted. BILLS *87-737 A List of Claims certified by the City Manager as correct, was approved in the amount of $1,702,444.97. It was noted that the check to Swanson and Associates listed in the report was withdrawn. RETURN TO THE REGULAR AGENDA WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS 87-738 From Gordon Christopherson, 2807 Marina Drive, background information on airport noise abatement. [See Paragraph No. 87-739 for discussion on Christopherson's communications.] submitting both Mr. 31 87-739 From Gordon Christopherson, 2807 Marina Drive, submitting solutions to airport noise abatement. Mr. Christopherson addressed the staff's analysis of his letters; discussed flight patterns in detail; and stated he believes the analysis of Runway 33 is flawed, and that there is not enough air space in the proposed radials. Councilmember Thomas stated she believes the tower on Bay Farm Island is a hazard, and staff needs to confirm whether the flights are being diverted or not; stated the letter from the Port of Oakland that was in the packet for PD 81-2 (Harbor Bay Business Park) states that the tower height might not comply with FAR height limitations and they request this might be a condition of the approval; and stated she previously requested information about whether the condition has been complied with and what the height limitation is. President Corica stated there should be a report in writing from the City Manager as to exactly what has happened regarding the matter. Councilmember Haugner moved acceptance of both communications from Mr. Christopherson. Councilmember Camicia seconded the motion and it was carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. 87-740 From Thomas Delmore, 2062 Pacific Avenue, concerning a neighborhood problem. Mr. Delmore stated he needs clarification of the letter he received from the Public Works Director; stated the building at 1625 Willow Street has always been a garage, and requested the City act on what he believes is clearly a violation. Paul Roberts, 1621 Willow Street, stated it was definitely a garage when he moved next door about 3 years ago but since then, appliances, kitchen and bathroom have been put in; there are people living in it; parking has been made difficult; and the place is not being kept up. President Corica inquired if the permits requested indicated the alterations that were taking place. The Public Works Director reviewed the permit dates and requests which included stair repairs, reroofing and other such items, noted it could have been converted to a single family dwelling without a permit, and that the Sanborn Map in 1972 indicates a dwelling and a separate address, although the building card does not show it was ever converted. Mr. Roberts asked clarification of the recommendation to which the Public Works Director explained that the staff has two choices of action, 1) to rely on the Sanborn Map indicating there was a family dwelling and approve the permit application based upon upgrading the structure; or 2) proceed on cards only, which show no conversion, and state this is really a permit to add a single family dwelling to a garage which would not be allowed under today's standards; that the recommendation is to utilize the information on the Sanborn Map and treat it as an upgrade. President Corica stated he had a problem since there is nothing in the building records to indicate it was converted to a single family dwelling, he believes it would be setting a precedent that would permit people to try to bypass the law. Councilmember Thomas inquired whether the owner lives on the property and requested information as to whether or not he has paid for a business license, to which the City Manager responded that he would obtain the information. Councilmember Haugner stated she has seen Mr. Delmore's property, it is nicely cared for as are other houses on the street, but the house in question, is not, and the garage looks as though it is meant to be inhabited. President Corica inquired if it is inhabited now, to which Mr. Roberts replied that it is. President Corica stated Council needs more information on the matter and perhaps information could be provided from the neighbors as to how long it has been occupied. Councilmember Thomas inquired if this could, potentially, come under the amnesty program, to which the Public Works Director stated it possibly could. Councilmember Monsef moved that the communication be accepted with the understanding that there will be research regarding it, information as requested by the Councilmembers will be provided, perhaps a canvass of the area to find out more information about what has happened at the property in question in the past, and return to the matter at the next Council meeting. Councilmember Camicia seconded the motion and it was carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. 87-741 A petition from Heritage Homeowners' Association requesting the removal of an abandoned shack located on property between Heritage and Lighthouse Cove Communities. The Public Works Director reviewed the matter, stated the building was inspected by the Fire Marshall and Chief Building Inspector, has not been found to be a building that can be demolished under the abatement for dangerous buildings and is not a fire hazard; there is no gas or electrical service to the building; the "attractive nuisance" aspect could be cured by putting up a door or boarding up the opening; but the building does not violate any requirement of the City at this time. President Corica noted that inasmuch as the cost of boarding up the building would be less than $100, perhaps the Council should direct the Public Works Director to write the owner and tell her that Council wants her to board it up. 33 Councilmember Thomas suggested that the homeowners in the community discuss the matter with the owner and perhaps help her to take it down; boarding it up might make it an even more attractive nuisance to children; the owner will suffer the monetary loss and neighbors would benefit and they should offer to help take it down. Councilmember Haugner agreed with Councilmember Thomas that children could get in easily, there is a large opening which is a menace, and if the neighbors can handle the situation acceptably, that is fine, but if not, then the City should. Councilmember Monsef stated he believes Council should take a position and made a motion that Council should notify the owner expressing its concern, give 30 days to tear down the building, and if it isn't done, Council will take action. Councilmember Camicia seconded the motion. President Corica stated it should be conveyed to the owner that Council is concerned with the possibility of a small child getting in, or someone getting into mischief there, and he believes the owner might respond to that. Councilmember Thomas stated she would like to include in the letter that Council requests that the owner and the homeowners try to work something out so that the City does not have to take any action, and copies should be sent to the homeowners. On the call for the question, the Motion was carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. APPEALS 87-742 Appeal of Planning Board's decision to approve Variance 87-11. The property is located at 608 Waterview Isle and is zoned R-1Yf5, One Family Residence District, with a special front yard depth of five feet. Applicant: Jay and Joy Davis. Appellant: Dan and Carmen Lasar, Walter and Camille Galyk. President Corica directed that the Appeal must be addressed strictly on the record that is before Council which was acted upon by the Planning Board. The Planning Director explained the background of the Appeal. Councilmember Thomas stated it is this Council's first Appeal and requested City Attorney give standards that apply in an Appeal. The City Attorney explained the Council's judicial responsibility in an Appeal. Councilmember Haugner stated she has been in Mr. and Mrs. Galyk's backyard and looked at the site, and talked to one of the parties. The City Attorney stated it should be avoided in the future, but but if something different was said than what is on the record, then that should be disclosed during the hearing and it would become part of the evidence, and if it is considered significant, that might be reason to send it back to the Planning Board. Councilmember Monsef stated that he too had seen the property between the time of the decision and before the Appeal. Carmen Lasar, 612 Waterview Isle, stated she represents the neighbors to ask that Council deny the Variance granted by the Planning Board; that Planning Board member, Linda Pritchard, sold applicants their residence and voted for the variance with other members of the Board in August, and a conflict-of-interest report was filed with the Fair Political Practices Commission; and requested Council deny Planning Board's decision, and refund the fees necessary to bring this to Council's attention. President Corica noted that the Davises had submitted revised plans between decisions of the Planning Board. Camille Galyk, 604 Waterview Isle, requested Council reverse the Planning Board's decision and stated she believes the evidence does not support the Board's findings; the findings do not support a finding of exceptional or extraordinary circumstances to support the Variance; the finding that other property owners have similar additions is not correct because neighbors have only patios that are enclosed on one or two sides. Sharon Machado, 605 Waterview Isle, stated the subject house was run down and neighbors were happy when the Davises moved in because they have taken care of the property so well; do not believe the variance is unreasonable, many people in the neighborhood make similar improvements, and the plans for the home are well done; and read notes and comments from neighbors in favor of the improvement. Lance Russum, 2500 Santa Clara, representing appellants, stated that with the proposed addition there would still be 14 feet from the deck to the shoreline while the Lasar property has only five feet from their existing porch, the Galyks from their deck have an 8 foot difference, so there is not the interference as claimed; when the Board approved the request, it was because they had been out to review the area, which they had not previously done; there is no blocking of sunlight, the Lasar residence may have some impact on the Davis residence; a Galyk tree on the border near the water already casts a shadow; the Lasar residence protrudes further toward the lagoon and has more adverse affect than the Davis residence; the exceptional and extraordinary circumstance is the expectation of an addition at the time of purchase and denial of an addition when others have theirs; that a number of variances have been granted to neighbors. Councilmember Monsef stated he believes there is additional evidence Council should review; that perhaps the matter should be referred back to the Planning Board. 35 Councilmember Thomas stated she had questions on the findings and suggested perhaps Planning Board might clarify the matter. Councilmember Haugner questioned the possibility that there could be a compromise. Councilmember Camicia, following discussion, made a motion to table the matter for two weeks with the understanding that the neighbors and their attorneys get together and if they cannot resolve the matter, then Council can address the matter. Councilmember Haugner seconded the motion and it was carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 87-743 From President, Social Service Human Relations Board, requesting a joint meeting with the City Council. Councilmember Camicia stated that Mayor Dave Karp, City of San Leandro would also like to have a joint meeting with Council and requested the matter be explored. Councilmember Camicia made a motion to accept the report and recommendation and it was carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. 87-744 From Chairman, Charter Review Committee, submitting final report on Committee's proposal. (Note: At the Regular Council Meeting of August 4th, Council "tabled" this item until October.) Lil Arnerich, 3275 Encinal Avenue, expressed concern over future Councils and future selections; and believes the City should solve the problem of filling vacancies. Charles Tillman, member of the Charter Review Committee, stated the presentation of the Committee would give the voters the right to select the person to sit on the Council. Councilmember Haugner stated she doesn't know if people are aware of what the recommendation is. President Corica read the recommendation portion of the communication from the Committee that the Charter be amended to state "The term of an elective officer shall expire at the date of any election for which an elected officer files nomination papers applicable to a different elective charter office." President Corica stated the recommendation would not affect him personally because of the date of the end of his term, however, two members of Council would be the only ones affected as they would need to resign to run for office, while the other members would not, as the end of their terms would correspond to the beginning of the mayoral term. Councilmember Haugner stated that sometimes it is best to do nothing; that the next in line by vote should be the first one considered but there are difficulties, i.e., someone who gets very 36 few votes; and appreciates Committee's diligent consideration. Mr. Tillman stated the Committee explored all contingencies involved. Councilmember Camicia stated he doesn't believe it possible to always make all people happy; believes Council should stay with the process and realize it is not always going to work but Council gets elected to make decisions; and the committee did a good job in exploring options. Councilmember Thomas stated that she thinks Council must make the voters happy, believes the voters should decide, and the matter should be placed on the ballot. President Corica stated two people on Council will be discriminated against because their terms do not coincide with the Mayor's term. Councilmember Monsef stated the Committee recommendation was defeated by the voters when [in November, 1986] Proposition G was defeated. Councilmember Thomas stated it had been previously stated that the Committee might review other portions of the Charter and perhaps that should be done. President Corica stated that if the recommendation is to be put on the ballot, he suggested the alternative of accepting the person with the highest vote, be placed on also. President Corica suggested Council can make a decision right now or accept the report, keep the committee intact and if there are other items in the Charter to be reviewed, they can be addressed. Councilmember Camicia made a motion to accept the report, take no action on it, keep the Committee functioning, and at some point ask them to look at some other things. President Corica suggested Council have a joint meeting with the committee, to express concerns about the Charter. Councilmember Camicia added the proposed joint meeting into the motion. Councilmember Haugner seconded the motion and it was carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. 87-745 From City Manager submitting Program Performance Review. Charles Tillman 2415 Roosevelt Drive, directed a number of questions regarding the reporting on funds, the business tax revenue, the auditor's review of the books, and other matters to which the City Manager responded. Councilmember Camicia stated he believes this is simply a report of the goals and a review of whether or not those goals have been met. The City Manager reviewed the procedure of setting objectives and 37 reviewing progress. President Corica stated he appreciates the time and effort put into the program but he will also talk to others within the departments to find their opinions and concerns, and get the overall picture. In response, the City Manager stated concerns regarding President Corica's proposal, primarily Labor Relations and responsibilities under the Charter; and stated a forum would be good. President Corica stated he would like to talk to first-line personnel for purposes of information. Councilmember Camicia agreed, but stated it would liot come under this heading. [Program Performance Review] Councilmember Thomas agreed the idea was good, but agreed with Councilmember Camicia that it should not be done in the context of this line item; stated that what is important regarding this report, is not only what is in it, but what is not included; she would like to read the reports; that more detailed facts would make the report more meaningful; and there are other goals she would like to see. The City Manager stated Council approved what was submitted to the departments, and that the previous Council had approved the goals that are covered in the Program Performance Review. Councilmember Thomas stated Council had to review and accept a two year budget after two months in office, has had difficulty obtaining reports, there are some she would like to see; and she believes there should be a standardized training policy for all levels of employees. Councilmember Monsef made a motion to accept the report. Councilmember Camicia seconded the motion and it was carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. 87-746 From Police Chief regarding Parking Lot W. President Corica reviewed the background and action taken concerning Mrs. Ullner's complaints regarding Parking Lot W. President Corica stated the report notes that there are a couple of corners in that lot that are poorly lit to which the City Manager stated staff would check on the lighting. Councilmember Haugner does not believe the suggestion in the report that Mrs. Ullner move, should be considered, as she has lived many years in her very old Alameda home. Councilmember Thomas proposed the lot be chained off at night. Councilmember Camicia suggested the merchants be consulted on the matter. 38 Councilmember Monsef made a motion that the lot be chained and locked at night between 9:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m., and more lights added, on a trial basis. Councilmember Haugner seconded the motion. Following discussion regarding parking lot hours, Councilmember Monsef amended his motion by changing the hours of closure to the hours between 10:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m., without consultation with Webster Street merchants. Councilmember Thomas seconded the amended motion, which carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Councilmembers Camica, Monsef, Thomas and President Corica - 4. Noes: Councilmember Haugner - 1. Absent: None. 87-747 From Public Works Director on status of structural evaluation of the Alameda Theater. The Public Works Director reviewed the matter and the recommendation to require the owners to provide an inspection to show any imminent danger of falling concrete from certain areas, and notify the owner that no greater intensive use of the building will be permitted. Councilmember Haugner inquired if the Committee to Save the Theater has indicated any further action toward their thoughts regarding future uses of the theater. Christopher Hanson, 543 Palace Court, responded that the Committee is continuing discussion with the owner, but had been awaiting the results of the structural report. Councilmember Haugner made a motion to accept the report and recommendation. Councilmember Camicia stated he would like more regular reports from the theater Committee and seconded the motion, which was carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. RESOLUTIONS 87-748 Resolution No. 11322 "Adopting Plans and Specifications and calling for bids for Santa Clara Avenue Sanitary Sewer extension, P.W. No. 9-87-22." (Held over from October 6th Council Meeting) Adopted. Eleanor Wylie, 1402 Santa Clara Avenue, stated that the sewer has been a problem for years, and questioned the fact that she has been paying taxes for years for sewer maintenance, when it is not a City sewer, and stated she does not believe that she should be required to make payments as though this is new construction; agreeable to paying for lateral on her property, but cannot pay for the main sewer. Following discussion of details on when the original sewer was installed, by whom, how payments could be made, what arrangements could be made to spread the payments for the owners, etc., Councilmember Camicia made a motion to direct staff to investigate the matter further, and propose a solution. Councilmember Haugner seconded the motion and it was carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. 39 The City Manager stated that the purpose of the resolution is to accept the plans and specifications and go out to bid, perhaps that could be done, and it could be found what the costs are, and then come back to Council regarding who is to pay for it. Councilmember Camicia stated he would include that in the motion. The motion was carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. 87-749 Resolution No. 11323 "Appropriating $119,540.00 from the General Fund Reserve for revegetation of the Doolittle Landfill Site and authorizing an agreement with Environmental Resources, Inc. and Eljumaily and Butler Associates (ERI/EBA) for engineering services of the Landfill Gas Management System, and authorizing the Public Works Director to negotiate in the open market to obtain the services of a Landscape Contractor to perform hydroseeding of the site." Adopted. Fred Scullin, 1120 Chestnut Street, stated he hopes the Council will not pass this matter tonight, has heard that houses are going to be built on Mt. Trashmore; states that only testing the gas is required before deciding whether or not to proceed further; and added that the company designated to handle the matter has not proved it is qualified to do it. President Corica stated the site is in violation of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District at present. [Due to the Calderon Bill and the change of exemption under the provisions of Regulation 8, Rule 34, Section 111.5] Councilmember Haugner stated she does not believe Council has any option. Councilmember Monsef made a motion to adopt the resolution. Councilmember Thomas seconded the motion and it was adopted by unanimous voice vote - 5. 87-750 Resolution No. . "Proposing Noise Abatement Procedures at Oakland International Airport." (Written Communications, Item Nos. 2 and 3) (Held over from 9-1 and 9-15 Council Meetings) Held over. President Corica noted there have been meetings with the Port, have made some progress, but perhaps this is the time to pass the resolution. Gordon Christopherson, 2807 Marina Drive, opposed adoption of the resolution at this time, stating it is too vague, there has not been enough research in the matter; believes the runway situation is not correctly presented; and is not a good solution. James Hackbarth, 3345 Washington Court, stated he believes everyone, the community, developers, Port of Oakland, and City, should just sit down and work out the problems; believes everybody is in this together, suggested Council assign someone to attend the noise abatement meetings so that no loopholes occur; and believes 40 there is no one-time solution, but there must be an ongoing process. President Corica inquired if he believes there is a negative factor involved in passing the resolution tonight. Mr. Hackbarth replied that it depends upon how much the City locks itself in with the resolution; that it must have an open end to change; if the Port lengthens Runway 33 and it turns out badly, the City will be locked in, so it should be rethought; and stated he does not know what affect it would have as there is no policing action, if R33 is extended and large aircraft are allowed to take off from there, it would enhance the problem instead of reducing it The City Manager commented that the condition for extension of the runway is that the Port would include the prohibitions now on 27R and 27L so heavier aircraft would not come off R33; and the alternative is all traffic on R29, which the City has tried to push previously. Mr. Hackbarth stated he believes the alternative to be an excellent suggestion as it would eliminate the problem completely. President Corica suggested Council not pass the resolution tonight, and try in some manner to make it a little stronger. Mr. Hackbarth stated any position of weakness right now will be a problem, and suggested the possibility of a trial basis for a certain number of months on an R33 extension and if it does not work, then stop it; noted that might not be a good suggestion as it might possibly soften the issue. Councilmember Haugner stated the resolution should be couched in the strongest terms possible, and moved the resolution be held two weeks to work on and strengthen the resolution. Councilmember Monsef seconded the motion. The motion was carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. 87-751 Resolution No. "Authorizing execution of agreement with Alameda County regarding provision of oversight responsibilities for emergency medical services." Adopted. Councilmember Monsef made a motion to adopt the resolution. Councilmember Camicia seconded the motion and it was carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. 87-752 Resolution No. 11325 "Opposing Corporate Takeovers." Councilmember Camicia made a motion to adopt the resolution. Councilmember Haugner seconded the motion and it was carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. 87-753 Resolution No. 11326 "Authorizing execution of a Grant 41 Agreement with the Alameda Unified School District for Woodstock Child Development Center window replacement and toddler program funding for fiscal year 1987-88." Adopted. Councilmember Camicia made a motion to adopt the resolution. Councilmember Thomas seconded the motion and it was carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. 87-754 Resolution No. 11327 "To review and consider approval of the Alameda County Solid Waste Management Plan and associated Negative Declaration." Adopted. Councilmember Camicia made a motion to adopt the resolution. Councilmember Haugner seconded the motion. The motion was carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. INTRODUCTION OF ORDINANCES 87-755 Ordinance No. N.S. "Amending the Alameda Municipal Code by adding Chapter 11 to Title XV thereof, regulating smoking in public places, restaurants, hotels, motels, and places of employment." Introduced. Dr. Rollin Odell, Jr., M.D., Merritt Hospital, Chairman of Smoking Action Coalition of Alameda County, a consortium of three health agencies, the American Lung Association, the American Heart Association and the American Cancer Society, encouraged Council to introduce the ordinance to protect rights of non-smokers to breathe while protecting the rights of smokers; that the ordinance is protective to smokers, non-punitive to non-smokers and is not expensive to implement; read from the Surgeon-General's report regarding devasting effects of side-stream smoke including 8000 lung cancers per year; is a public health issue; and as a radiation oncologist has treated many cancers from persons in Alameda, which this ordinance could help control. Carolyn Bovat, Mayor of Clayton, California, Coordinator of the Smoking Action Coalition, 310 Summit, 5th Floor, Oakland, stated there are 116 cities in California which have adopted ordinances; stated the ordinance is a very good one and is designed to be self-enforcing; urged Council to adopt it; stated Coalition would be happy to help, provide No Smoking signs; and has brochures that may be of assistance. Denice Kretchman, R.N., 346 Central Avenue, stated she is a clinical specialist dealing with cancer patients; that cancer problems begin at a young age; and it is important to work on something to educate people that smoking is a hazard and affects everyone; and believes the ordinance may help people to understand the hazard involved for non-smokers also. Dr. Robert I. Deutsch, 2059 CLinton Avenue, Respiratory Disease Specialist, Alameda Hospital; Smoking Action Coalition, works with those who have chronic bronchitis, is a Co-Director of the Respiratory Therapy Department since 1980 and is spokesperson for 2 his 500 -600 patients with respiratory diseases including asthma, chronic bronchitis, etc., as well as lung cancer, some of whom have problems as a result of harmful substances in tobacco smoke, now have their respiratory impairment considerably worsened by the smoke of others; that some persons must leave places of employment because of side - stream smoke; and would like these patients, who have problems that develop or are made worse by other person's smoke, considered. Leonard Casey, 1377 Versailles, supports the ordinance; believes it is very important; does not go to restaurants in Alameda, but goes where there are smoking regulations. Vi Morris, 601C Willow Street, thanked Council; stated she has had a heart attack and throat surgery which are irritated by second -hand smoke; filed petition with the City for non - smoking sections in restaurants; without smoking ordinance, she has lead restricted life; with the ordinance, she will be able to dine out and also to live a more fruitful life. James Hanecak, 2110 Eagle, stated if non - smoking sections are not adequate for people, then the air pollution outside the restaurant would not be good either; he would prefer to quit smoking on his own; cars are not eliminated and yet there are a lot of deaths by cars; that smoking is an American heritage even though it makes people sick; and questioned who started the non - smoking in Council Chamber to which President Corica stated the matter was first requested by a high school girl. Fred Scullin, 1120 Chestnut, stated the earlier the age a person smokes, the more likely to get lung cancer; supports the ordinance as it may save lives, there is much death and disease from smoking; the financial cost is heavy to handle; is particularly interested in youth, and therefore is opposed also to the dispensing machines that do not allow any supervision of children who use them to get cigarettes, and he would like to see Alameda be a test case in banning cigarette vending machines; and is opposed to the illuminated billboards on Park Street promoting cigarettes,. President Corica stated he has received numerous letters and phone calls in favor of the ordinance. Councilmember Monsef stated the City Attorney drafted a good ordinance, that many ordinances were reviewed, appreciates the medical profession coming out and utilizing their expertise, and moved that the ordinance be introduced. Councilmember Thomas seconded the motion and it was carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. NEW BUSINESS 87 -756 Consideration of appointment to Civil Service Board. President Corica nominated Raymond Anderson for the position of Civil Service Board member. Councilmember Camicia seconded the 43 motion and it was carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. 87-757 Consideration of appointment to Social Service Human Relations Board. President Corica nominated Michael Richards. Councilmember Camicia seconded the motion and it was carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. 87-758 Councilmember Thomas requested public information guidelines be scheduled for the November 3rd Council Meeting. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, GENERAL 87-759 Patricia Flood, 1636 Lincoln, Past President of Western Rottweiler Owners, expressed three areas of concern with the current proposed vicious animal ordinance as follows: 1) inquired, if vicious dogs are defined under Article 8, what is the purpose of "Potentially Vicious Animals?" 2) inquired which dogs are addressed under Licensing -- all dogs in the City or dogs that are already on the books that are known to be vicious, and 3) recommended that another area of the dog be used for tattooing, such as inside the rear leg, instead of in the mouth; and stated that the Animal Shelter person she talked to had no formal or special training to test dogs, and if the Potentially Vicious Animals definition is used, every dog that comes in will be tested as every breed she researched in the American Kennel Club book was originally bred for hunting, guarding or some such work, including Lhasa Apsos and Cocker Spaniels. 87-760 Jean Follrath, 1706 Moreland Drive, commented on the vicious animal ordinance and recommended that the City listen to opinion of experts in the matter. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 11:50 p.m. Respectfully submitted, fTh ' DIANE B. FELSCH City Clerk The agenda for this meeting was posted 72 hours in advance in accordance with the Brown Act.