Loading...
2023-03-21 Regular CC Minutes84 Regular Meeting Alameda City Council March 21, 2023 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING TUESDAY- - MARCH 21, 2023- -7:00 P.M. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft convened the meeting at 7:34 p.m. ROLL CALL - Present: Councilmembers Daysog, Herrera Spencer, Jensen, Vella, and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft – 5. [Note: Councilmember Vella was present via Zoom and left the meeting at 11:39 p.m.] Absent: None. AGENDA CHANGES None. PROCLAMATIONS, SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY AND ANNOUNCEMENTS (23-155) Proclamation Declaring March 2023 as Women’s History Month. (23-156) Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft read a proclamation regarding National Women in Construction Week. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (23-157) Brian Kennedy, Alameda, expressed concern about sanctuary cities. (23-158) Cecelia Venucci, Alameda, expressed concern about youth COVID-19 vaccine campaigns. CONSENT CALENDAR Councilmember Herrera Spencer requested final passage of the ordinance [paragraph no. 23- 164] be removed from the Consent Calendar for discussion. Vice Mayor Daysog moved approval of the remainder of the Consent Calendar. Councilmember Jensen seconded the motion, which carried by the following roll call vote: Councilmembers Daysog: Aye; Herrera Spencer: Aye; Jensen: Aye; Vella: Aye; and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye. Ayes: 5. [Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk preceding the paragraph number.] (*23-159) Minutes of the Special and Regular City Council Meetings Held on February 21, 2023. Approved. (*23-160) Ratified bills in the amount of $4,873,416.19. (*23-161) Recommendation to Approve Extending the Term for the Use of Remaining Approved Funds for the Tyler Munis Financial and Human Capital Management System Implementation Project through June 2025. Accepted. 85 Regular Meeting Alameda City Council March 21, 2023 (*23-162) Recommendation to Authorize the City Manager to Execute a Second Amendment for Five Years, in an Amount Not to Exceed $924,300, for a Total Compensation Not to Exceed $2,046,355, to Carlson, Barbee & Gibson, Inc. (CBG) for Civil Engineering Services to Replace Backbone Infrastructure in Alameda Point’s Reuse Area. Accepted. (*23-163) Recommendation to Accept Report on the Appointment of an Open Government Commission Member. Accepted. (23-164) Ordinance No. 3339, “Amending Alameda Municipal Code by Amending Article XIX (the Third-Party Food Delivery Services) of Chapter VI (Businesses, Occupations and Industries) to Continue Placing Limits on Charges Imposed by Third-Party Food Delivery Services; Define Core Product Offering to Mean a Service; and Other Amendments.” Finally passed. Councilmember Herrera Spencer stated first reading for the ordinance resulted in a split vote with herself and Councilmember Jensen voting against the matter; Council has subsequently received multiple emails from Dashers and people who use the delivery service; people have submitted correspondence changing their position to support the proposal; there appears to be confusion surrounding the matter; the City of San Francisco ordinance is agreeable to delivery services; the ordinance caps fees on the merchant side at the lowest level of services at 15% and changes cannot be made unless without a vote; Alameda has been capping both the consumer and business sides; San Francisco only capped fees applied to businesses and ended up in litigation; continuing down the proposed path may result in litigation and the expense of General Fund monies; the cap set by San Francisco helps businesses long-term, which Alameda’s proposal does not offer; expressed concern over Dasher delivery staff being properly paid; stated delivery services will have to come up with other ways to offset losses from the proposed ordinance; it is unfortunate that the City is not pursuing the path that would benefit businesses in the long-term; discussed public comments. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft requested clarification about the San Francisco ordinance and litigation. The City Attorney stated the San Francisco litigation occurred over a two-year period during COVID-19; the ordinance being litigated was a hard 15% cap with no ability to negotiate a higher range; the litigation was resolved by allowing merchants and delivery companies to negotiate higher ranges while maintaining the 15% cap; the prior Alameda ordinance was similar to San Francisco on the merchant side with a 15% hard cap with no ability to negotiate higher ranges; Alameda remains the first in the Nation to cap consumer fees; the proposed ordinance includes a liberalization in allowing for Consumer Price Index (CPI) increases; operators can apply for additional upward mobility with a demonstration of necessity; comments and concerns from Dashers were operating under a more restrictive ordinance the last three years; hopefully, the liberalization will be seen as an opportunity to increase, instead of decrease, earnings. In response to Councilmember Jensen’s inquiry, the City Attorney stated fees could be adjusted by CPI over the last three years and catch up for all three years. Councilmember Jensen inquired whether the charges have been locked in for the past three years, to which the City Attorney responded in the affirmative. 86 Regular Meeting Alameda City Council March 21, 2023 Councilmember Jensen further inquired whether charges will be locked in with CPI increases for the next two years, to which the City Attorney responded in the affirmative. Councilmember Jensen stated with the opportunity, providers would have increased fees; she believes it costs more than two dollars to deliver a hamburger from Scolari’s to someone on Bay Farm Island due to increases in related costs; she is opposed to the consumer fees being imposed; continuing to extend third party price controls has been identified as an effective way to ensure meals prepared by restaurants are available to residents unable to dine indoors or pickup orders; discussed the pandemic causing an inability to dine indoors; stated the inability to dine indoors should not automatically establish an economic barrier to pay a fee for delivery; customers who cannot dine in a restaurant do not all have a barrier to paying more than two dollars for delivery; there are other ways to address delivery options; discussed vulnerable, senior, low-income residents in Oakland having access to programs without imposing broad economic restrictions on a specific industry; stated many Alameda residents often order restaurant meals via delivery to avoid cooking, driving, or socializing in a restaurant; that she can afford to pay the delivery fee; it is not the City’s responsibility or role to determine the third- party delivery service charges for people who prefer to eat at home; she opposes the proposed ordinance. Councilmember Vella inquired whether a cost recovery mechanism is built into the ordinance, to which the City Attorney responded in the affirmative; stated the ordinance had and continues to have a fair return petition process to address cost recovery. Councilmember Vella stated there is a mechanism to address fees not reflective of actual costs; discussed price gouging during the pandemic; stated that she has a bigger concern about extreme price gouging resulting in the loss of money to restaurants; expressed concern for price gouging directed at consumers. Councilmember Vella moved approval of final passage of the ordinance. Vice Mayor Daysog stated that he will continue to support the ordinance; the ordinance is groundbreaking and Council should be proud; the ordinance eliminates excessive charges consumers are facing and limits charges faced by restaurants; the ordinance has been in place for two years; there is no evidence of a significant reduction in the availability in food delivery services; he understands the concerns being raised; DoorDash reported a revenue increases of 40% in the past year; recommended DoorDash’s corporate headquarters start looking out for employees providing delivery services; stated the ordinance is remarkable. Vice Mayor Daysog seconded the motion. Under discussion, Vice Mayor Daysog stated two adjustments have been made to the ordinance; there has been an adjustment for inflation and a process for administrative hearings; the ordinance is not inflexible; the ordinance is flexible related to the needs of food delivery service providers. Councilmember Herrera Spencer inquired whether staff has data related to the demographics of people who use food delivery services. The Economic Development Manager responded in the negative; stated staff could request the information from delivery companies. 87 Regular Meeting Alameda City Council March 21, 2023 Councilmember Herrera Spencer inquired whether staff knows the percentage of customers who are immuno-compromised. The Economic Development Manager responded in the negative; stated that he could research the information and provide if possible. Councilmember Herrera Spencer inquired whether the City currently has data regarding the socio-economic level of those using food delivery services. The Economic Development Manager responded staff has demographic information related to income, but not directly related to those who use food delivery services. Councilmember Herrera Spencer inquired whether staff has the percentage of food delivery service users who are seniors or unable to drive, to which the Economic Development Manager responded in the negative. Councilmember Herrera Spencer requested the process outlined by the City Attorney be clarified. The City Attorney stated staff envisions a similar process for fair return where a company must demonstrate it is not able to effectuate a constitutional, required rate of reasonable return under the limitations imposed by the ordinance; discussed an example of a basis for a hearing officer to provide an upward adjustment. Councilmember Herrera Spencer inquired what happens if the company has reported a loss of $1.36 million in the past year. The City Attorney responded it would depend on why the loss occurred; stated the questions are administrative in nature and would require case-by-case examination. Councilmember Herrera Spencer inquired whether the City’s position is that food delivery from a restaurant is similar to renting a house. The City Attorney responded the views are not identical, however, staff is utilizing the same framework; stated the constitutional limitations are similar. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she will continue to support the ordinance, which is the right thing to do; she is proud of the City; Council has received a flurry of emails from Dashers and delivery drivers; expressed support for DoorDash treating Dashers fairly and for the increase in profits being shared among Dashers; stated corporate entities should do right by the people who help create profitability for the company; means testing is not conducted in relation to charges for delivery services; demographic information seems intrusive, but could be important to consider when discussing protections; prior to limitations being in place, fees as high as 30% were being implemented; when she asked the estimated top fee for consumers, the response was that customer fees had not been considered; the community has people who are immunocompromised and not ready to dine in restaurants; the City cannot equate being immunocompromised with being financially secure enough to pay any delivery service fee; the City is attempting fairness on all sides; the ordinance kept restaurants in business; delivery services were performed just fine during the past two years; delivery services charging high fees 88 Regular Meeting Alameda City Council March 21, 2023 might causes restaurants to fail from absorbing fees or passing costs on to consumers; restaurants going out of business is bad for delivery services; restaurants are part of the fabric of the City; business districts want to keep all restaurants in business; the City can help look out for others, as well as support food delivery services; the actions is part of Council’s duty to the City; other cities are looking at what Alameda is doing and are ready to follow. Councilmember Herrera Spencer stated DoorDash reported an annual net loss of $1.36 million last year. Vice Mayor Daysog stated data he has seen shows revenues are up. Councilmember Herrera Spencer noted expenses must have increased as well. Councilmember Jensen stated that she appreciates the points related to profiteering and high charges; expressed support for protecting Alameda’s restaurants; stated that her opposition to the ordinance does not have to do with the portion of the ordinance which has been successfully adopted by many cities in the Bay Area; expressed concern over the part of the ordinance restricting consumers fees, which is first in the Nation; stated that she does not want to see price gouging for consumers; there are other consumer products and services where consumers pay a high price that could also be regulated; stated gasoline is a good example. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft noted the Governor might be doing something about the high prices of gasoline soon. On the call for the question, the motion carried by the following roll call vote: Councilmembers Daysog: Aye; Herrera Spencer: No; Jensen: No; Vella: Aye; and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye. Ayes: 3. Noes: 2. CONTINUED AGENDA ITEMS (23-165) Consider Directing Staff to Initiate the Process of Amending Alameda Municipal Code (AMC) Section 30-12.4, Location of Liquor Stores, Similar to Council's Amendment of AMC Section 30-12.2, Location of Bars in March, 2021. (Councilmember Herrera Spencer) Vice Mayor Daysog recused himself and left the dais. Expressed support for Webster Street having an ordinance related to liquor stores; stated getting rid of or changing the ordinance creates equality; expressed support for equality between Park and Webster Streets: Linda Asbury, West Alameda Business Association. Expressed support for the matter; expressed concern over the West End of Alameda being treated differently; urged Council to level the playing field: Tod Hickman. Councilmember Vella inquired whether there has been an update about the applicant referenced in the previous Council meeting discussion. The City Manager responded the Zoning Administrator approved a use permit for a grocery store at 1542 Webster Street on March 6th; stated the store is also allowed to sell liquor provided that the location also sells a variety of groceries as defined in the Municipal Code; the Use Permit approval is final; the next steps are obtaining building permits for any tenant 89 Regular Meeting Alameda City Council March 21, 2023 improvements and a liquor license. Councilmember Vella stated that she is satisfied with the update provided and does not support any changes to the regulations. Councilmember Herrera Spencer stated that she brought forth the referral for a business that was on Webster Street for over 40 years; the business found an alternative location, however, the new location fell within 1,000 feet of another liquor store; the referral attempts to allow the business to move across the street; selling groceries as well as liquor is not the business owners first choice; the referral goes beyond the single business; if the business had been in any other location in Alameda, there would not be an issue; expressed concern over the current Code and the City not treating districts similarly or fairly; stated the City has a problem that is worthy of sending to the Planning Board for review and future finalization from Council. Councilmember Herrera Spencer moved approval of having the referral heard by the Planning Board for a future return to Council. Councilmember Herrera Spencer stated there is a problem when ordinances pertain only to one street; she would like to level the playing field for all businesses in the City and treat all similarly. Councilmember Jensen stated it is unfortunate to have the matter come to Council because one business had been unable to operate; her support for the motion stems from wanting to make ordinances uniform throughout the City; the City is a leader in protecting businesses and consumers; the proposed action would further protect businesses by providing uniformity; the issue of the business in question has been addressed; Councilmember Herrera Spencer has pointed out the business has to change its business model due to the ordinance; she feels the ordinance should be made uniform for all businesses. Councilmember Jensen seconded the motion. Under discussion, Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she appreciates the referral being brought forth; the matter no longer includes the same urgency as when brought forth because the issue has been resolved; expressed support for the new business model being adopted by the business; stated that she is not currently prepared to support the motion; proposed the matter be brought forth at an upcoming priority setting workshop; stated there is a lot of demand on staff time; the Planning Board will be reviewing the Universal Design ordinance; at the priority setting workshop, Council could decide the location of liquor stores on Webster Street should bump ahead of the Universal Design ordinance, however, it might not; Council could place the matter somewhere in the queue; she would like historic information included in the presentation if the matter returns to Council; former Police Chiefs have had concerns over liquor stores and bars on Webster Street; Council should be provided a fuller picture. On the call for the question, the motion failed by the following roll call vote: Councilmembers Daysog: Absent; Herrera Spencer: Aye; Jensen: Aye; Vella: No; and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft: No. Ayes: 2. Noes: 2. [Absent: Vice Mayor Daysog – 1.] Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether a motion is needed for the matter to be addressed at the priority setting workshop. The City Manager responded a process will be shared with the Council that includes a survey of 90 Regular Meeting Alameda City Council March 21, 2023 projects and work plans; stated staff will be asking whether new projects should be considered as part of the process; staff will be happy to include any items. Councilmember Jensen expressed support for understanding staff time needed to make the ordinance uniform versus items coming up piecemeal. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired the date for the next priority setting workshop, to which the City Manager responded April 24th. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS (23-166) Resolution No. 16033, “Establishing a Temporary Recruitment and Hiring Incentive Policy of $75,000 for Lateral, Academy Graduate and Entry Level Police Officers through Use of Existing Salary Savings.” Adopted. The Police Chief gave a Power Point presentation. In response to Councilmember Herrera Spencer’s inquiry on repayment, the Police Chief stated the $25,000 would not be repaid. Councilmember Herrera Spencer requested clarification about the rationale. The Police Chief stated similar to other agencies that provide a signing bonus, $25,000 is the first portion of the bonus being offered; the Department is looking to attract laterals; the cost of new hires is roughly $40,000; prioritizing lateral hires helps save the $40,000; the $25,000 bonus is a good investment upfront. Councilmember Herrera Spencer inquired how much Alameda Police Officers make throughout their career. The Human Resources Director responded staff conducted a salary survey; stated the salary survey looks at the top step; Police Officers at the top step, with all special pays, cost roughly $164,000; staff compared the amount with other cities in the staff report. Councilmember Herrera Spencer stated that she is asking for total pay and benefits at the beginning of an Officer’s career, as well as at the end. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft proposed other clarifying questions be addressed in order to allow staff to find the information being requested by Councilmember Herrera Spencer. Councilmember Herrera Spencer inquired how many Officers currently live in Alameda and their level of pay. The Human Resources Director responded the City currently has 43 Officers; 5 live in Alameda, but she does not have data related to their total compensation; the Police Chief lives also in Alameda. Councilmember Herrera Spencer inquired how many Police managers live in Alameda, to which the Human Resources Director responded none. 91 Regular Meeting Alameda City Council March 21, 2023 In response to Councilmember Herrera Spencer’s inquiry about $75,000 assisting with living in Alameda, the Police Chief stated the Department has a difficult time recruiting people; he is hearing affording housing in Alameda or the immediate Bay Area is difficult; staff’s thought process was the money would help new Officers with getting established in Alameda or an adjacent community. The City Manager stated up-front financial resource could allow Officers to put a down payment on a home or security deposit on an apartment; staff is not stating hires will do so, however, the funding provides an incentive to locate closer to Alameda, which has higher housing costs. In response to Councilmember Herrera Spencer’s inquiry related to increasing Officers, the Police Chief stated the incentive would be the biggest available; staff believes the incentive will attract attention. Councilmember Herrera Spencer inquired whether staff thinks there are any other reasons contributing to why the City has difficulty finding new hires, other than monetary. The Police Chief responded the Alameda Police Department (APD) lost a lot of sworn Officers recently; stated 50% of the loss was due to retirements; some Officers are leaving the profession and some have moved to other agencies outside the region; further stated being able to afford to live in the area is difficult; housing is part of the equation. In response to Councilmember Jensen’s inquiry about the $25,000 payment being in full versus pro-rated or incremental, the Police Chief stated the approach relates to housing and helping hires with a large amount up-front; previous approaches have not worked; spreading out payment has not worked; providing money up-front is an attempt to draw attention from lateral Officers; the hire must stay with APD for five years; if a hire leaves anytime within the five year period, the payment must be returned; the approach is a show of goodwill and an upfront investment, which has some built-in guarantees. Councilmember Jensen inquired whether staff considered a program to provide a down payment rather than a direct cash payment, to which the Police Chief responded in the negative. The City Manager stated staff discussed whether the funding should be restricted to housing and thought the incentive would be less attractive; hopefully, the funding incentive would be used towards housing, however, the amount could be used for other needs; staff wanted to provide something out-of-the-box; the incentive may not work, but staff would like to see if the approach will help move the needle. Councilmember Jensen expressed support for the need to recruit; stated the amount of funding is substantially larger than other agencies; the amount will make a statement and help catch the attention of lateral transfers; the amount could be for a down payment instead of $50,000 for funding something else; the funds likely would be spent on over time; requested clarification about the process for recruiting lateral Officers. The Police Chief stated hiring lateral Officers saves a significant amount of time; entry level Officers have to find the next available academy; academies take six months to complete; some Officers get injured while in the academy; new Officers are required to engage in additional field training, which can take roughly 19 weeks; it takes approximately ten months in training before 92 Regular Meeting Alameda City Council March 21, 2023 new hires are able to patrol Alameda streets solo; the time is also spent working through the hiring process. Councilmember Jensen inquired what the proposal provides to lateral hires in terms of additional benefits; stated transfer Officers tend to lose seniority and other benefits. The Police Chief responded APD will maintain the current policy; stated laterals would receive credit; the City would match benefits and pay as best as possible; the City has not had many lateral hires recently. Councilmember Jensen inquired whether the City will provide additional incentives such as service credits or sick leave, to which the Police Chief responded in the affirmative. Councilmember Jensen inquired whether the proposal is supported by the Alameda Police Officers Association (APOA), to which the Police Chief responded in the affirmative; stated that he has been in contact with the APOA President who has expressed support. Vice Mayor Daysog inquired whether APD is not asking for new budget authority and whether budget authority currently not being unused is being reallocated, to which the Police Chief responded in the affirmative. Stated Police Departments across the United States are hemorrhaging personnel on a daily basis; the losses result in an increase in crime and loss of confidence in local government to provide basic services; the proposed incentive will let others know the City is thinking outside the box; discussed his former tenure as Police Chief: Burney Matthews, Alameda. Stated $75,000 seems like a lot of money, but the amount sends a message; the proposed incentive will provide the City with quality hires; discussed other agencies hiring practices: Michael Robles-Wong, Alameda. Discussed crime incidents involving his neighbor; noted that his calls to the Police Department indicated how understaffed the Department is; expressed concern over the Police force being maintained: Wayel Fare, Alameda. Stated existing funds should be used towards accountability, community oversight, and additional training; expressed concern over new Officers; expressed support for an overall change in policing; stated there are other ways to reduce crime, including promoting an increased standard of living: Marilyn Rothman, Alameda. Urged Council to vote no on the proposed incentive; stated the incentive is an egregious and irresponsible use of public funds; expressed concern over staff report omissions; stated administrative leave is not properly contextualized in the presentation; advocating for increased hiring without acknowledging fundamental failures is inappropriate: Savanna Cheer, Alameda. Stated that she is baffled by the proposed incentive; Alameda Officers are some of the most well compensated in the area and country; $75,000 is more than most people make in the City; the exodus of Officers is not something specific to Alameda; Police do not prevent crime: Jenice Anderson, Alameda. Urged Council to vote no on the proposed incentive; stated the matter makes many 93 Regular Meeting Alameda City Council March 21, 2023 assumptions; there is no guarantee the funding will be used for housing; a low clearance rate with crime on the rise is an assumption; adding more Police is not going to make people safe: Laura Cutrona, Alameda. Stated there is a misconception of cost; the City should offer a larger incentive; there are existing salary savings; an increased incentive amount and housing assistance would be more attractive; Officers are emergency workers: Tod Hickman, Alameda. Urged Council support the proposed incentive; stated public safety is essential to quality of life; overall crime increased 17% in 2022; discussed the recent theft of his catalytic converter; stated incentives will help bring Officers to Alameda: Rohit Reddy, United Democrats of Alameda. Expressed concern for the proposal having no guiderails; stated there is no clear sunset date or maximum budget amount; the funding is out of balance with other incentive programs; the proposed program would bankrupt other larger agencies; quantity does not equal quality in staffing; expressed support for a program that recruits and retains quality hires: Jennifer Rakowski, Alameda. Urged Council to vote no on the proposed incentive; stated correlation does not imply causation; saying a dip in staffing has caused crime to rise is unsubstantiated; expressed support for feeling safe in Alameda; stated data does not show that an increase in Police presence prevents crime: Jackie Zipkin, Alameda. Urged Council to support the proposed incentive; stated Councilmembers are responsible for keeping residents safe; crime has increased in the City; expressed support for doing whatever it takes to get people to join APD; stated that she does not feel safe in Alameda: Rosalinda Corvi, Alameda. Expressed support for the proposed incentive; stated that she has needed to use hiring bonuses in her profession; there is more crime; discussed the theft of her catalytic converter; stated that she would like the decision to be made based on what works, not based on anti-policing philosophies: Joyce Boyd, Alameda. Discussed the lack of crime in the past and a shootout on Park Street; stated the City needs a fully staffed Police Department; expressed support for the proposed incentive: Karen Miller, Alameda. Expressed support for the proposed incentive; stated that she wants well trained Peace Officers to deter crime while respecting people’s rights; accountability is very important; expressed concern over defunding Police: Cecelia Venucci, Alameda. Discussed policing conditions of the past and speeding throughout the City; stated Traffic Officers are needed for pedestrian and bike safety; expressed support for the proposed incentive; stated the City is on the right path to reforming policing: Jon Spangler, Alameda. Vice Mayor Daysog stated the City is experiencing significant staffing shortages in APD, which is a challenge that needs to be fixed; APD would like to have one Officer per beat, however, staffing shortages result in spreading Officers thin by having one Officer cover two to three beats; the limited number of Officers at nighttime is lower than desired; there are desires to link data trends to crime and the proposed incentive; APD is looking to address the problem with 94 Regular Meeting Alameda City Council March 21, 2023 incentive pay; the Police Chief is asking for reallocation of funding using existing budget authority, re-not an increase; the incentive is game changing; other cities will likely emulate the process; Alameda offers a great quality of life; Officers will want to join APD due to the incentive; expressed support for the proposed incentive; stated that he hopes the City deals with the staffing shortage problem; the changes related to policing across the Nation over the years has been profound, however, staffing shortage needs to be addressed; [moved approval of the staff recommendation]. Councilmember Herrera Spencer inquired the meaning behind the description of the temporary policy. The City Manager responded the program would be in place until APD reaches its 88 sworn Officer limit; stated once the 88 sworn Officer limit is reached, the program will no longer be offered. Councilmember Herrera Spencer inquired the last time APD had 88 sworn Officers, to which the Police Chief responded before 2009. Councilmember Herrera Spencer inquired whether the matter can return to Council in one year for a review, to which the City Manager responded in the affirmative; stated if the program is not working as-intended, staff will return to Council. Councilmember Herrera Spencer expressed support for an update being provided in one year if the matter passes; stated the lowest paid Officer has a base-pay of $113,654, and total pay of $248,566 with benefits. The Human Resources Director stated that she has information for base pay plus special pay and benefits; the figures also add in CalPERS; inquired whether Councilmember Herrera Spencer desires total compensation or just base pay. Councilmember Herrera Spencer responded transparentcalifornia.com has different categories showing regular pay, as well as total pay and benefits; staff provided Council with the information for different steps; the presentation indicated Officers make $112,000, but did not show the total number; sharing the total pay and benefits is important. The Human Resources Director stated Open California looks at the individual employees as an average; she can provide information based on the City’s salary schedule, however, based on Open California the cost is $113,659 for a new Officer’s base pay at step one. Councilmember Herrera Spencer stated a speaker indicated the amount paid to higher level Officers; inquired the base pay for higher level Officers. The Human Resources Director responded the speaker referenced the Police Captains position, which is not included in APOA; APOA tops out at $312,348. Councilmember Herrera Spencer stated that she is interested in the amount referenced by the public speaker; the public at large thinks of Police Officers as one unit; inquired the highest paid Police Officer. The Human Resources Director responded all benefits and additional pay included is about 95 Regular Meeting Alameda City Council March 21, 2023 $402,000 for a Police Captain; stated Police Captains are second-level under the Police Chief. Councilmember Herrera Spencer inquired the base pay for Police Captains, to which the Human Resources Director responded $280,000. Councilmember Herrera Spencer stated that she plans to support the proposed incentive; expressed support for APD; stated the difficulty in hiring relates to the culture; she disagrees with the narrative that the trend is occurring all over the country; APD staff are well compensated; many City employees make less than $75,000 per year; $75,000 is a lot of money; many taxpayers within Alameda earn significantly less than $75,000 per year; expressed support for the Police Chief addressing the matter; stated that she believes an update being provided in one year is critical and will allow Council to understand whether changes need to be made; she would support a motion to approve the proposed incentive with an update being provided after one year; she is unsure whether full APD staffing will be achieved; the program will bring attention to the City; respecting Officers makes a difference in attracting Officers to work in Alameda. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated Vice Mayor Daysog made a motion; Councilmember Herrera Spencer could second the motion; inquired whether Councilmember Daysog would accept the friendly amendment to the motion. Vice Mayor Daysog responded in the affirmative and agreed to accept the friendly amendment to the motion. Under discussion, Councilmember Jensen stated that she will support the proposed incentive; discussed her tenure as a Board member for Alameda Health Care Systems; stated recruiting nurses is similar to recruiting Officers; the professions are highly respected, however, there is difficulty in maintaining the number of employees; input regarding similar incentives for nurses were discussed; expressed support for the salaries for both because both professions help keep people alive and the community safe; the incentive is unique and innovative. Councilmember Vella stated questions have been raised by speakers related to calculating the amount of service time in relation to Officers being put on administrative leave; requested clarification; inquired how the instance would be addressed if an eligible Officer is placed on administrative leave and whether the time on administrative leave would count towards receiving the bonus. The Police Chief responded staff would look at years of service for an Officer placed on administrative leave; stated APD tries to resolve cases fairly quickly; he does not anticipate an Officer being on administrative leave for many years; the Officers time employed with the City would count towards years of service. Councilmember Vella inquired whether the language in Exhibit 4 can be amended to exclude paid or unpaid administrative leave; stated that she supports adding language for administrative leave counting towards service credit if the case is cleared; administrative leave can be time consuming; expressed concern over the administrative leave provision. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft requested clarification on the provision to be modified. Councilmember Vella stated the provision would be edited to add language under “Overall 96 Regular Meeting Alameda City Council March 21, 2023 Guidelines.” The City Manager stated that she understands Councilmember Vella’s desire to add a section under “Overall Guidelines” to state over 30 days of administrative leave, time would be excluded from time served; requested clarification for the intent behind the edit. Councilmember Vella stated that she does not wish to wordsmith from the dais; she would like language to be included about paid or unpaid administrative leave exceeding 30 days not counting towards years of service for the purpose of the bonus provision. The City Manager stated staff can check the provision against implementation during a brief recess. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft concurred with the City Manager; stated that she understands the administrative leave would count if the case is cleared. Councilmember Vella concurred with Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft; stated that she is trying to avoid potential issues with the Memorandum of Understanding; she would like staff to look into the provision during recess. *** Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft called a recess at 9:47 p.m. and reconvened at 10:07 p.m. *** Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft requested a report from staff on the proposed language addition to the policy for administrative leave. The City Manager stated staff discussed a legal way to implement the provision; the language will be subject to a meeting with APOA to approve the proposed language; if an Officer is placed on administrative leave during the five year payback period, and subsequently terminated for cause, any time spent on administrative leave would not count towards service credit; the Officer would have to pay back the time spent on administrative leave; provided an example; stated the payback provisions would have to be reviewed and accepted by APOA. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the outline provided by the City Manager accurately portrays the desires of Councilmember Vella, to which Councilmember Vella responded in the affirmative. Councilmember Vella expressed support for an update to the program being provided in one year; stated the bonus amount is a lot; the update should include the amount paid for referrals as a further incentive; increasing the referral amount could further help with hiring needs; expressed support for a budget update being provided in the event the proposed incentive is not utilized; stated that she would like an update on how much funding is being used towards the program during the budget process. Councilmember Herrera Spencer requested clarification about meet and confer; stated that she would like the public to understand the process; inquired whether the discussion will affect the program’s effective date. The City Attorney responded public employers cannot unilaterally impose contractual terms 97 Regular Meeting Alameda City Council March 21, 2023 upon a represented group, such as APOA; stated meeting and conferring means the City will meet with labor representatives of APOA to discuss and negotiate implementation of the policy; staff could not implement the policy without agreement and approval; if agreement from APOA is exactly what Council has proposed and Council delegates authority to the City Manager, then the policy could be implemented; if any other changes occur from negotiations, the policy will have to return to Council. Councilmember Herrera Spencer inquired whether there is currently a referral policy for APD. The Human Resources Director responded in the affirmative; stated the referral bonus is $1,000 for any City employee who refers a Police Officer who is hired and stays for one year. Councilmember Herrera Spencer stated visitors of transparentcalifornia.com are able to see the pay for cities and government agencies; users can search Alameda and APD for 2021 and the results will show Police Officers; urged residents to become familiar with the website in order to see how City employees are paid compared to other employees. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft requested clarification regarding the proposed policy for APOA; inquired whether Council can direct staff to perform administratively and whether the motion needs to be amended. The City Attorney responded Council could direct the City Manager to negotiate and implement the proposed provision if the language is accepted with no changes. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft expressed support for staff acting without additional steps; inquired the best way for Council to take action. The City Attorney responded the best step would be to have APOA agree to the proposed changes. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether Council can provide direction to the City Manager or amend the current motion. The City Attorney responded the Council motion would be to adopt the policy with the proposed change, subject to bargaining, and authorize the City Manager to execute any necessary documents to implement the policy consistent with Council direction. Councilmember Herrera Spencer proposed a friendly amendment to the motion to authorize the City Manager to execute and implement any necessary documents for the policy, subject to bargaining. Vice Mayor Daysog accepted the friendly amendment to the motion. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated there is a wide range of opinion in the City; Council is implementing the recommendations of the Police Reform subcommittee; she is proud of the Community Assessment Response and Engagement (CARE) team; APD is under the leadership of a new Police Chief with decades of experience; the current Police Chief was not the Police Chief during incidents mentioned under public comment; the Police Chief is in favor and supportive of data driven policing; changes have been made to APD; she understands catalytic converter thefts are occurring on a daily basis, as well as traffic safety violations; APD is seriously 98 Regular Meeting Alameda City Council March 21, 2023 understaffed; expressed support for the amended motion. On the call for the question, the motion which carried by the following roll call vote: Councilmembers Daysog: Aye; Herrera Spencer: Aye; Jensen: Aye; Vella: Aye; and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye. Ayes: 5. (23-167) Recommendation to Endorse the Design Concept for the Clement Avenue/Tilden Way Project and Authorize the City Manager to Execute a Third Amendment to the Agreement with Kittelson & Associates to Increase Compensation by $1,130,000, Including Contingencies, for a Total Aggregate Compensation Not-to-Exceed $1,475,876, to Provide Additional Technical Services Related to the Clement Avenue/Tilden Way Project. The Senior Transportation Coordinator and Mike Alston, Kittelson & Associates, gave a Power Point presentation. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft discussed a recent site visit; expressed support for the presentation. Councilmember Jensen stated there are four crosswalks; inquired whether all crosswalks are raised. Mr. Alston responded two of the four crosswalks are raised; stated the two raised crosswalks are along Tilden Way and Blanding Avenue. Councilmember Jensen inquired whether there are any other mechanisms in place to stop traffic for pedestrians at crosswalks. Mr. Alston responded in the affirmative; stated the project has yield controls; stated there are no lights or other traffic controls. Councilmember Jensen inquired whether AC Transit is working to change the bus route for the area. Mr. Alston responded that he has not heard about AC Transit moving the route; stated AC Transit has expressed interest in serving the shopping center at Blanding Avenue and maintaining the existing bus stop. Vice Mayor Daysog stated concerns have been expressed about emergencies and ensuring residents are able to go out Tilden Way in the direction of the Fruitvale Bridge; inquired whether there is a way to make the outbound lane from Tilden Way into two lanes and any associated issues with the change; stated the multi-user path appears to be 12 feet wide; inquired whether the path can be shortened to 10 feet wide. Mr. Alston responded the project is in its concept stage; stated consultants will have the space surveyed first thing to understand how much space is actually available; the ability to provide two lanes after the bridge up to the roundabout will be better understood once the survey is completed. Vice Mayor Daysog expressed support for staff analyzing the concept and presenting potential trade-offs. 99 Regular Meeting Alameda City Council March 21, 2023 Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether consultants will check in with public safety after the survey is complete to ensure evacuations are able to be performed properly in the event a disaster occurs, to which Mr. Alston responded in the affirmative. In response to Councilmember Herrera Spencer’s inquiry regarding data, Mr. Alston stated that he does not have pre-COVID-19 information; stated there is information related to areas in the vicinity, as well as regional travel patterns; the data from 2022 shows traffic levels have recovered from the absolute bottom at the start of the pandemic; various comparisons show recovery from 80% to 90% of pre-pandemic levels; 2022 counts have been grown by 20% due to levels not yet being fully recovered. Councilmember Herrera Spencer stated that she is looking for City data; inquired whether there is pre-COVID-19 information. Mr. Alston responded pre-COVID-19 data for the City is available for locations nearby. Councilmember Herrera Spencer inquired how the information compares to the numbers being presented, to which Mr. Alston responded the numbers pre-COVID-19 were a bit higher, hence the adjustment in data. Councilmember Herrera Spencer inquired what happens as the City adds more housing and subsequent cars, to which Mr. Alston responded adding more jobs and housing generally results in more activity. Councilmember Herrera Spencer inquired whether there is a demonstrative model of what the conditions will look like, to which Mr. Alston responded in the affirmative; stated staff used an Alameda County travel model to forecast future traffic. Councilmember Herrera Spencer inquired how far the backup reaches; stated the videos she reviewed reflected Grass Valley, Chico and Tahoe, which do not have the type of traffic Alameda has; many of the cities have zero to minimal cars passing; outlined an instance of one car passing slowly through the roundabout resulting in a five-car backup; inquired whether videos show an increase and include bicycle, pedestrian, and truck traffic operations. Mr. Alston responded generally, a roundabout performs as adequately as a signal with respect to traffic increases; stated if traffic volumes continue to increase, delays during the peak hour could increase; throughout the day, the roundabout would provide less delay than a signal; the roundabout provides the ability to move as you arrive rather than as a signal permits; information is included in a memo regarding what happens if traffic grows beyond the anticipated forecast; there are ways to add metering, which has been demonstrated in other locations; metering is a signal which comes on similar to a freeway ramp meter; the meter creates a more resilient roundabout; more activity would occur if the City adds more housing and jobs, however, the instance is not simple enough to say more traffic would occur in the peak hour at the designated intersection; other constraints on the system would affect the area and do not necessarily mean more traffic would occur at the intersection; congestion elsewhere in the City could be present and impact the roundabout; staff has some solutions to deal with a future increase in traffic, including laying infrastructure as recommended by the Transportation Commission; there are other locations where people would be delayed approaching the proposed intersections; additional traffic and population will not indicate an isolated 40% growth in traffic solely at the presented intersection. 100 Regular Meeting Alameda City Council March 21, 2023 Councilmember Herrera Spencer stated that she understood the design would have Pearl Street flow into the roundabout; inquired how someone living on Pearl Street would get to Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) by car. Mr. Alston responded there are a couple of approaches to take, including continuing traveling south to tie into Tilden Way or accessing Broadway at another point; stated the options are circuitous due to the desire to remove the high conflict location at Pearl Street and Fernside Boulevard. Councilmember Herrera Spencer stated currently, drivers can drive up Pearl Street and cut through to BART; inquired where drivers would go if they continue travelling to the right. Mr. Alston responded drivers would continue further east on Fernside Boulevard; stated if drivers wanted to get to the bridge, a north-bound approach on Pearl Street would not be possible. Councilmember Herrera Spencer stated clarity is important so people understand trade-offs; Versailles Street is a slow street that previously had a lot of through traffic; Council has received correspondence related to traffic on Pearl Street; inquired whether Versailles Street will continue to be a slow street. The Planning, Building, and Transportation Director responded the City will be replacing the slow street with a neighborhood greenway per the Active Transportation Plan (ATP); the ATP will happen before the roundabout is ready for construction. In response to Councilmember Herrera Spencer’s requested clarification about the neighborhood greenway, the Planning, Building, and Transportation Director stated cars would be able to get in and out of Versailles Street as they did before. Councilmember Herrera Spencer inquired whether cars would be able to make a left on Fernside Boulevard and then enter the roundabout, to which the Planning, Building, and Transportation Director responded in the affirmative. Councilmember Herrera Spencer inquired whether the design has been approved. The Planning, Building, and Transportation Director responded when Council approved the ATP, Council approved the conversion of the slow street barricades to the neighborhood greenway. Councilmember Herrera Spencer inquired whether the neighborhood greenway street has been approved, to which the Planning, Building, and Transportation Director responded in the affirmative; stated the actual improvements and physical street changes have not yet occurred. Councilmember Herrera Spencer requested clarification about which crosswalks are raised and which are not; stated that she would like clarification of why some crosswalks are raised and other are not. *** (23-168) Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated a motion is needed to consider new items after 11 p.m.; 101 Regular Meeting Alameda City Council March 21, 2023 inquired Councilmember Vella’s preference. Councilmember Vella stated she would prefer not to hear any other items. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether Vice Mayor Daysog would like to make a motion to not hear any additional items and continue the Annual Reports [paragraph no. 23-169] to the continued section on April 4, 20223. Vice Mayor Daysog moved approval of Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft’s proposal. Councilmember Vella seconded the motion, which carried by the following roll call vote: Councilmembers Daysog: Aye; Herrera Spencer: Aye; Jensen: Aye; Vella: Aye; and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye. Ayes: 5. *** Mr. Alston reviewed the slide with the crosswalk locations. Councilmember Herrera Spencer inquired the reason behind having the two raised crosswalks versus all four being raised. Mr. Alston responded the first crosswalk was proposed to promote driver-yielding for the crossing at the Cross-Alameda trail; stated other areas are pinched; a raised crosswalk promotes and reinforces the slow speeds for drivers and makes the crossing more prominent and visible. In response to Councilmember Herrera Spencer’s inquiry, Mr. Alston displayed the truck route; stated some trucks serve the shopping center; the crosswalk is raised since it is used by trucks; the raised crossing helps slow drivers down and increases visibility for crosswalk users. Councilmember Herrera Spencer requested clarification aboutthe design of the raised crosswalk; inquired how wide and how tall the crossing is, and how the raised feature would impact a user in a wheelchair. Mr. Alston responded reviewed the slide; stated the platform is raised a couple of inches; different agencies have different designs, but generally, the rise is a couple of inches with a gentle bump; the design reinforces slow speeds with a slight elevation not as aggressive as a speed bump. Councilmember Herrera Spencer inquired the width of the raised crosswalks, to which Mr. Alston responded the crosswalks have yet to be designed. In response to Councilmember Herrera Spencer’s further inquiry, Mr. Alston displayed and discussed an image of a raised crossing. Hermanus Steyn, Kittleson & Associates, stated crossings are typically the same width as the ramps on both sides; users will be able to traverse the elevation even in wheelchairs; the crossing ramps slopes down at a 15:1 ratio and is gentle; the crossing is not a traditional speed bump; the raised ramps force drivers to reduce speed. Councilmember Herrera Spencer inquired whether the design will have drivers travel 20 miles 102 Regular Meeting Alameda City Council March 21, 2023 per hour (mph), to which Mr. Steyn responded in the affirmative. Councilmember Herrera Spencer stated more information is needed; expressed concern over the crossing being able to accommodate a wheelchair; stated people should not be crossing on the slope. Mr. Steyn stated the crossing will be wide enough for a wheelchair; the width will be the same as the path to the crossing. In response to Councilmember Herrera Spencer’s inquiries, Mr. Alston discussed the radius. Councilmember Herrera Spencer inquired how many parking spaces will need to be removed for the roundabout, to which Mr. Alston responded six spaces. Councilmember Herrera Spencer discussed the videos; inquired why the locations were chosen and whether a video is available with a size and pattern similar to Alameda, to which Mr. Alston responded in the affirmative. Vice Mayor Daysog stated people can currently come out of Pearl Street and make a left onto Fernside Boulevard to access the bridge; the proposed plan eliminates the current option; inquired whether the reason for the change is due to the volume of traffic which could come out of Pearl Street, whether the volume of traffic is an issue, whether the City can consider placing a traffic barrier at Buena Vista Avenue and Pearl Street to help with flow; stated people living at Lincoln Avenue and Pearl Street want to go to Broadway because the route is faster. Mr. Alston responded the main reason is due to safety; stated a crash pattern exists; the area juggles a lot of conflicts at the same time. Councilmember Vella inquired whether the desire was to find a video of a roundabout in a city with less than 100,000; noted Chico has a population of over 100,000. Mr. Alston responded in the affirmative; stated a lot of work has been done in Chico; a comparable city is Bend, Oregon; Bend has many roundabouts and some drone footage might be available for review. Councilmember Herrera Spencer stated the referenced videos showed next to no traffic; the proposed intersection will have traffic; regardless of the population, she would like to see a video which shows more than three cars utilizing the roundabout. The Planning, Building, and Transportation Director stated staff can find an example. Councilmember Herrera Spencer stated that she would also like to see pedestrians and bicyclists as well. Councilmember Vella inquired how the request is different from Chico, which has a large pedestrian and bike population; stated other examples could include cities in Hawaii; she is trying to understand what is being requested that is different from what has been provided. Mr. Alston stated that he understands the request is for a video showing more action at the roundabout. 103 Regular Meeting Alameda City Council March 21, 2023 Expressed concern over making Tilden Way one lane with a roundabout; discussed major earthquake events and evacuation routes; expressed support for using the right of way for evacuation; urged Council to reject the project until an evacuation policy is in place: Karen Miller, Alameda. Discussed Fruitvale Avenue access to BART; stated the project is heavily endorsed; expressed concern over the right turn on Tilden Way; stated there should not be access from Pearl Street; the roundabout could be used with two lanes in an emergency: Jon Spangler, Alameda. Expressed support for the project and staff recommendation; urged Council to complete the project expeditiously: Cyndy Johnsen, BikeWalk Alameda. Stated the project is complicated; expressed concern over narrow lanes and a four-way stop for the truck route: Carmen Reid, Alameda. Expressed support for the project; stated that she endorses the project for future generations of Alamedans; expressed support for a welcoming monument at the inlet of the roundabout: Rebecca Pollon, Alameda. Councilmember Jensen inquired whether the speed limit continues to be 35mph, to which Mr. Alston responded in the affirmative; stated the speed limit will be lowered as part of the project. Councilmember Jensen inquired whether the plan is to have the speed limit lowered once drivers cross the bridge, to which Mr. Alston responded in the affirmative. Councilmember Jensen inquired whether the lanes shift to one lane, to which Mr. Alston responded in the affirmative. Councilmember Jensen inquired whether one lane remains after drivers exit the roundabout, to which Mr. Alston responded in the affirmative. Councilmember Jensen inquired whether the lanes ever shift to two lanes. Mr. Alston responded the concept shows the extent of the project; stated the two lanes will remain further down the roadway. Councilmember Jensen inquired whether the speed limit will remain 25 mph until Park Street. The Senior Transportation Coordinator responded in the negative; stated the area falls outside the study area; anything beyond the area between Broadway and Park Street on Tilden Way will not be touched; the project has a limited amount of funding. Councilmember Jensen inquired whether the concept is to go from two lanes coming off the bridge, to 25 mph and one lane to the roundabout, then an increase to 35 mph and two lanes for roughly four blocks. The Senior Transportation Coordinator responded in the affirmative; stated the concept will be in place until the City gets more grant money; the idea of having a consistent design is the vision; the next phase for Tilden Way is to create another roundabout at Buena Vista and Tilden 104 Regular Meeting Alameda City Council March 21, 2023 Way; the road diet will continue towards Park Street. Councilmember Jensen expressed support for lowering the speed limit coming into the roundabout when coming off the bridge; stated supporting a speed limits of 35 coming into the roundabout would be difficult; discussed the second amendment to the service provider agreement; inquired how screening for feasible locations was included in the scope twice. The Senior Transportation Coordinator responded Kittleson & Associates started with on-call consultant services for transportation and performing roundabout work for the City; the scope transitioned into providing more work on the Clement Street and Tilden Way project; Kittleson & Associates has done work for the City on roundabouts at different intersections in Alameda, including a city-wide analysis of possible roundabout locations. Councilmember Jensen inquired whether the work being provided is new and whether the concepts have already been reviewed. The Senior Transportation Coordinator responded in the affirmative; stated the project is at 10% design drawings; the proposed agreement funding would provide for 100% design drawings. Councilmember Jensen inquired whether earlier contracts with design drawings included in the scope will continue to potentially be held in the City’s toolbox, to which the Senior Transportation Coordinator responded in the affirmative. Councilmember Vella stated that she would like to address concerns being raised; the population of Chico is 102,000; Chico is a college town with a tremendous amount of bike and pedestrian traffic; there are a number of roundabouts on the island of Kauai; Kauai’s population is 75,000, which does not include 100,000 to 140,000 visitors; drone footage of a new roundabout is available; discussed the speeds and lane shifting for Kauai’s roundabout, which is busy; there are many examples of roundabouts that include the elements similar to proposed project; she would like to see the project move forward. Councilmember Vella moved approval of the staff recommendation. Councilmember Jensen seconded the motion. Under discussion, Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft expressed support for the presentation and project site visit; stated Council heard from different speakers; she places a lot of weight on the comments provided by direct neighbors of the project site; the project needs to happen; she is impressed with the project consultants; expressed support for the next steps of the project as it moves along through public outreach and education. Vice Mayor Daysog discussed a television segment on roundabouts in Carmel, Indiana; stated the roundabouts succeed in slowing traffic down; roundabouts are aesthetically pleasing in many regards and some have welcome monuments; the literature demonstrates that roundabouts slow the speed of vehicles and make conditions safer; the project is something Alameda should look into; Alameda cherishes slow traffic speeds; 96% of Alameda is 25mph; he has heard the concerns related to ingress and egress during an emergency; expressed support analysis the roundabout having two outbound lanes; many people expressed concern for emergency safety; the City is putting one-lane roads throughout Alameda, which is new; roundabouts could be the thing to help slow down traffic; Alameda is much more enjoyable 105 Regular Meeting Alameda City Council March 21, 2023 when driven at 25 mph; expressed support for any measure that encourages drivers to drive 25 mph; stated roundabouts could be aesthetic markers for neighborhoods; roundabouts are out of the usual for most people, but should be looked into; he is ready to support the staff recommendation, with the consideration of a two-lane outbound option. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft noted the Public Art Commission could look at the possibility of art at the roundabout; stated reducing lanes slows traffic and increases safety. Councilmember Herrera Spencer inquired the width of the travel lanes and how the lanes compare to current conditions. Mr. Alston responded the project will try to have 11-foot lanes everywhere, which is the City standard. Councilmember Herrera Spencer inquired whether the lane width is the same as Alameda Point. The Planning, Building, and Transportation Director responded roads differ in lane width all through town; stated the narrowest lanes are 10-feet; Park Street is 10.5-feet; truck and bus routes have a standard of 11-feet, which is what staff is proposing for the project. Councilmember Herrera Spencer inquired the road lanes near the new apartment complex at Alameda Point. The Planning, Building, and Transportation Director responded he believes the lanes are 10.5- feet. Councilmember Herrera Spencer stated the width appears to be narrow. Mr. Alston stated the lanes will be 11-feet anywhere else and 20-feet inside the roundabout; the entries and exits might be a bit wider for trucks. Councilmember Herrera Spencer inquired the width for the existing portion of Clement Avenue and whether the project lanes will stay the same or narrow in width. Mr. Alston responded the project will generally have 11-foot lanes; stated some old or existing lanes might be wider. Councilmember Herrera Spencer inquired whether the width of the new lanes will narrow compared to the existing portion of lanes on Blanding Avenue. Mr. Alston responded in the negative; stated the project does not touch the existing curb; trucks will still be able to drive through; the roundabout project is trying to match vehicle needs. Councilmember Herrera Spencer further inquired the width of the lanes near the park area. Mr. Alston responded the lane width will be 11-feet. Councilmember Herrera Spencer expressed concern over the width of the lanes; stated that she does not like how narrow the lanes are at Alameda Point; expressed support for a lane width 106 Regular Meeting Alameda City Council March 21, 2023 that works for trucks; stated many people in town tow boats or have a wide load; two lanes allow for wider loads. Mr. Alston stated that he appreciates the clarification about concerns; the project is designed for trucks; part of the contract will include a roundabout rodeo where the design is taken by a surveyor and mapped out for testing. Councilmember Herrera Spencer inquired whether people can test out the conditions while towing, to which Mr. Alston responded in the affirmative. Councilmember Herrera Spencer stated Alameda is an Island; many people have recreational vehicles; expressed concern over the width of the crosswalks; stated the wider the raised crosswalks, the better; she does not want anyone to fall off the edges of the raised crosswalks; she plans to support the project; expressed concern over Versailles Avenue not being open yet; stated that she hopes Versailles Avenue will be open soon; the current intersection does not work; she hopes the project will improve conditions. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft discussed Alameda Point’; stated the project will start and end with safety. Councilmember Vella stated the Kauai example includes towing fishing boats with 11 foot lane widths; the analyses are being performed and have found to be in-line. On the call for the question, the motion carried by the following roll call vote: Councilmembers Daysog: Aye; Herrera Spencer: Aye; Jensen: Aye; Vella: Aye; and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye. Ayes: 5. (23-169) Recommendation to Accept the 2022 Annual Reports on the General Plan, Transportation Choices Plan, Vision Zero Action Plan, and the Climate Action and Resiliency Plan. Continued to April 4, 2023. CITY MANAGER COMMUNICATIONS (23-170) The City Manager outlined storm related calls for service; discussed power outages; announced a community meeting for APD to discuss Assembly Bill 481 and the opening of Dignity Village; discussed an East Bay Municipal Utility District’s (EBMUD) Oakland Inner Harbor pipeline project causing road closures; announced the beginning stages of planning for the 4th of July parade. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA None. COUNCIL REFERRALS (23-171) Consider Directing Staff to Proceed with the Purchase of License Plate Readers for Vehicles, Concurrently with the Implementation of Fixed License Plate Readers. (Councilmember Herrera Spencer). Not heard. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS 107 Regular Meeting Alameda City Council March 21, 2023 (23-172) Councilmember Herrera Spencer discussed her attendance at an Alameda Housing Authority (AHA) event and a Civic Well conference at Asilomar. (23-173) Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft discussed the AHA event and affordable housing; noted the Civic Well conference had many helpful topics, including related to solar power and renewable energy; discussed her attendance speaking on a panel in Sacramento related to affordable housing; stated that she attended a presentation on the Gee’s Bend Quilters, as well as a presentation on homelessness and the Warming Shelter; discussed her attendance at the Little League opening ceremony and a roundabout site visit at Tilden Way. (23-174) Councilmember Jensen announced her attendance at a dinner presentation for the Alameda County Special Districts Association on cities’ partnership with the Association; discussed a StopWaste meeting and a crab feed event at Encinal High School; stated athletic leagues are a special part of the Alameda community; recognized two Alameda athletes: Bryan Wu, and Talana Lepolo; expressed support for those celebrating the eve of Muslim Holy Month. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft adjourned the meeting at 11:49 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger City Clerk The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Sunshine Ordinance.