2001-10-16 Regular CC MinutesMINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
TUESDAY - - OCTOBER 16, 2001 - - 7:30 P.M.
Mayor Appezzato convened the Regular Meeting at 7:43 p.m.
ROLL CALL - Present: Councilmembers Daysog, DeWitt, Johnson,
Kerr and Mayor Appezzato - 5.
Absent: None.
AGENDA CHANGES
None.
PROCLAMATIONS, SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY AND ANNOUNCEMENTS
(01 -538) Mayor Appezzato stated there has been a great deal of
news regarding the Alameda Hospital; that he asked the Hospital
Chief Executive Official to provide a brief presentation to reduce
speculation and misinformation regarding the Hospital.
David O'Neill, Chief Executive Officer, Alameda Hospital, stated a
petition started circulating last weekend; Alameda Hospital, a non-
profit organization, has been serving Alameda for over 100 years;
the Hospital started losing money from operations in 1999, when it
lost about $1 Million; in 2000, the loss was about $3 Million; this
year, the loss will be about $3 Million; losses are due to: 1)
inadequate reimbursement from Medicare, Medical, HMO's and other
insurance companies; 2) appropriate increases in the cost for
skilled labor, e.g. nurses, x -ray technicians, respiratory
therapists, and lab technicians; 3) a limited market for services;
the Hospital has difficulty attracting non - Alameda residents to use
its services; 750 of its patients are from Alameda; the Hospital
has been using reserves to off -set losses; the Hospital has limited
remaining resources and cannot sustain operations much longer; the
Hospital has considered: 1) recruiting additional primary care
physicians; Alameda has a shortage of physicians; 2) affiliating
with another health care system or organization; and 3) creating a
health care district, which is a special governmental entity; a
health care district is a tax district created in a given
geographic area and operates under the Brown Act; the district must
be created by an act of the Alameda County Board of Supervisors and
Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO), and by 500 of the voters
in the district; two- thirds of the voters in the district must
approve the establishment of a tax; the tax would be based upon
assessed valuation of real estate; there are about 60 district
hospitals in the State; the Hospital's strategy to create a
district was planned for the November, 2002 election; however, in
September, the timeline changed because: 1) Pacific Care HMO, which
served about 1,700 Alameda seniors, is no longer available to
Alameda Hospital; and 2) Kaiser Permanente decided to open a clinic
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council 1
October 16, 2001
on Central Avenue, which is currently the Alameda Medical Group
(AMG); many physicians associated with AMG might change to Kaiser;
said change will be effective January 2, 2002, and will double the
losses anticipated for 2002; AMG physicians are responsible for a
substantial portion of the Hospital's admissions; said changes
necessitated moving the health care district matter forward; now,
the Hospital's timeline is for a special election in April, 2002;
to meet said timeline, petitions must be circulated by next Monday.
Mayor Appezzato stated the Hospital's future is unknown; if
requested by the Hospital, he would request bridge financing be
addressed by the Council prior to the election.
Mr. O'Neill responded the Hospital has not made said request.
Mayor Appezzato encouraged Mr. O'Neill to keep the citizens
informed through the media and every medium available; stated a
community forum or town hall meeting will be held when the Hospital
is prepared.
Mr. O'Neill suggested said meeting be held sometime in mid -
November.
Councilmember Daysog stated that he and Mayor Appezzato are
interested in assisting with the LAFCO process and bridge
financing.
Councilmember Kerr requested a copy of the initiative petition.
Mr. O'Neill presented a copy of the petition to the City Clerk to
be made a part of the record.
Councilmember Johnson inquired what would happen with Pacific Care
patients.
Mr. O'Neill responded Health Net is available for said patients;
some physicians will continue to provide coverage through Pacific
Care; patients may switch to traditional Medicare coverage or
transfer to Kaiser; there are options.
Councilmember Johnson stated seniors in the community might not be
able to find physicians in Alameda and transportation can be a
difficult issue.
Mr. O'Neill stated patients looking for physicians are encouraged
to call the Hospital's physician referral line or Health Insurance
Counseling and Advocacy Program (HICAP), a non - profit organization,
which serves to assist people with sorting out insurance options.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council 2
October 16, 2001
Councilmember Johnson inquired whether AMG is advising its patients
of options and providing referrals.
Mr. O'Neill responded that he believes so, however, he cannot speak
for AMG.
In response to Vice Mayor DeWitt's inquiry regarding recruitment,
Mr. O'Neill stated the Hospital is actively recruiting; the
Hospital is close to reaching an agreement with one of two
physician groups to provide in- house, back -up coverage, 24 -hours a
day to ensure that physicians will always be available to admit
patients; the Hospital is working to recruit physicians to join
existing practices; professional recruiters are being used to
assist with the process; Alameda Hospital is negotiating with an
existing group of Bay Area physicians interested in establishing a
practice in Alameda; the Hospital is also working with physicians,
who not going with Kaiser, to enable them to set up practices in
Alameda; the Hospital is constrained by the law in terms of what it
can do to bring physicians into the community; the Hospital must
work carefully within confines of Medicare Fraud and Abuse Laws,
Internal Revenue Service Regulations and Stark Regulations; the
Hospital is optimistic that six physicians will be recruited by the
end of the year.
Councilmember Johnson inquired whether office space is an issue.
Mr. O'Neill responded the Hospital is trying to make space
available; one group the Hospital is negotiating with is exploring
commercial space in Alameda.
Councilmember Johnson stated City staff could provide the Hospital
with information about available office space.
Councilmember Kerr stated Kaiser Hospital is not on the moon; the
51 bus line stops right at Kaiser; for people who cannot drive,
there is good public transit, including free shuttles from the
MacArthur BART station to the Hospital; it is not as convenient as
a hometown hospital, however, if seniors do not have
transportation, they should not fear that there is not a way to get
to Kaiser.
Mr. O'Neill stated that by ambulance, any Alameda resident is
within 4 or 5 minutes of Alameda Hospital; traveling off the Island
triples or quadruples said amount of time; signing the petition
only places the matter on the ballot, and is not a vote for the
measure; to have an emergency room in Alameda, there must be a
hospital.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council 3
October 16, 2001
Mayor Appezzato stated the Hospital is a vital and necessary
resource for the community.
Councilmember Johnson inquired whether other, similar -sized
communities have hospitals.
Mr. O'Neill stated Alameda is a free - standing hospital and is not
part of another system; the economics of the health care system and
changes in health care delivery are forcing hospitals to
consolidate; other communities do not have hospitals similar to
Alameda Hospital; Alameda has a rich and vital resource, which is
one of the things that makes Alameda a place where people want to
live and raise families.
(01 -539) Presentation by the Aer -O -Nuts acknowledging the City of
Alameda for the 60th year of support for the Bill Osborne Model
Airplane Field.
Bill Osborne gave a presentation on the Model Airplane Field and
members of the Aer -O -Nuts presented Mayor Appezzato, the Recreation
and Park Director and Dave McCarver of Alameda Awards & Recognition
with plaques in recognition of 60 years of continued support of the
Model Airplane Field.
Lil Arnerich, former Councilmember, stated tonight is special
because rather than the City recognizing a volunteer, Mr. Osborne,
a volunteer, honored the City; provided a brief history of Mr.
Osborne's involvement with the Model Airplane Field.
(01 -540) Presentation by the Social Service Human Relations Board
(SSHRB) on Social Service and Human Relations Needs, Resources and
Priorities Assessment.
Michael Gwynn, SSHRB Vice President, gave a Power Point
presentation on the SSHRB ❑s Needs Assessment.
(01 -541) Presentation by Assemblymember Wilma Chan on the State
Resolution Commending Alameda Power & Telecom (AP &T).
Assemblymember Wilma Chan congratulated AP &T and the City for
providing citizens of Alameda with stable, accessible, relatively
low -cost power during the State ❑s power crisis; presented Mayor
Appezzato with the Resolution from the State Assembly.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Mayor Appezzato announced that the Recommendation to adopt Plans
and Specifications and authorize Call for Bids for the Cypress
Street East of Third Street Improvements [paragraph no. 01 -543] was
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council 4
October 16, 2001
removed from the Consent Calendar for discussion.
Councilmember Johnson moved approval of the remainder of the
Consent Calendar.
Vice Mayor DeWitt seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous
voice vote - 5.
[Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk preceding
the paragraph number.]
( *01 -542) Minutes of the Special Joint City Council and Community
Improvement Commission (CIC) Meeting held on September 4, 2001; the
Special Joint City Council, CIC and Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment
Authority (ARRA) Meeting held on September 18, 2001; and the
Special City Council Meeting, Special Joint City Council and ARRA
Meeting and the Regular City Council Meeting held on October 2,
2001. Approved.
(01 -543) Recommendation to adopt Plans and Specifications and
authorize Call for Bids for the Cypress Street East of Third Street
Improvements, No. P.W. 04- 01 -10.
Jennifer Norris, Alameda, submitted a letter to the City Council;
stated the main problem with the City's deemed improvements is
Staff Report Alternative 2 [30 -foot wide roadway and street parking
on the north side of the street] places the sidewalk against homes
and removes the fire exit and front entry for her upstairs
apartment, which turns her duplex into a single family home; that
she opposes the City tearing out her tree and fence to put in a
sidewalk; access to Woodstock Park is in compliance with the
Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requirements because there is
a sidewalk on the right -hand side of the street; residents on
Cypress Street contacted the City to have pot holes filled;
Alternative 2, a 20 -foot road, is recommended by staff because it
is better for the property owners; the City will tear down her 6-
foot fence and will not replace it; if the City is going to improve
Cypress Street, it should not financially affect her and take away
improvements on her property.
Councilmember Kerr noted that there were public meetings held on
the matter and the Deputy Public Works Director provided very good
information.
Mayor Appezzato requested staff to respond to Ms. Norris's
concerns.
The Public Works Director stated there were two public meetings;
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council 5
October 16, 2001
the City is not taking property; the City has public right -of -way;
the City's right -of -way is against Ms. Norris's porch; two
alternatives were reviewed: 1) a 20 -foot travel lane, without
parking, which would allow two -way traffic and sidewalks on both
sides of the street; and 2) providing parking on the north side;
both alternatives require the City to remove improvements which are
in City's right -of -way, such as the Ms. Norris's fence.
Mayor Appezzato inquired whether the fence is actually on City
property.
The Public Works Director responded in the affirmative; stated
staff is proposing Council approve Alternative 1, 20 -foot wide
roadway; the excess right -of -way, which the City currently owns,
will be given to property owners; Ms. Norris would be allowed to
construct a porch and access the second story of her building.
Ms. Norris stated that after speaking with her real estate agent
and the title company, the owner of the land is unclear; the City
claims to own the land; however, there are all sorts of surveying
mistakes; after meeting with her title attorney, there might be
litigation; requested the Council to postpone the project until the
ownership issue is resolved.
Mayor Appezzato stated the City does not want litigation; inquired
which alternative Ms. Norris would choose.
Ms. Norris responded Alternative 1 [a twenty foot -wide roadway east
of Third Street with no parking on the street].
Mayor Appezzato inquired which alternative staff is recommending,
to which the Public Works Director responded Alternative 1.
Mayor Appezzato requested staff to address the Ms. Norris's
stipulations.
The Public Works Director stated the City is confident that it owns
the property.
Mayor Appezzato inquired whether the major problem is the fence
ownership and replacement, to which the Public Works Director
responded staff is not recommending that the City replace the
private fence.
Mayor Appezzato stated the fence has no business being on City
property; inquired what the Public Works Director recommends.
The Public Works Director responded the six stipulations [in Ms.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council 6
October 16, 2001
Norris's letter] are not acceptable: 1) Ms. Norris is requesting
that the City add an extra driveway slip on the property; only one
[slip] exists, staff recommends only one be installed; the contract
could include a second slip, but the property owner would have to
pay for it; 2) Ms. Norris is requesting the live oak tree be saved;
staff is in favor of saving the tree; 3) Ms. Norris is requesting
the fence be replaced, which staff does not recommend; 4) Ms.
Norris is requesting unused property be deeded back to the property
owner, which is included in the staff recommendation; staff will
follow normal procedures for vacation of property; in some
instances, property owners do not necessarily get the property;
sometimes because of the way property has been deeded to the City,
it may go back to the original property owner and into a trust; 5)
Ms. Norris is requesting approval of replacing the stairs; staff
would require stairs to meet building permit and other planning or
zoning requirements; 6) Ms. Norris is requesting underground
utility lines, which would be very expensive; the area is not
currently an underground district; staff does not recommend
underground utility lines.
Mayor Appezzato inquired whether staff would prefer the matter go
forward or be held over.
The City Attorney stated Public Works researched the matter; if a
real estate attorney provides additional information, staff will
consider it; requested that the Council go forward, based upon the
representations from the Public Works Department; if staff
determines there is a problem within the next week or two, the
matter can be brought back to Council for reconsideration.
Councilmember Kerr stated for about 30 years, Woodstock homeowners
have requested the matter be resolved; since the matter was on the
Consent Calendar, they did not show up to defend what they fought
for and finally got into the budget; at the request of Woodstock
homeowners, she visited the site; that she saw a homeowner
constructing a new driveway which extends into the City's right -of-
way; property owners keep putting new things into the City's right -
of -way; only the south half of the street was paved; the rest of
the street is mud; in the winter, residents have been driving in a
muddy mess and cars get stuck; Woodstock supports either
alternative and is leaving said decision up to the neighbors on the
north side; at the community meetings, staff was very clear and
very forthcoming; if legally possible, the unused part of the
right -of -way will be donated back to the homeowners, which is a
generous offer; that she is convinced the City owns the 50 -foot
right -of -way based upon her review of the records at Public Works
and the County; that she supports making every effort to donate the
unused part of the right -of -way to homeowners.
Councilmember Johnson inquired whether Ms. Norris opposes the
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council 7
October 16, 2001
improvements or whether she was present to address the impacts on
her property.
Ms. Norris responded, the non - Woodstock residents oppose the
improvements; residents only wanted pot holes filled; there is a
sidewalk; the City is in compliance with ADA; a sidewalk is not
needed on either side of the street; residents have concerns about
drainage; that she asked for two driveway slips because she has a
duplex; the 20 -foot recommendation does not provide for any street
parking; street parking used by renters will be gone; that she
requested underground utilities because she opposes utilities being
attached to her home.
Councilmember Johnson inquired whether Alternative 1 allows the
stairs to be replaced as long as some other requirement does not
prohibit it, to which the Public Works Director responded in the
affirmative.
Vice Mayor DeWitt stated Woodstock homeowners have asked the City
to pave the other half of the street for a number of years; there
is half of a street on Cypress Street at Third Street; it is paved
on the Woodstock side; the other side is dirt; there were hearings;
a street and sidewalk are needed.
Vice Mayor DeWitt moved approval of the staff recommendation
[Alternative 1: 20 -foot wide roadway east of Third Street with no
parking on the street.]
Councilmember Kerr seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous
voice vote - 5.
( *01 -544) Recommendation to accept the work of Gallagher and Burk,
Inc., for Harbor Bay Parkway Extension (Phase 4) and Landscape
Improvements (Phases 3 and 4), No. P.W. 07- 99 -19. Accepted.
( *01 -545) Recommendation to accept the work of Nema Construction
for Jackson Park Renovation, Phase 1, No. P.W. 05- 00 -10. Accepted.
( *01 -546) Recommendation to approve the Purchase of One (1)
Johnston 3000 Series Three -Wheel Mechanical Street Sweeper with
High Dump in accordance with Section 2 -61.7 of the Alameda
Municipal Code. Accepted.
( *01 -547) Recommendation to authorize the City Manager to execute
Second Amended Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement between City of
Alameda and East Bay Municipal Utility District. Accepted.
( *01 -548) Resolution No.
Mitigation Measures and
Program in Accordance with
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
October 16, 2001
13405, "Making Findings Concerning
a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
the California Environmental Quality Act
i
for Amendments to the Marina Cove Planned Development and
Subdivision Located on Buena Vista Avenue Between Hibbard Street
and Entrance Road (State Clearinghouse #2000062119)." Adopted; and
( *01 -548A) Resolution No. 13406, "Approving Tentative Map
Amendment, TA -01 -0001, for Tract 7170 to Allow Phased Final Maps
and Changes in Lot Boundaries." Adopted.
( *01 -549) Resolution No. 13407, "Authorizing the City Manager to
Submit an Application for Funding Through the Roberti- Z'Berg- Harris
Urban Open Space and Recreation Program." Adopted.
( *01 -550) Resolution No. 13408, "Authorizing Sole Source Repair of
Engines and Gearbox for the Express II Conversion Project."
Adopted.
( *01 -551) Ratified bills in the amount of $2,306,441.73.
REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS
(01 -552) Public Hearing on Housing and Community Development Needs
and Fiscal Year 2000 -01 Performance Review.
Mayor Appezzato opened the public portion of the Hearing.
Jim Franz, Social Service Human Relations Board (SSHRB), stated
that the cost of living has risen and there have been layoffs;
there is an increased need for services, e.g. food, rental
assistance, utility assistance, and child care; a lot of people are
being forced out of Alameda because they cannot afford it anymore,
especially low income families, seniors, people with disabilities,
and people on fixed incomes; now, the working poor are fighting to
stay in Alameda; safety net services can mean the difference of up
to two or three hundred dollars a month; when adults leave, their
kids leave Alameda schools, which takes revenue out of the City and
takes kids away from their community.
Hugh Cavanaugh, Alameda Emergency Food Bank, thanked the City, the
Council and the Development Service Department for providing
physical assets, advice, counsel and support to the Food Bank;
stated as the economy has deteriorated over the past few months,
the Food Bank's services are becoming a much more critical need
within the community.
Ed Dankworth, SSHRB, stated one of the most pressing needs in
Alameda is child care; there are only 2,700 child care spaces in
Alameda and 7,800 children with working parents; there is a lack of
availability; there are also high costs; full time care for an
infant is $166.00 per week; which is about two- thirds of minimum
wage; vouchers are available, however, there are long waiting
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council 9
October 16, 2001
lines; even if someone gets a voucher, they might have trouble
finding a place to use it; the SSHRB Child Care Work Group
established priorities: 1) maintain existing child care in the
City; unless something is done, Woodstock Child Care Center will
have to close at the end of the year; the School District does not
have enough money to keep it going; if the parcel tax is approved,
it will ease some problems; however, the School Board has not
guaranteed it will approve enough funds enough to keep the Center
open; the Work Group is working hard on the problem and might come
back to Council sometime in the next year; 2) expand and improve
child care services; last year, the City's budget included $16,000
to be used for hiring a child care coordinator; the Alameda County
Children and Families Commission did not provide additional
funding, so the proposal fell through; 3) develop a proposal to
include child care objectives in a General Plan, which would
encourage the development of child care facilities in and around
residential and industrial developments in the City; at least 20
other cities and counties in California have included such
objectives in General Plans; child care provides important social
and educational benefits to children and makes important
contributions to the economy; the child care industry generates
between $4.7 and $5.4 billion per year in revenues Statewide;
supporting child care ensures that kids get a good start in life
and helps the economy grow stronger.
There being no further speakers, Mayor Appezzato closed the public
portion of the Hearing.
Councilmember Daysog moved acceptance of the report.
Councilmember Johnson seconded the motion, which carried by
unanimous voice vote - 5.
(01 -553) Public Hearing to consider a re(
approximately 14,000 square feet of land area to
Residential Zoning District /Planned Development
District. The property is located at 3203, 3205
Boulevard, in the R -2 Two - Family Residential
Applicants: George and Mary Carder; and
4uest to rezone
R -2 /PD Two - Family
Combining Zoning
and 3207 Fernside
Zoning District.
(01 -553A) Introduction of Ordinance Reclassifying and Rezoning
Certain Properties Within the City of Alameda by Amending Zoning
Ordinance No. 1277, N.S., from R -2 (Two- Family Residence) Zoning
District to R -2 (PD) (Two- Family Residence/ Planned Development
Combining) Zoning District, for that Property Located at 3203, 3205
and 3207 Fernside Boulevard. Introduced.
There being no speakers, Mayor Appezzato closed the public portion
of the Hearing.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council 10
October 16, 2001
Vice Mayor DeWitt moved Introduction of the Ordinance.
Vice Mayor DeWitt requested staff to provide a brief presentation
on the differences between the two zoning districts.
The Development Review Manager stated the site is in the R -2
district; staff reviewed the development in order for the property
to be subdivided; there are three structures: two duplexes and one
single family home; the development does not quite comply with some
of the technical zoning requirements; therefore, staff's
recommendation is to reclassify the property to include a Planned
Development (PD) district, which will recognize the size of the
parcels, the setbacks and the existing parking arrangement; the PD
overlay will be used in conjunction with the R -2 zoning.
Councilmember Kerr noted parking will not be lost and is in
compliance; inquired whether R -2 open space requirements are being
met.
The Development Review Manager responded in the affirmative.
Councilmember Johnson seconded the motion, which carried by
unanimous voice vote - 5.
(01 -554) Recommendation to eliminate Invocations and Institute a
Moment of Silence at City Council Meetings.
Speakers In Favor of Eliminating the Invocation:
Mark Irons, Alameda;
Rabbi Allen B. Bennett, Temple Israel;
Diane Leibel, Alameda;
Jasmine Weiss Tokuda, Alameda;
Hugh Cavanaugh, Alameda;
Dave Kong, American Atheists;
Mia Raaphorst, Alameda;
Dr. Louk Wysen, Alameda;
Reverend Roger Bauer; Immanuel Lutheran Church;
Thomas A. Mally, East Bay Atheists;
Lauren Helfand, Alameda;
Doris K. Broudy, Alameda;
Steven Gerstle, Alameda;
Art Lenhardt, Alameda;
Elaine Kofman, Temple Israel;
Zadik Shapiro, Alameda;
Golda Mason, Alameda;
Larry Wexler, Alameda;
Judy Pollard, Alameda;
Jim Franz, Alameda;
Jonathan Soglin, Alameda;
Larry Schultz, First Congregational Church of Alameda;
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council 1 1
October 16, 2001
Peter Lenhardt, Alameda;
Randy Potter, Alameda;
Morten Wellhaven, Alameda;
Bonnie Bone, Alameda; and
Ken Werner, Alameda.
Speakers Not In Favor of Eliminating the Invocation:
Nita Rosen, Alameda;
Shirley Cummins, Alameda;
Elder John Pillitiere, Alameda Chapel;
Janis Metzner, Alameda;
Lucille Rodriguez Parsons, Alameda;
Jacquie Lydon, Alameda; and
Clark Flesher, First Baptist Church.
Mayor Appezzato stated a minister, priest or rabbi has a select
congregation; people choose their places of worship; however, that
is not true for the Council Chambers; 30 to 50 years ago, the
matter was not an issue because Alameda did not have the diversity
it has today; that he has never been invited to a church to give a
political invocation; in God's name, there has been more hate, war,
death and injury than any other issue on earth; God should not be
used to create division and distrust; most ministers in the
community have been invited, but choose not to give invocations;
only one minister contacted him about continuing the invocation;
suggested that Council make a motion to remove the invocation and
another motion to decide on an alternative; stated a moment of
silence does not connote prayer and has been used to honor those
who have passed away; a moment of silence has become the tradition
at sports activities and schools; it is used to reflect, not pray;
however, those who want to pray, can; Thomas Jefferson stated: ❑it
is in your lives and not your words that your religion will be
judged;❑ using words to divide is no longer appropriate; in the
past, children have sung patriotic tunes and a citizen recited the
Declaration of Independence; similar alternatives can be used [to
commence Council meetings].
Councilmember Daysog thanked everyone for sharing their views
during the past month; stated the City is unique and is proud of
its traditions; people have more in common, than differences; not
everyone will agree with the Council's decision; thanked Mayor
Appezzato for bringing the issue to the City Council; stated the
community sees its diversity as a strength; there are a large
number of religious organizations in Alameda, which change society
for the better; the country is founded on the separation of church
and state; the Bill of Rights is one of texts which demonstrates
the importance of the separation of church and state; John F.
Kennedy stated: "I believe in an America where the separation of
church and state is absolute."
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council 12
October 16, 2001
Councilmember Johnson stated speakers tonight were respectful; a
religious beginning of meetings is not needed; options should be
explored, e.g. a statement of the purpose and importance of the
meeting followed by a moment of silence; meeting commencement
should bring everyone together and be a time to leave what has been
done during the day and focus on the important work which is about
to be done; there can be words of wisdom about the importance of
fairness and justice, without being in the form of a prayer; that
she would like to hear other Councilmembers' suggestions for
something to take the place of the invocation.
Vice Mayor DeWitt stated the United States is made up of many kinds
of people; everyone lives together so well because there is
tolerance and respect; people have tolerated and respected the
invocation for 45 years; that he gets great inspiration from public
and private invocations; that he will vote for prayer; although it
is not the majority, he would like to stick with the way it has
been done.
Councilmember Kerr stated society has learned from the great
injustice during the Second World War with Japanese internment
camps; people of other religions are respected; Constitutional
issues should be left to the Supreme Court, which has said it
[prayer] is okay; the Senate has a Chaplin; people find prayer
acceptable at home or in church, but not in public; she is alarmed
when people decide to suppress any form of speech in public; that
she is not in favor of a moment of silence, which is designed to
show respect for people who have served their City or country well;
inspirational speeches could be read at the beginning of Council
meetings, e.g. part of the Constitution or Declaration of
Independence; although she is not extremely happy with the
invocation, better alternatives have not been presented; questioned
whether people should be told they cannot speak their minds; stated
people who express religious fervor at Council meetings should show
more courtesy; people should move on from hurt feelings; there is
no issue that comes before Council which has universal support;
Councilmembers are elected at large; that she represents everyone
in the City to the best of her ability.
Councilmember Daysog moved approval of accepting the Social Service
Human Relations Board's recommendation [eliminate the current
policy of invocations before City Council meetings and institute a
moment of silence, lasting approximately one minute, to be carried
out by a member of the City Council, and concluding with "Thank
you. "].
Mayor Appezzato inquired whether Councilmember Daysog would amend
his motion to separately address 1) eliminating the invocation and
2) replacing it with something else.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council 13
October 16, 2001
Councilmember Daysog responded in the affirmative.
Mayor Appezzato requested the motion be restated.
Councilmember Daysog moved approval of removing the invocation.
Councilmember Johnson seconded the motion.
Under discussion, Councilmember Johnson stated replacements for the
invocation should be thoroughly explored; the invocation should not
be dropped without replacing it with something else.
On the call for the question, the motion carried by the following
voice vote: Ayes: Councilmembers Daysog, Johnson and Mayor
Appezzato - 3. Noes: Councilmembers DeWitt and Kerr - 2.
Mayor Appezzato stated the invocation will be eliminated from the
Council agenda; inquired whether the matter should be referred to
the Social Service Human Relations Board (SSHRB) for suggestions,
e.g. a moment of reflection, a moment of silence, a thought for the
day or some type of public participation.
Councilmember Johnson stated maybe the matter could be resolved
now.
Councilmember Kerr stated that she did not want the matter referred
back to the SSHRB.
Vice Mayor DeWitt stated there could be a moment of reflection,
which could be speeches or other things; it would not be religious;
a moment of silence does not inspire him; a moment of reflection
could be interpreted in different ways.
Councilmember Johnson stated residents could sign up to provide the
moment of reflection or guidance; rather than a Councilmember
leading a moment of silence, a member of the public could open the
meeting.
Vice Mayor DeWitt stated that he would support Councilmember
Johnson's suggestion.
Mayor Appezzato inquired whether it could be a thought for the day.
Vice Mayor DeWitt responded the moment of reflection could be a
thought or something else.
Councilmember Kerr suggested that each Councilmember come up with
ideas, e.g., reading from inspiring governmental documents.
Mayor Appezzato suggested that the matter be referred to the SSHRB;
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council 14
October 16, 2001
stated the Board can provide a list of alternatives; if there are
not adequate alternatives, each Councilmember can add to the list.
Councilmember Daysog stated that he would support sending the
matter back to the SSHRB, however, the Board might make the same
recommendation [moment of silence].
Councilmember Kerr stated the Councilmembers were selected by the
community; each Councilmember should come up with recommendations.
Councilmember Johnson stated that she does not object to sending
the matter back to the SSRHB; however, the Council might be able to
come up with a solution; the matter could be on a Council agenda
and the public could provide ideas; if referred to the SSHRB, a
recommendation might not return to Council for months.
Councilmember Kerr stated that she would support keeping the matter
at Council level.
Vice Mayor DeWitt stated matters are normally sent back to a Board
for hearings and to do the legwork; that he would prefer to send
the matter to the SSHRB.
Councilmember Kerr moved approval of keeping the matter
[alternatives to commence Council Meetings] at Council level and of
each Councilmember coming up with a list of suggestions.
Vice Mayor DeWitt seconded the motion, which carried by the
following voice vote: Ayes: Councilmembers Daysog, DeWitt, Johnson
and Kerr - 4. Noes: Mayor Appezzato - 1.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON- AGENDA
(01 -555) Larry Schultz stated the Alameda Hospital issue is
extremely important; inquired when Councilmember Kerr last rode the
51 bus route.
Councilmember Kerr responded that she rode the bus all the time
when she had a broken leg; that she rode the 51 bus within the last
three months; and that she uses public transportation whenever
possible.
(01 -556) Noel Folsom, Alameda, thanked Mayor Appezzato and
Councilmembers Johnson and Daysog for being the voice of reason and
voting to eliminate the Invocation.
(01 -557) Jim Franz, SSHRB, stated the SSHRB suggested that the
Mayor and City Councilmembers lead something at the beginning of
Council meetings, rather than opening it to the public, because the
Board has faith in the elected officials.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council 15
October 16, 2001
(01 -558) Jasmine Weiss Tokuda, Alameda, thanked the Councilmembers
for making the decision [to eliminate the Invocation].
COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS
(01 -559) Councilmember Daysog stated the 51 line [bus route] might
be changed; if revised, the bus would travel up Broadway to
Telegraph Avenue and up Telegraph Avenue, which would make the line
further away from Kaiser.
(01 -560) Councilmember Johnson inquired when the Public Transit
Committee matter would be on the City Council agenda.
Vice Mayor DeWitt responded the first meeting in November.
The City Manager confirmed that the matter would be addressed at
the November 6 City Council Meeting. The City Manager noted the
first meeting in November could be changed due to the Special
Election.
(01 -561) Mayor Appezzato stated that he received an Appeal [of the
Transportation Advisory Committee's decision] regarding Sherman
Street; inquired whether staff was addressing the matter.
The City Manager responded in the affirmative.
(01 -562) Mayor Appezzato stated AC Transit has offered Ecopasses
to City of Berkeley employees; requested the City Manager to look
into the matter to determine whether it could apply to City of
Alameda employees.
The City Manager stated staff is reviewing the matter.
(01 -563) Mayor Appezzato requested staff to respond to the Social
Service Human Relation Board's request for a youth representative
on the Board.
(01 -564) Councilmember Johnson stated a subcommittee of the
Council, similar to the Public Transit Committee or Airport
Committee, should be formed to have regular communications with
Alameda Point Community Partners (APCP), the [former Navy Base]
Master Developer; that she would volunteer; there should be regular
communications with APCP and reports to the Council.
Mayor Appezzato stated there could be a subcommittee of two
Councilmembers.
Councilmember Kerr stated that she would like to serve on the
subcommittee.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council 16
October 16, 2001
Mayor Appezzato stated that he will serve on the subcommittee;
requested staff to present a recommendation to form a subcommittee
of two Councilmembers; suggested that Councilmember Johnson meet
with the City Manager to discuss the matter and then, the matter be
placed on the agenda.
(01 -565) Councilmember Kerr stated that several months ago, she
requested that the nomination of Committee members be placed on the
City Council agenda; the matter has not returned; the Public
Transit Committee's Report used the Housing Forum and another item
[report], which resulted in staff appointed groups making City
policy; the Council should clarify when Council should appoint
Committees and when staff should convene forums for its own
interest.
The Assistant City Manager, Operations stated the matter should be
on the agenda for the second meeting in November.
Councilmember Kerr noted that she would not be at the second
meeting in December because she would be attending the League of
California Cities Annual Meeting, which was rescheduled.
(01 -566) Councilmember Johnson congratulated the new City Clerk on
her appointment.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, Mayor Appezzato adjourned the
Regular Meeting at 11:45 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Lara Weisiger
City Clerk
The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown
Act.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council 17
October 16, 2001