2002-10-15 Regular CC MinutesMINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
TUESDAY - - OCTOBER 15, 2002 - - 7:30 P.M.
Acting Mayor DeWitt convened the Regular Meeting at 7:45 p.m.
Councilmember Kerr led the Pledge of Allegiance.
ROLL CALL - Present: Councilmembers Daysog, Kerr, Johnson and
Acting Mayor DeWitt - 4.
Absent: None.
AGENDA CHANGES
(02 -472) Acting Mayor DeWitt announced that there is a correction
to the Record; the Minutes of the Special City Council Meeting of
September 24, 2002 should be corrected to reflect the vote taken by
Council regarding the settlement of the City of Alameda /CLASS v.
Port of Oakland; the action is reflected as follows: DeWitt: Aye;
Johnson: Aye; Kerr: Aye and Daysog: No.
PROCLAMATIONS, SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY AND ANNOUNCEMENTS
(02 -473) Presentation regarding Housing Element Annual Report:
Programs and Accomplishments 1988 -2001.
The Development Services Manager gave a Power Point presentation on
the Housing Element programs and accomplishments.
Joan Cummings, Alameda, stated that she has been waiting for senior
housing for three years; the Housing Authority will not provide her
with her position on the waiting list; inquired as to how much
longer she will have to wait for senior housing.
Acting Mayor DeWitt requested the City Manager to follow up with
Ms. Cummings.
Connie Alaniz, Alameda, stated that she has been waiting for senior
housing for two years; the Housing Authority will not provide her
with her position on the waiting list; noted that she meets the
requirements for senior housing.
The City Manager stated that space becomes available when someone
moves out; the Housing Authority cannot predict when someone will
move out; the City will provide more information on waiting list
status.
Ms. Alaniz stated housing is being given to people who do not meet
the requirements.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council 1
October 15, 2002
The City Manager stated there are two different rate structures:
market rate and subsidized rate.
Ms. Alaniz stated that she wants to be made aware of the types of
housing for which she might qualify.
The City Manager stated the City would provide updated information.
Councilmember Johnson requested that literature be made available
which adequately explains the process of getting market rate- and
subsidized rate - units; requested a review of placement lists.
Councilmember Daysog suggested the City discuss expanding the
volume of affordable housing for seniors with the Alameda Point
developer.
Richard Neveln, Alameda, stated public transit should be considered
when discussing housing issues; developers should provide for
transit as a part of development fees.
Councilmember Kerr noted that the City passed a traffic mitigation
ordinance for new development in Alameda.
Acting Mayor DeWitt stated the City's greatest demand is affordable
housing for working people and seniors; stated there are areas for
improvement.
(02 -474) Presentation on the Recycling Program.
The Public Works Environmental Services Administrative Intern gave
a Power Point presentation and puppet show on City's recycling
program.
Jon Spangler, Alameda, stated that he is happy that his
neighborhood was chosen for the pilot program.
Councilmember Kerr inquired where Alameda County Industries (ACI)
office will be located, to which Mr. Pellegrini, ACI, responded on
Blanding Avenue.
Acting Mayor DeWitt inquired about when the cans and containers
will be delivered to residents, to which Mr. Pellegrini responded
the containers would be delivered starting on February 1, 2003 and
completed by April 30, 2003.
Councilmember Kerr inquired whether residents are required to roll
cans to the curb, to which Mr. Pellegrini responded only the
residents in the pilot program area are required to roll cans to
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council 2
October 15, 2002
the curb.
Councilmember Johnson inquired if the small food waste buckets are
emptied into the green yard waste containers, to which Mr.
Pellegrini responded in the affirmative.
(02 -475) Acting Mayor DeWitt announced that the week of October
20 -26, 2002 is National Childhood Lead Poisoning Prevention Week.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Councilmember Daysog moved approval of the Consent Calendar.
Councilmember Johnson seconded the motion, which carried by
unanimous voice vote - 4.
[Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk preceding
the paragraph number]
( *02 -476) Minutes of the Regular City Council Meeting held on
October 1, 2002. Approved.
( *02 -477) Recommendation to terminate the contract with Youngar-
Wunar, Inc. for Washington Park ADA Restrooms, No. P.W. 10 -00 -16
and authorize project completion. Accepted.
( *02 -478) Recommendation to accept the work of Mike Brown Electric
Company for the Audible Signal and Truncated Dome Warning Surface
Installation Project, No. P.W. 04- 01 -13. Accepted.
( *02 -479) Recommendation to accept report on Public Citizens Option
for Public Safety Program (COPS) AB 3229. Accepted.
( *02 -480) Introduction of Ordinance Amending the Alameda Municipal
Code by Replacing Subsection 23 -3.3 (Allowing Branches to Extend
Over Sidewalks) of Section 23 -3 (Trees and Shrubbery) of Chapter
XXIII (Parks, Recreation Areas and Public Property). Introduced.
( *02 -481) Ratified bills in the amount of $ 1,897,751.07.
REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS
(02 -482) Public input for consideration in the naming of a City
street or other public facility in memory of the late Mayor Ralph
Appezzato.
Former Councilmember Lil Arnerich, Alameda, suggested Atlantic
Avenue west of Webster Street to Main Street be named the Ralph
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council 3
October 15, 2002
Appezzato Memorial Parkway; presented Council with an example of
the street sign.
Jon Spangler, Alameda, stated there should be many memorials named
after Ralph Appezzato; suggested the new library, a meeting room at
the library, the public square envisioned for Lincoln Avenue, a new
ferry, the new school on the FISC property, and the Alameda Point
park [Main Street Linear Park] all be named after Ralph Appezzato.
Peter Lenhardt, Alameda, suggested the park at Alameda Point [Main
Street Linear Park] be named after Ralph Appezzato.
Richard Neveln, Alameda, suggested the future Golf Course at
Alameda Point be named The Ralph Appezzato Memorial Golf Course.
Michael John Torrey, Alameda, stated that he supports Councilmember
Johnson's suggestion to name the future City Hall Tower after Ralph
Appezzato; suggested a City street be named Ralph Appezzato
Memorial Boulevard.
Councilmember Johnson stated Council should proceed forward; a
review process is not required; suggested all options be brought
back to Council for action.
Acting Mayor DeWitt stated the present Council should review all
considerations and make a decision at the November 19, 2002 Regular
City Council meeting.
Councilmember Kerr stated the boards and commissions should have
input on the decision.
Councilmember Johnson stated the boards and commissions could be
notified when the matter is placed on the [Council] agenda to allow
members to provide suggestions and opinions.
Councilmember Daysog concurred with Councilmember Johnson.
Acting Mayor DeWitt inquired whether Council should state a
specific choice or a review of all suggestions.
Councilmember Johnson stated that she supports the Ralph Appezzato
Memorial Parkway with additional memorials to be decided in the
future.
Councilmember Kerr stated the City's boards and commissions want to
provide input on the decision.
Councilmember Johnson stated the Ralph Appezzato Memorial Parkway
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council 4
October 15, 2002
could be presented to the boards and commissions for consideration.
The City Manager stated staff can frame the request to have boards
and commissions review the matter with a priority, but without
foreclosing other opportunities.
Mr. Arnerich stated Council should take everything under advisement
and go forward at the next meeting.
Councilmember Johnson moved approval of Council supporting naming
the street [Atlantic Avenue] west of Webster Street traveling to
the main former Navy base entrance "Ralph Appezzato Memorial
Parkway" and directed that boards and commissions have the option
to review suggestions and provide comments prior to the matter
returning to Council on November 19, 2002.
Councilmember Daysog seconded the motion, which carried by
unanimous voice vote - 4.
(02 -483) Public Hearing to consider an Appeal of the Historical
Advisory Board's decision to deny a certificate to allow the
demolition of a residence, damaged by fire, listed within the
City's Historical Buildings' Study List. The residence is located
at 1525 Minturn Street within an R -5 Residential Zoning District.
Applicant /Appellant: Will Harrison.
(02 -483A) Resolution No. 13535, "Denying the Requested Appeal of
the Historical Advisory Board's Decision Denying a Certificate of
Demolition of the Structure Listed within the City's Historical
Building's Study List." Adopted.
Acting Mayor DeWitt opened the Public Hearing.
Proponents (If favor of Appeal)
Alex Ramos, Applicant;
Tom Pavletic, Alameda.
Opponents (Opposed to Appeal)
David Baker, Alameda Architectural Preservation Society (RAPS);
Randy Horton, RAPS;
Haldis Fearn, Alameda;
Janelle Spatz, RAPS;
Nancy Hird, Alameda;
Denise Brady, Alameda;
Scott Brady, Chair, Historical Advisory Board;
Trent Tillman, Alameda; and
Jon Spangler, Alameda.
There being no further speakers, Acting Mayor DeWitt closed the
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council 5
October 15, 2002
public portion of the hearing.
Councilmember Johnson stated Council's responsibility is to balance
the issue; the family is asking to demolish the structure and build
a new house; Alameda is full of Victorian houses; an individual who
purchases a Victorian house on the Historic Study List has a
special responsibility; the Grand Street Station area is a very
historic part of Alameda; Minturn Street is special because there
is a cluster of Victorians; many Victorians in Alameda have brick
foundations; if the fire damage had not occurred, the owners would
be living on a brick foundations; the Building Official determined
the structure is less than 70% damaged by fire and can be restored;
the owner is proposing a 2300 square foot house on the small lot,
which would change the character of the neighborhood; most of the
historic elements are intact according to the HAB Chair; restoring
the structure is economically feasible; historic neighborhoods
should be preserved.
Councilmember Johnson moved approval of denying the Demolition
Permit [adoption of resolution denying the Appeal].
Councilmember Daysog stated the cost of restoration is between
$175,000 and $225,700; inquired what the homeowner would do if the
cost of restoration goes above $225,700.
The Planning and Building Director responded staff requested the
Appellant /Applicant to provide as much detail as possible; staff
has provided all information to Council; cost estimates could vary
as restoration proceeds; Council has to decide whether there is a
chance for so much fluctuation that the restoration could be
rendered economically infeasible, which staff does not believe will
be the case.
Councilmember Daysog inquired whether staff has dealt with
preliminary restoration costs of Victorians in the past and what is
the record of accuracy.
The Planning and Building Director responded that said record is
not something which staff tracks; fluctuation from the initial
estimate is not uncommon; however, based upon the information
provided staff does not believe fluctuation would render
restoration economically infeasible.
Councilmember Kerr questioned the less than 70% damage to the
building; stated from the church behind the building, the house
appears gutted to the front door.
The Building Official responded the assessment is based upon the
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council 6
October 15, 2002
fact that the building still has a foundation and lower level
supports; the entire exterior, lower level and main floor still
exist.
Councilmember Kerr stated the back of the building is gone; the
walls are questionable and would have to be restructured; the
property taxes will probably increase greatly and the owners might
not be able to stay in the house; an economic return is hard to
estimate; although the house will be worth more, the owners might
have to move; that she questions whether the house can be restored
with the insurance money available; Victorians are jacked up all
over the City, which destroys architectural integrity because the
proportions are destroyed and the houses become boxes.
Acting Mayor DeWitt stated Council is voting on whether or not to
allow demolition; the question is whether the insurance money will
cover the cost of restoration; the Planning Department should have
worked out an arrangement to give the owners discretion while
requiring use the salvageable parts.
Councilmember Daysog stated the question is whether or not the
conditions warrant the City Council to allow the family to demolish
and build anew; the Applicant believes that the current foundation
is inadequate to rebuild on; the HAB believes the building can be
restored on existing foundation; the key question is restoration
cost; the owner is willing to pay $352,800 to build a new house;
hopefully, restoration costs would not go above $175,000; comparing
restoration cost against the cost the Appellant is willing to pay
to build a new house, there is a lot of room to have lower
restoration costs and still reap an economic return; the cost of
restoration is less than the cost of building anew; that he concurs
with the HAB's decision.
Councilmember Daysog seconded the motion.
Under discussion, Councilmember Kerr stated aside from the front
wall there is not much left of the building; that she does not
believe the house can be restored with the [insurance] money.
On the call for the question, the motion carried by the following
voice vote: Ayes: Councilmembers Daysog, Johnson and Acting Mayor
DeWitt - 3. Noes: Councilmember Kerr - 1.
(02 -484) Ordinance No. 2885, "Urgency Ordinance Adopting Ordinance
No. 2886 Which Repeals and Replaces Chapter XXI (Solid Waste and
Recycling) of the Alameda Municipal Code and Making Said Ordinance
Effective on October 6, 2002." Finally passed.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council 7
October 15, 2002
(02 -484A) Introduction of Ordinance Amending the Alameda Municipal
Code by Repealing and Replacing Chapter XXI (Solid Waste and
Recycling). Introduced.
Louie Pellegrini, Alameda County Industries (ACI), stated the
ordinance addresses all matters necessary to provide the services
agreed to in the franchise and has a rate structure which provides
a rebate for single family residences and raises revenue for the
City to cover costs; the ordinance clarifies how ACI will provide
standard recycling services for businesses and takes into
consideration existing recycling providers.
Barry Wilee, Attorney for Biagini Waste Reduction Services (BWRS),
stated that he received a revision from the City on grandfathering
[Section 21- 20.3(g)]; wording can be dealt with on the staff level;
however, there are several philosophical differences about the
recycling program for businesses; BWRS has been providing recycling
services for businesses in Alameda for years; the ordinance adopts
a monopolistic approach; the ordinance will make it uneconomic for
recycling companies, other than the franchisee, to provide
commercial recycling services by requiring that businesses be paid
for materials taken; resale of products does not provide enough
income to justify money going from the recycling company to the
commercial enterprise; other jurisdictions have allowed commercial
recycling subject to permit, bonding, insurance, etc.; the
grandfathering provision will eliminate BWRS over time because
additional services cannot be provided to existing clients and new
service cannot be provided to new clients.
In response to Councilmember Daysog's inquiry whether BWRS holds
other franchises, Mr. Wilee responded in the negative.
Councilmember Daysog further inquired whether BWRS could increase
efficiencies to still be profitable with existing clients.
Mr. Wilee responded if allowed to compete on equal footing, BWRS
can handle recycling in an economic way; however, no recycling
company can pay clients money for picking up, transporting or
disposing of recycling.
Ruth Abbee, Alameda, stated that she is thrilled about the new
recycling service; she is in one of the pilot areas for [food waste
recycling]; she is able to recycle everything and has no waste; the
program is wonderful; thanked staff for the open, inclusive public
process; stated commercial recycling has always been open market
competition in Alameda; grandfathering existing commercial
recyclers and disallowing new recyclers will eliminate all
commercial recyclers other than the franchisee through attrition,
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council 8
October 15, 2002
which is not best for recycling in Alameda; open competition would
be best; ACI will have to work hard to provide the minimum level of
service to commercial businesses, let alone to create special
programs for hard to service customers; having a minimum level of
service for all customers works well; businesses should be able to
choose to use additional recyclers; said practice has worked in
Oakland; further stated the current ordinance requires construction
and demolition projects under $100,000 be exclusive to the
franchisee; construction and demolition debris is a lively market
and should be open market competition; all of the players,
including the franchisee, should be permitted to provide said
service; allowing free and open market competition for commercial
recycling and construction and demolition would provide the maximum
level of recycling.
Councilmember Daysog inquired if there are logical reasons for
having a residential franchisee, why does the same not hold true
for commercial.
Ms. Abbee responded residences and businesses generate recyclables
differently; residences can live with the minimum level of
recycling; considering every area in the franchise agreement, to
ask ACI to be the number one recycler for demolition and
construction projects under $100,000 and the number one specialty
recycler for all commercial businesses is a lot to ask; ACI has a
profitable franchise without providing said services; requested a
retention of the status quo for commercial businesses and
demolition projects under $100,000 to maximize recycling for
Alameda.
Councilmember Kerr requested Ms. Abbee to provide an example of
special recyclable materials, which are generated by commercial
businesses.
Ms. Abbee stated bailed cardboard from a grocery store or large
volumes of mixed paper from an office facility could be handled by
individual recyclers; however, the franchise is exclusive for mixed
recycling; the franchisee is the only provider who picks up mixed
recycling in a single bin; other providers currently pick up mixed
recycling; there is no policy or financial reason to prohibit said
providers; rates are cheaper; ACI does not need to occupy the
entire field; specialty materials will still fall under open market
competition.
Bill Smith, Alameda, discussed garbage service.
John McCabe, Alameda, stated businesses should be allowed to hire
any company to handle recycling; residences should be allowed to
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council 9
October 15, 2002
hire any permitted recycler for residential construction demolition
debris.
The Deputy Public Works Director suggested Council amend the
ordinances by revising section 21- 20.3(8) on Grandfathered
Recyclers and deleting section 21- 2O.3(e) on Landscape Contracts.
The Deputy Public Works Director stated the franchise requires
business service to be exclusive to make the rates work; the
amendment allows current business recyclers to continue with
current customers and to collect specialty materials or materials
distinctive from the franchisee; the matter can be reviewed after
one year.
Councilmember Daysog inquired about the percent of commercial
business recycling considered specialty recycling, to which the
Deputy Public Works Director responded businesses predominantly
generate specialty recycling.
Councilmember Kerr inquired whether anyone can self -haul to Davis
Street, to which the Deputy Public Works Director responded in the
affirmative.
Councilmember Kerr inquired whether a 30 -day notice would be
sufficient evidence for a landlord to receive a temporary
exemption, to which the Deputy Public Works Director responded in
the affirmative.
Councilmember Kerr inquired where would low income and senior
residents apply for a discount, to which the Deputy Public Works
Director responded at the ACI office on Blanding Avenue.
The Deputy Public Works Director stated the construction and
demolition debris section of the ordinance states that for projects
greater than $100,000 the hauling can be done by the permittee or
the franchisee and for projects under $100,000 the hauling can be
done by the franchisee, a contractor or can be self - hauled.
The Assistant City Attorney stated the first motion to adopt the
ordinance as an urgency measure will go into effect immediately and
requires four affirmative votes; the second motion to waive the
first reading and introduce the regular ordinance will go into
effect 30 days after final adoption.
Councilmember Kerr inquired why there are two ordinances, to which
the Assistant City Attorney responded to allow the findings that
are necessary to adopt the ordinance as an urgency matter to be
eliminated; further stated when the regular ordinance is adopted,
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council 10
October 15, 2002
the urgency ordinance and findings will be repealed.
Councilmember Johnson stated Council is adopting the ordinance as
an urgency ordinance on a temporary basis.
Councilmember Johnson moved final passage of the urgency ordinance
[No. 28851, including suggested changes [deleting section 21-
20.3(e) on Landscape Contracts and revising section 21- 20.3(8) on
Grandfathered Recycler].
Councilmember Kerr seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous
voice vote - 4.
Councilmember Johnson moved approval of waiving the first reading
and introduction of the ordinance [Amending the Alameda Municipal
Code by Repealing and Replacing Chapter XXI (Solid Waste and
Recycling)], including suggested changes [deleting section 21-
20.3(e) on Landscape Contracts and revising section 21- 20.3(8) on
Grandfathered Recycler].
Councilmember Daysog seconded the motion, which carried by
unanimous voice vote - 4.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON- AGENDA
(02 -485) Bob Rubin, Alameda, submitted a letter to Council and
outlined his concerns regarding the street conditions on Park
Avenue from Otis Drive to the park; a potential fire hazard in his
neighborhood; graffiti; speeding; the street conditions on the
Oakland side of the Park Street Bridge; and the Alameda Hospital.
Acting Mayor DeWitt requested the City Manager to follow up with
Mr. Rubin.
(02 -486) Haldis Fearn, Alameda, stated tenants are living in sub-
standard housing because every time repairs are requested rent is
increased; there should be protection for tenants; suggested the
City create a program which provides anonymity for renters in
individual rental houses.
Councilmember Kerr noted a State law protects tenants who make
complaints about repairs and habitability from having their rent
raised.
Acting Mayor DeWitt requested the City Manager to provide said
information to Ms. Fearn.
(02 -487) Bill Smith, Alameda, discussed alternative medicines.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council 1 1
October 15, 2002
(02 -488) Jean Sweeney, Alameda, discussed public policies involved
with the Alameda Beltline Measure E, including the courts
involvement with the matter.
COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS
(02 -489) Consideration of Acting Mayor's appointments to the
Mayor's Committee on Disability Issues.
Acting Mayor DeWitt appointed James Gwynne and Teresa Thomas to the
Mayor's Committee on Disability Issues.
(02 -490) Consideration of Acting Mayor's nomination for
appointment to the Social Service Human Relations Board. (Partial
term expiring June 30, 2003)
Acting Mayor DeWitt nominated Teresa E. Thomas for appointment to
the Social Service Human Relations Board.
(02 -491) Acting Mayor DeWitt announced that the next Regular
Council Meeting would be held on Wednesday, November 6, 2002, due
to the General Municipal Election on Tuesday, November 5, 2002.
(02 -492) Councilmember Kerr stated Sonoma and a few other cities
in California have instituted alternative methods for enforcing
municipal infractions; repeated calls use a lot of police time;
Sonoma appointed a City Prosecutor with authority over a limited
number of matters; the City Prosecutor uses methods such as massive
amounts of small claims; when someone is creating a disturbance in
a neighborhood, the Prosecutor has neighbors file small claims;
owners facing 20 fines of $5,000 each generally stop the noise,
debris, or whatever is bothering the neighbors; noted the matter is
addressed in an article in the Western Cities publication; further
stated the program was cost effective because it saves sworn
officers' time going on calls and appearing in court; requested
staff to review the matter and determine whether the program would
be financially possible and would work in Alameda.
The City Manager stated that he would work with the City Attorney's
office to prepare a report on the matter.
(02 -493) Councilmember Kerr stated Alameda Point Community
Partners (APCP) is providing a monthly report; requested the
reports be collected and retained in the Council's common area.
In response to the City Manager's inquiry about whether
Councilmember Kerr was referring to the report APCP provides on
leasing activity, Councilmember Kerr responded in the affirmative.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council 12
October 15, 2002
The City Manager stated the report would be provided in the
Council's common area.
(02 -494) Councilmember Kerr stated the Governor vetoed Senate Bill
(SB) 905, which would have prevented deductions from public
salaries, but he approved Assembly Bill (AB) 1243; requested the
City Attorney to provide information on the impact of AB 1243 being
chaptered into law.
In response to the City Manager's inquiry whether Councilmember
Kerr checked with the League of California Cities about the matter,
Councilmember Kerr responded in the affirmative.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, Acting Mayor DeWitt adjourned the
Regular Meeting at 11:40 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 13
October 15, 2002