2005-09-20 PacketCITY OF ALAMEDA • CALIFORNIA
SPECIAL MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
TUESDAY - - - SEPTEMBER 20, 2005 - - - 6:20 P.M.
Time: Tuesday, September 20, 2005, 6:20 p.m.
Place: City Council Chambers Conference Room, City Hall, corner
of Santa Clara Avenue and Oak Street.
Agenda:
1. Roll Call.
2. Public Comment on Agenda Items Only.
Anyone wishing to address the Council on agenda items only,
may speak for a maximum of 3 minutes per item.
3. Adjournment to Closed Session to consider:
3 -A. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS
Agency Negotiator: Craig Jory.
Employee Organizations: International Brotherhood of
Electrical Workers and Management
and Confidential Employees
Association.
3 -B. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - ANTICIPATED LITIGATION
Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to subdivision (b)
of Section 54956.9
Number of cases: One.
4. Announcement of Action Taken in Closed Session, if any.
Adjournment
AGENDA
Special Meeting of the Governing Body of the
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
* * * * * * **
Alameda City Hall
Council Chamber, Room 390
2263 Santa Clara Avenue
Alameda, CA 94501
1. ROLL CALL
2. CONSENT CALENDAR
Tuesday, September 20, 2005
Meeting will begin at 7:25 p.m.
Consent Calendar items are considered routine and will be enacted, approved or adopted by
one motion unless a request for removal for discussion or explanation is received from the
Board or a member of the public.
2 -A. Recommendation to Approve the Fourth Amended Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement
between the City of Alameda and East Bay Municipal Utility District.
3. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON - AGENDA (PUBLIC COMMENT)
(Any person may address the governing body in regard to any matter over which the
governing body has jurisdiction that is not on the agenda.)
4. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE GOVERNING BODY
5. ADJOURNMENT
This meeting will be cablecast live on channel 15.
Notes:
• Sign language interpreters will be available on request. Please contact the ARRA Secretary, Irma Glidden
at 749 -5800 at least 72 hours before the meeting to request an interpreter.
■ Accessible seating for persons with disabilities (including those using wheelchairs) is available.
• Minutes of the meeting are available in enlarged print.
• Audio tapes of the meeting are available for review at the ARRA offices upon request.
CITY OF ALAMEDA • CALIFORNIA
IF YOU WISH TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION:
1. Please file a speaker's slip with the Deputy City
Clerk and upon recognition by the Chair, approach the
podium and state your name; speakers are limited to
three (3) minutes per item.
2. Lengthy testimony should be submitted in writing and
only a summary of pertinent points presented verbally.
3. Applause and demonstration are prohibited during
Commission meetings.
SPECIAL MEETING OF THE COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION
TUESDAY - - - SEPTEMBER 20, 2005 - - - 7:27 P.M.
Location: City Council Chambers, City Hall, corner of Santa Clara
Avenue and Oak Street.
Public Participation
Anyone wishing to address the Commission on agenda items or
business introduced by the Commission may speak for a maximum of 3
minutes per agenda item when the subject is before the Commission.
Please file a speaker's slip with the Deputy City Clerk if you wish
to speak on an agenda item.
ROLL CALL
CONSENT CALENDAR
1 -A. Minutes of the Special Community Improvement Commission
meetings of August 16, 2005. (City Clerk)
1 -B. Recommendation to approve a Contract with LPA, Inc. in an
amount not to exceed $148,500 to provide design development,
construction documents, coordination with the Department of
the State Architect, bid negotiations and construction
administration services for development of the Alameda
Recreation and Parks Department 4 -acre community park at
Bayport. (Development Services)
AGENDA ITEMS
None.
ADJOURNMENT
Beverly Johnson, Chair
Community Improvement Commission
CITY OF ALAMEDA • CALIFORNIA
IF YOU WISH TO ADDRESS THE COUNCIL:
1. Please file a speaker's slip with the Deputy City
Clerk and upon recognition by the Mayor, approach the
podium and state your name; speakers are limited to
three (3) minutes per item.
2. Lengthy testimony should be submitted in writing and
only a summary of pertinent points presented verbally.
3. Applause and demonstration are prohibited during
Council meetings.
AGENDA REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
TUESDAY - - - - SEPTEMBER 20, 2005 - - - - 7:30 P.M.
[Note: Regular Council Meeting convenes at 7:30 p.m., City
Hall, Council Chambers, corner of Santa Clara Ave and Oak St.]
The Order of Business for City Council Meeting is as follows:
1. Roll Call
2. Agenda Changes
3. Proclamations, Special Orders of the Day and Announcements
4. Consent Calendar
5. Agenda Items
6. Oral Communications, Non - Agenda (Public Comment)
7. Council Communications (Communications from Council)
8. Adjournment
Public Participation
Anyone wishing to address the Council on agenda items or business
introduced by Councilmembers may speak for a maximum of 3 minutes
per agenda item when the subject is before Council. Please file a
speaker's slip with the Deputy City Clerk if you wish to address
the City Council.
SPECIAL MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL 6:20 P.M.
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS CONFERENCE ROOM
Separate Agenda (Closed Session)
SPECIAL MEETING OF THE ALAMEDA REUSE AND 7:25 P.M.
REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
Separate Agenda
SPECIAL MEETING OF THE COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT 7:27 P.M.
COMMISSION, CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
Separate Agenda
1. ROLL CALL - City Council
2. AGENDA CHANGES
3. PROCLAMATIONS, SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY AND ANNOUNCEMENTS
3 -A. Proclamation declaring October 2005 as United Nations Month.
3 -B. Proclamation declaring September 18 -24 as Pollution Prevention
Week in Alameda.
4. CONSENT CALENDAR
Consent Calendar items are considered routine and will be
enacted, approved or adopted by one motion unless a request
for removal for discussion or explanation is received from the
Council or a member of the public.
4 -A. Minutes of the Special and Regular City Council meetings held
on September 6, 2005. (City Clerk)
4 -B. Bills for ratification. (Finance)
4 -C. Recommendation to accept the Quarterly Financial Report for
the Period Ending June 30, 2005 (Year -end). (Finance)
4 -D. Recommendation to adopt Specifications and authorize Call for
Bids for three marked police vehicles. (Police)
4 -E. Recommendation to reject the Bids, adopt the modified
Specifications, and authorize a second Call for Bids for
Cyclic Sewer Repair Project Phase 4, No. P.W. 05- 03 -11.
(Public Works)
4 -F. Recommendation to amend the Construction Contract with
Ghilotti Brothers by increasing the contingency amount by
$120,000 for the Park Street Streetscape and Town Center
Project, No. P.W. 10- 02 -13. (Public Works)
4 -G. Recommendation to approve a Subdivision Improvement Agreement
with FOCIL -BP, LLC, and
• Adoption of Resolution Approving Final Map and Accepting
Certain Dedications and Offers of Dedication and Easement
Vacations for Tract 7512 (Bayport). (Development Services)
4 -H. Adoption of Resolution Approving Parcel Map and Accepting
Dedication of Easements for Parcel Map No. 8725 (Bridgeside
Shopping Center). (Public Works)
4 -I. Adoption of Resolution Amending the Management and
Confidential Employees Association Salary Schedule by
Establishing the Salary Range for the Position of Sales and
Services Supervisor and Amending the Salary Range for the
Position of Information Systems Network Analyst. (Human
Resources)
5. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS
5 -A. Adoption of Resolution Commending William C. Norton for His
Services as Acting City Manager.
5 -B. • Adoption of Resolution Reappointing Karen Lee as a Member
of the Public Art Commission;
• Adoption of Resolution Reappointing K. C. Rosenberg as a
Member of the Public Art Commission; and
• Adoption of Resolution Appointing Terri Bertero Ogden as a
Member of the Recreation and Park Commission.
5 -C. Final Passage of Ordinance Amending the Alameda Municipal Code
Chapter XIII (Building and Housing) by Repealing Article I,
Section 13.4 (Alameda Electrical Code) in Its Entirety and
Adding a New Article I, Section 13.4 (Alameda Electrical Code)
to Adopt the 2004 California Electrical Code and Approve
Certain Amendments Thereto. (Planning and Building)
5 -D. Recommendation to authorize the submission of an application
with the California Film Commission to enable City
participation in the Film Liaisons In California, Statewide
(FLICS) Program; and
• Adoption of Resolution Establishing the Alameda Film
Commission and Granting It the Formal Designation to Serve
as Its Film Liaison In California, Statewide (FLICS) with
the California Film Commission. (Development Services)
5 -E. Transmittal of Task Force report concerning strategies to
prevent mass termination of tenancies from large apartment
complexes and to create additional affordable housing
opportunities. (City Manager)
6. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON - AGENDA (Public Comment)
Any person may address the Council in regard to any matter
over which the Council has jurisdiction or of which it may
take cognizance, that is not on the agenda.
7. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS (Communications from Council)
7 -A. Consideration of Mayor's nominations for appointment to the
Civil Service Board, Economic Development Commission,
Historical Advisory Board, Housing and Building Code Hearing
and Appeals Board, and Recreation and Park Commission.
8. ADJOURNMENT
• For use in preparing the Official Record, speakers reading a
written statement are invited to submit a copy to the City Clerk
at the meeting or e -mail to: lweisige @ci.alameda.ca.us
• Sign language interpreters will be available on request. Please
contact the City Clerk at 747 -4800 or TDD number 522 -7538 at
least 72 hours prior to the Meeting to request an interpreter.
• Equipment for the hearing impaired is available for public use.
For assistance, please contact the City Clerk at 747 -4800 or TDD
number 522 -7538 either prior to, or at, the Council Meeting.
• Accessible seating for persons with disabilities, including
those using wheelchairs, is available.
• Minutes of the meeting available in enlarged print.
• Audio Tapes of the meeting are available upon request.
• Please contact the City Clerk at 747 -4800 or TDD number 522 -7538
at least 48 hours prior to the meeting to request agenda
materials in an alternative format, or any other reasonable
accommodation that may be necessary to participate in and enjoy
the benefits of the meeting.
HARBOR
BAY
05 SEE 12 P; 3: 20
iS 1 RJHL i;fl :....__.
September 12,
Mayor Beverly Johnson and
Honorable Members of the Alameda City Council
City of Alameda City Hall
2263 Santa Clara Avenue — Room 320
Alameda, CA 94501
Re: Harbor Bay Village Six
Dear Mayor and Honorable City Council Members:
We understand that the City Council has a number of concerns about the Harbor Bay
Village Six development and how it relates to the Development Agreement that the Harbor Bay
developers have with the City. The purpose of this letter is to address these concerns in one
place in a coherent way in order to assist you in your deliberations. We want to clarify our
position on these issues to avoid confusion or misunderstandings.
The acknowledgment by the City Council that the Development Agreement between
Harbor Bay and the City covers the Village Six residential development is the critical threshold
issue that must be addressed before the public hearing process goes forward. This is a legal
matter and one that should not be determined on the merits of the project itself. As we have
explained to City staff, it is not appropriate for the City or Harbor Bay to spend time and money
processing our applications for the General Plan Amendment, rezoning, and environmental
review without a clear understanding that the 1989 Development Agreement is applicable to this
project area; and that the Development Agreement's exemptions from subsequently enacted City
ordinances and from new exactions applies to our proposed project. Our position is that the
Village Six residential development project, which is part of the buildout of Harbor Bay, is
"grandfathered" by the Development Agreement and is exempt from the City's recently enacted
Inclusionary Housing Ordinance. Over the years, we have honored and fulfilled our obligations
under the Development Agreement, and we expect the City to do the same.
In our applications package, we outlined a number of economic benefits to the City that
would result from our proposed residential development compared to developing the site with a
high school and athletic fields or with commercial buildings. In the course of preliminary review
sessions, we have informed City staff that as a good corporate citizen, we are willing to make
additional contributions that will benefit the City - - - $1,000,000 to assist the City with its
programs to provide affordable housing in other locations in the City, and a $500,000
contribution to fund road improvements on North Loop Road and Harbor Bay Parkway.
Re: Item #3 -D
09 -20 -05 Closed Session
Doric Realty, Inc. 1141 Harbor Bay Parkway, Suite 221 Alameda, CA 94502 Phone: (.
September-12, 2005
Page 2
We want to assure the City Council that we are not trying to bypass the Planning Board
review and the public hearings process. We acknowledge that our initial applications for a
General Plan Amendment, rezoning, and for environmental review will receive full scrutiny in
the public hearings before the Planning Board and the City Council. The subsequent
applications for Planned Development, Design Review, and Subdivision Map will also receive
full review in the public hearings that will follow in due course. Any and all concerns about the
capacity of the site to handle the number of units proposed, compatibility with surrounding
existing uses, traffic, airport- related noise exposures, and other land use planning and
environmental issues will be fully addressed during the applications review process.
Residential development is the highest and best use of this property. Residential use
responds favorably to policies in the City's recently updated Housing Element. It also responds
very favorably to the State of California's emerging, powerful policies to provide more housing
for California's growing economy and population. The Governor's "Go California" legislative
package, SB 1024, and SB 836 all speak to the need to create housing close to transportation
centers, and to limit suburban sprawl by concentrating on infill urban sites. These bills when
enacted will provide incentives for developing new housing close to public transportation
centers. The 12 vacant acres along North Loop Road are an urban infill site located within
walking distance of a public transportation hub, the Alameda Harbor Bay Ferry Terminal. The
development will be marketed to people who will use the ferry service at a time when the ferry
service is struggling for ridership, and the City is struggling to retain the ferry service's public
subsidy funding provided through MTC.
In order to process the applications for Village Six in an orderly way, we have
accomplished a number of milestones before beginning the formal public hearing process with
the Alameda Planning Board:
• Traffic Reports have been prepared by Abrams and Associates and submitted to
the City that show that the residential development would generate substantially
less traffic than if the site were developed with commercial uses, and that the
proposed project will not have any significant adverse impacts on the capacity of
roads or intersections on Bay Farm Island, on the main Island of Alameda, or in
the neighboring City of Oakland.
• The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has approved the residential project
as a preferable use of the land than private schools from an aviation perspective.
• Staff of the Port of Oakland has agreed with Harbor Bay that with the mitigation
measures incorporated into the project, the Village Six development is acceptable,
September 12, 2005
Page 3
is preferable to schools, and that the demarcation line between residential and
commercial use on Bay Farm Island can be adjusted to incorporate the project.
• The Board of the Harbor Bay Business Park Association voted unanimously to
recommend that the Business Park owners approve an Amendment to the
Business Park CC &Rs to de -annex the 12 acres of land from the Business Park so
that the residential project can go forward; and the owners have approved that
Amendment.
• SRM Associates and Pacific Coast Capital Partners, the developers of the
Waterfront properties (the former Lucent Campus) and most of the vacant land in
the Business Park, have agreed with Harbor Bay that with the mitigation measures
incorporated into the project, residential use of the 12 acres along North Loop
Road is compatible with present and future commercial uses in the Business Park.
We hope that the points we raise in this letter will help the City Council finalize its
determination on the threshold legal issue that the Development Agreement covers our proposed
Village Six residential development so that we can move forward with the environmental review
and the public hearings on the merits of our applications.
Very truly yours,
Stephen K. Brimhall
CITY OF ALAMEDA
MEMORANDUM
Date: September 13, 2005
To: Honorable Chair and Members of the
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
From: Debra Kurita
Executive Director
Re: Recommendation to Approve the Fourth Amended Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement
between the City of Alameda and East Bay Municipal Utility District
BACKGROUND
On May 2, 1997, the City entered into a Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement with East Bay
Municipal Utility District ( EBMUD) for the operation and maintenance of the water distribution
facilities at Alameda Point. This Agreement was amended on October 1, 1999, October 2, 2001 and
October 1, 2003 to authorize EBMUD to continue to operate and maintain the water distribution
facilities at Alameda Point. The current Agreement expires September 30, 2005. The new
Amendment extends the terms of the Agreement to September 30, 2008 and allows for an additional
two -year extension.
DISCUSSION
Since 1997, East Bay Municipal Utility District ( EBMUD) has operated and maintained the water
distribution facilities at Alameda Point for the City through a Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement.
The City compensates EBMUD for all associated costs, but requires City approval for any general
operations or emergency work that exceeds a specified dollar amount. The Fourth Amended
Agreement will enable EBMUD to continue to operate and maintain the Alameda Point water
distribution facilities for the City until September 30, 2008 and allows for an additional two -year
extension. The Amendment also increases the maximum allowance for routine operations from
$5,000 to $6,000 per month and for emergency work from $20,000 to $25,000 per event. Both
parties are agreeable to the terms and conditions of the Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement. A copy
of the Agreement is on file in the City Clerk's Office.
BUDGET CONSIDERATION/FINANCIAL IMPACT
There is no impact to the General Fund. This work is funded by Alameda Point Lease Revenues and
is included in the adopted 2005/2006 budget. The City will compensate EBMUD for its actual costs
to perform operations, maintenance and related services. The maximum allowance for routine
operations and maintenance services may not exceed $6,000 per month with prior City authorization.
Report 2 -A
9 -20 -05
Dedicated to Excellence, Committed to Service
Honorable Chair and Members of the Page 2
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority September 13, 2005
Emergency services may not exceed $25,000 per emergency repair event, without prior City verbal
approval (verified in writing within 24 hours). The estimated annual cost for this work is $115,000.
MUNICIPAL CODE /POLICY DOCUMENT CROSS REFERENCE
This action does not affect the Municipal Code.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the ARRA Governing Board approve the Fourth Amended Joint Exercise of
Powers Agreement between the City of Alameda and East Bay Municipal Utility District.
Respect lly submitted,
Matthew T. Naclerio
Public Works Director
MTN:gc
cc: Ted Lam, Maintenance Superintendent, EBMUD
Nanette Banks, Development Services Department
G:\pubworks\pwadmin\COUNCID2005\092005ba2005.doc
Dedicated to Excellence, Committed to Excellence
UNAPPROVED MINUTES
MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION MEETING
TUESDAY - - - AUGUST 16, 2005 - - - 6:45 P.M.
Chair Johnson convened the Special Meeting at 6:55 p.m.
Roll Call - Present: Commissioners Daysog, deHaan, Gilmore,
Matarrese, and Mayor Johnson - 5.
Absent: None.
The Special Meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider:
(05- ) Conference with Real Property Negotiators - Property:
Fleet Industrial Supply Center; Negotiating parties: Catellus
Limited Operating Partnership and Community Improvement Commission;
Under negotiation: Price and terms.
Following the Closed Session, the Special Meeting was reconvened
and Chair Johnson announced that the Commission gave direction to
the Real Property negotiators and no action was taken.
Adjournment
There being no further business, Chair Johnson adjourned the
Special Meeting at 7:30 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Lara Weisiger
Secretary, Community Improvement
Commission
The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown
Act.
Special Meeting
Community Improvement Commission
August 16, 2005
UNAPPROVED MINUTES
MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION MEETING
TUESDAY- - AUGUST 16, 2005- -7:35 P.M.
Chair Johnson convened the Special Meeting at 2:40 a.m., August 17,
2005.
ROLL CALL - Present: Commissioners Daysog, deHaan, Gilmore,
Matarrese, and Chair Johnson - 5.
Absent: None.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Chair Johnson announced that the Resolution Authorizing the
Executive Director to Execute a Fourth Amendment to the DDA
[paragraph no. 05- ] was removed from the Consent Calendar for
discussion.
Commissioner Matarrese moved approval of the remainder of the
Consent Calendar.
Commissioner Gilmore seconded the motion, which carried by
unanimous voice vote - 5.
[Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk preceding
the paragraph number.]
( *05- ) Minutes of the Special Joint City Council, Community
Improvement Commission (CIC), Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment
Authority, and Housing Authority Board of Commissioners Meeting,
and the Special CIC Meeting of August 2, 2005. Approved.
( *05- ) Recommendation to approve a Contract with Cooper Pugeda
Management, Inc. /The Allen Group, LLC for Construction Management
Services for rehabilitation of the Historic Alameda Theater Project
and proposed Civic Center Parking Garage for $1,114,436. Accepted.
(05- ) Resolution No. 05 -138, "Authorizing the Executive
Director to Execute a Fourth Amendment to the Disposition and
Development Agreement (DDA) by and Between the Community
Improvement Commission and Catellus Limited Operating Partnership
(Developer) Which Would Extend the Expiration Term by One Year From
June 2007 to June 2008 in Order to Allow the Developer to Explore a
Change from Commercial Office /Research and Development Land to a
Mixed -Use Retail /Residential Land Use at the Former U.S. Navy Fleet
Industrial Supply Center (FISC) Property." Adopted.
Special Meeting
Community Improvement Commission
August 16, 2005
1
Commissioner Matarrese inquired whether adoption of the resolution
would allow Catellus to explore a change in the current DDA.
The Development Services Director responded that the amendment
would allow Catellus to explore re- entitlement of the existing
property.
Commissioner Matarrese inquired whether there would be a public
process that would allow people to comment, to which the
Development Services Director responded in the affirmative.
Commissioner Matarrese stated that he wanted people to be aware
that the matter would be publicly noticed and that Catellus would
be given a year to provide more information.
Commissioner Matarrese moved adoption of the resolution.
Commissioner Gilmore seconded the motion, which carried by the
following voice vote: Ayes: Commissioners Daysog, Gilmore,
Matarrese, and Chair Johnson - 4. Abstentions: Commissioner deHaan
- 1.
AGENDA ITEMS
None.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, Chair Johnson adjourned the
Special Meeting at 2:45 a.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Lara Weisiger
Secretary, Community Improvement
Commission
The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown
Act.
Special Meeting
Community Improvement Commission
August 16, 2005
2
CITY OF ALAMEDA
Memorandum
To: Honorable Chair and Members
of the Community Improvement Commission
From: Debra Kurita
Executive Director
Date: August 16, 2005
Re: Recommendation that the Community Improvement Commission Approve a
Contract with LPA. Inc. in an amount not to exceed $148,500 to Provide
Design Development, Construction Documents, Coordination with the
Department of the State Architect, Bid Negotiations and Construction
Administration Services for Development of the Alameda Recreation and
Parks Department 4 -acre Park at Bayport
BACKGROUND
The new Bayport neighborhood is the first new development to be built on the former U.S.
Navy East Housing and Fleet Industrial Supply Center ( "FISC ") property acquired by the
City in 2000. The Bayport residential project includes 437 market -rate single - family homes,
58 below market duet townhouses and 91 units of low and very low- income affordable
rental housing. In addition, a new 7 -acre, K -8 School ( "School ") and 4 -acre community
park ( "Park ") will complement the new Bayport neighborhood.
The new School and Park are being developed by the Alameda Unified School District
( "AUSD ") and the City of Alameda's Recreation and Parks Department ( "ARPD ")
respectively, under a Joint Use Agreement that was executed in January 2005
( "Agreement "). Construction of the School is currently underway. Schematic design of the
adjoining Park and community building (which will be located on AUSD School site) is
complete and has been reviewed and approved by the City's Recreation and Parks
Commission with input from its Field Advisory Committee in July 2005. Both the School
and Park are scheduled to open in September 2006.
In 2003, AUSD and ARPD retained LPA Sacramento, Inc. (Architects, Planners and
Landscape Architects) to prepare a joint use, site -wide Master Plan, which was developed
through a community involvement process. The fee for this initial scope of work was
$9,000. ARPD has also retained LPA for the completion of schematic design for both the
Park and community building under another professional service contract for $16,000. As
a result, the total amount paid to LPA to date is $25,000.
The proposed contract will authorize LPA to complete design development, including
construction documents, bid negotiations, and construction administration for the Park and
community building. The not to exceed contract amount is $135,000, plus reimbursables
of up to $13,500, or $148,500. Report 1 -B
9 -20 -05
Honorable Chair and Members August 16, 2005
of the Community Improvement Commission Page 2 of 4
DISCUSSION
The existing Joint Use Agreement between AUSD and ARPD identifies the parties'
respective rights, duties and obligations regarding construction, as well as the use and
maintenance of various improvements to be constructed on the 7 -acres of land owned by
AUSD and 4 -acres of land owned by ARPD. Improvements to be constructed on the
AUSD 7 -acre site include new facilities for the proposed K -8 school and the ARPD
community building. Improvements to be constructed on the ARPD 4 -acre site include a
youth play area, little league baseball fields and a championship soccer field.
As provided for in the Agreement, AUSD will lease to the ARPD up to 2,000 square feet of
the school site, at no cost, for a term of fifty years. The ARPD will construct and operate a
community building on the site. The community building will be used to support ARPD
programs and will also be available to the community for eligible rental activities. Hours of
operation and use of the Park, School, community building and parking lot by AUSD or
ARPD are specified in the Agreement.
In 2003, AUSD solicited architecture firms through an openly advertised, competitive
Request For Qualifications process. The major selection criteria included: 1) Experience in
the design and construction administration of public educational facilities, 2) Experience in
working with the Office of the State Architect, 3) The firm's ability to provide a full scope of
services within budget, and 4) Fee for the proposed scope. The AUSD screening and
selection committee included a representative from ARPD and the City's Public Works
Department. Each member of the committee individually ranked respondents to the
Request For Qualifications. After references were checked, LPA Sacramento, Inc. was
selected by AUSD as the most qualified firm with the lowest fee for services.
Based on the selection process used by AUSD, participation by the City, and qualifications
of the firm selected, staff is recommending that LPA be used to proceed with design
development, construction documents, bid negotiations and construction administration of
the Park and community building. Given the importance of the design coordination between
the School and community building and the required consultation with the Office of the
State Architect for school facilities, it is cost - effective to continue working with the current
project architect. The scope of work under the proposed LPA contract includes the
completion of design development, construction documents, and coordination with the
Department of State Architect process, bid negotiations and construction administration.
BUDGET CONSIDERATION /FINANCIAL IMPACT
This contract for professional services will not require any supplemental appropriations or
have any fiscal impact on the City's General Fund. The total development cost for design
and construction of the Park and community building is included in the Catellus / Bayport
Project Budget approved by the CIC and City Council in April 2005. The Park and
community building project budget in the amount of $1,571,400 will be funded by Project
Dedicated to Excellence, Committed to Service
Honorable Chair and Members August 16, 2005
of the Community Improvement Commission Page 3 of 4
Revenues generated from the Catellus / Bayport Project. Maintenance of the 4 -acre park
will be paid for from funds collected from Bayport residents in the form of a "Supplemental
Community Facilities District Special Tax ". Maintenance of the 4 -acre Park has been
budgeted at $114,000.00 per year with an allowance for inflation tied to the consumer price
index.
MUNICIPAL CODE /POLICY DOCUMENT CROSS REFERENCE
This action does not affect the Municipal Code. The CIC contract with LPA, Inc. is in
conformance with the City Council Resolution No. 13643 Establishing a Policy of Fiscal
Neutrality Regarding Development at the Fleet Industrial Supply Center /East Housing
And Alameda Point.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The new Park and School were included in the original environmental review for the
Catellus Mixed -Use Project. No additional CEQA review is required.
RECOMMENDATION
Authorize the Executive Director of the CIC to execute a Contract with LPA. Inc., not to
exceed $148,500, for the purposes of providing design development, construction
documents, coordination with the Department of the State Architect, bid negotiations and
construction administration services for development of the Alameda Recreation and Parks
Department 4 -acre park and community building at Bayport.
DK /LAL /DC: dc
Respectfully submitted,
e
ent Services Director
By: i oug Cole
Redevelopment Manager
Dedicated to Excellence, Committed to Service
Honorable Chair and Members August 16, 2005
of the Community Improvement Commission Page 4 of 4
Attachments:
1) Executed Joint -Use Agreement
2) Joint -Use Park and School Master Plan Concept
3) K -8 School Master Plan Concept
4) Schematic Park Landscape Plan
5) Schematic Community Building Floor Plan and Exterior Elevation
6) LPA Consultant Agreement (on file with the City Clerk's Office)
G :IComdevlBase Reuse& Redevp\DougColelParkILPA Contract CIC Staff Report 081605 Final Changes.doc
Dedicated to Excellence, Committed to Service
ATTACHMENT 1
AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE ALAMEDA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT
AND THE CITY OF ALAMEDA RECREATION AND PARKS DEPARTMENT FOR THE
USE AND DEVELOPMENT OF REAL PROPERTY
This Agreement, made and entered into this s'�' day of ,SAN , 2Ge4by and
between the Alameda Unified School District (hereinafter known as "School District ") of
Alameda County, State of California, and the City of Alameda (hereinafter known as
"City ") of the City of Alameda, a Charter City and Municipal Corporation.
RECITALS
WHEREAS, Chapter 10 of Part 7 of Title 1 of the Education Code of the State of
California authorized and empowers public school districts and other public agencies to
cooperate with each other and to that end enter into agreements with each other for the
purpose of organizing, promoting, and conducting programs of community recreation,
establish systems of playgrounds and recreation, and acquire, construction, improve,
maintain and operate recreation centers as provided in Education Code § 10902; and
WHEREAS, it is in the public interest that the recreational and educational
facilities of public agencies be put to the fullest possible use; and
WHEREAS, the School District intends to construct a new K -8 school on seven
( ) acre6 l)r land it OVV„. dCL Lu e, WI[nln [1 iC Jdy(.3O(t Li v Jp(I ICI I[ site; d..0
WHEREAS, the City intends to develop a park on four (4) acres of land its owns,
or intends to acquire, adjacent to the proposed seven (7) acre school site within the
Bayport Development site; and
WHEREAS, the City and the School District desire to establish a basis for the
cooperative use the new K -8 school in the Bayport Development site and the adjacent
park site.
WHEREAS, the City and the School District desire to set forth their respective
rights duties and obligations with respect to the construction, use and maintenance of
the various improvements to be constructed on the new K -8 school and adjacent park
site.
NOW, THEREFORE, IN CONSIDERATION of the mutual covenants and
conditions contained in this Agreement, School District and City agree as follows:
1. Park Site
Concurrent with School District's acquisition of the above - referenced school
site. City has acquired title to and intends to construct, at its sole cost, a four (4) acre
park site (hereinafter known as -Park Site'), as specifically aescribea in Exhibit "A'
attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. Facilities within the Park
Site shall be segregated into two separate areas. One area shall contain various play
grounds, picnic area and restroom facilities and shall be no larger than one (1) acre in
area (the "Play Ground and Restroom Area ". The remaining land area of the park shall
contain one or more playing fields ( "Play Field Area "). In addition, the Park Site shall
contain a minimum of 35 parking spaces ( "Park Site Parking ").
2. School Site
On the School Site, School District intends to construct, at its sole cost,
various educational facilities ( "Educational Buildings "), school grounds consisting of an
asphalt play area on no less than 20,000 square feet containing at least two basketball
courts and a variety of pavement games and also including fencing ( "School Grounds
Area "), and a multi - purpose building ( "Multi- purpose Building ") and a minimum of 40
parking spaces adjacent to the Park Site Parking (" School Parking ") specifically
described in Exhibit "B" attached.
3. Community Building
The School District agrees to lease the City two thousand (2,000) square feet
of the School Site, for no cost, for a term of fifty (50) years for the purpose of enabling
the City to construct, at its sole cost, and operate a Community Building (the
"Community Building Leased Area "). The School District has the absolute discretion to
identify the location of the Community Building Leased Area on the School Site.
4. City Maintenance Obligations
City agrees to maintain and provide utility service to the Park Site and
Liornmunay Buuuu,y, ai iu I nmuntty buiiaing Lease() f;rea al a revci or II idrntenance
consistent with other City parks and facilities.
5. School District Maintenance Obligations
School District agrees to maintain and provide utility service to the School
Grounds Area, the Multi- purpose Building and both the Park Site Parking and the
School Parking at a level of maintenance consistent with other School District school
sites, buildings and parking lots.
6. Park Site Use
For the term of this Agreement, this section 6 shall govern the use of the park
site.
a. During School Hours
The City shall grant the School District an non - exclusive license for the
priority use of the Play Field Area and Park Site Parking from the hours of 7:30 a.m. to
3:30 p.m. on days when the new K -8 school is open for regular instruction ( "School
Hours ") except that the City may, upon five (5) days prior notice, exclude the School
District from the Play Field Area for park maintenance operational needs and City
sponsored services such as health and safety programs, emergency services exercises
and related services. The Play Ground and Restroom Area will remain open to the
puottc at au time the parts site is open for any type use.
City shall retain the exclusive right to schedule all use of the Park Site
during School Hours. However, during School Hours, the School District shall have the
first right to reserve the Play Field Area for its exclusive use for physical education
programs, class recess activities or other programmed school activities. The School
District may notify the City of its intended use of the Play Field Area up to twelve months
and at least twenty -four (24) hours in advance of its intended use. The City shall have
the right to schedule the use of the Play Field Area no earlier than three (3) months in
advance and the public shall have the right to schedule the use of the Playing Fieid
Area no earlier than one (1) month in advance. So long as there is no prior scheduled
use of the Play Field Area, the School District shall have the right to reserve the Play
Field Area for its use.
b. Non - School Hours
City shall retain the exclusive right to schedule all use of the Park Site
during the periods before 7:30 a.m. and after 3:30 p.m. on days when the new K -8
school is open for session and all day long on weekends and school holidays, (the times
when the School District does not have priority use) (Non - School Hours). However,
during Non - School Hours the City shall give first pr ;crity to request for use of the Park
Site to City sponsored programs, second priority to requests for use by the School
District and thereafter to requests by the public. School District may apply for priority
use up to a maximum of six (6) months prior to the desired date of use. The general
public will have the right to schedule use of the site up to a maximum of three (3)
months prior to the desired date of use. Previously scheduled uses will take
precedence. In the event a conflict occurs City will work cooperatively with the School
District to resolve the scheduling use. City, at its sole discretion, may grant or deny use
of me site. vVnen mere is no scneauiea use or the Park cite, it snail oe upen tor uasual
use by the general public.
7. School Site Use
a. During School Hours
School District shall have exclusive use of the entire School Site, including
the School Grounds Area, during School Hours with the exception of the Community
Building Leased Area.
b. Non School Hours
Subject to applicable State law, the School Grounds Area shall be open
and available for public use during Non - school hours. School District will have priority
for after school programs, and once scheduled, will take priority over public use. The
School District shall provide reasonable notice to the City of the dates and times during
Non - School Hours when it has scheduled the use of the School Site Play Area.
8. School Building Use
The School District shall have the exclusive and absolute right to use the
Educational Buildings at all times. The School District shall have the exclusive right to
use the Multi- purpose Building during School Hours. However, the School District will
permit, .,vith reasonable p:.!or notice, the City to use, or schedule the use, the Multi-
purpose Building during non - School Hours, but extending to 8:30 a.m. on mornings and
commencing at 3:00 p.m. on afternoons when school is open for instruction, so long as
the School District has not scheduled a prior use. Irk the event a request is received by
School District for use during these hours, School District will work cooperatively with
City to resolve the scheduling conflict. The foregoing notwithstanding, the School
District, at its sole discretion, may grant or deny any use of the Multi- purpose Building.
3
9. Community Building Use
In accordance with paragraph 3 above, the City may construct the Community
Building at City's sole cost on an area of the School Site designated by the School
District. Within the Community Building, City intends to operate before school and after
school recreation programs for school students during the school year and recreation
camp programs during the summer as well as recreation preschool /tiny tot programs for
community residents during the day year- around. The City shall have the exclusive
right to use the Community Building at any time for any public use. However, the City
will permit, with reasonable prior notice, the School District to use, or schedule the use,
the Community Building during times when the City is not using, or has not scheduled
another public use of the Community Building. In the event a request is received by the
City for the School District use of the Community Building, the City will work
cooperatively with the School District to accommodate the scheduling request. The
foregoing notwithstanding, the City, at its reasonable discretion, may grant or deny any
use of the Community Building.
10. Parking Lot Use
a. During School Hours
During School Hours, the School District shall have the exclusive use of
both the Park Site Parking and School Parking except that the School District shall
caci vc d cwo uI6duiea parKiny spaces and five (5) one hour limited time
parking spaces for Park Site, School Site and Community Building visitors.
b. Non School Hours
During Non - school hours all Parking shall be available for use by the
public.
The joint use of the Parking as set forth above shall be reflected in a
reciprocal easement to be executed and recorded by parties.
11. Park Site Improvements
School District may not make any improvements to the Park Site without the
prior written consent of City. Any improvements constructed on Park Site by School
District, when constructed, shall be considered fixtures of the City's real property, and
title to such improvements shall be thereafter vested in the City, unless School District
and City agree in writing that title to said improvements shall vest to the benefit of the
other party. City retains the right to require School District to remove any improvements
made by School District without City consent, at sole cost of School District.
12. School Site Improvements
City may not make any improvements, with the exception of the Community
Building, to the School Site without the prior written consent of School District. Any
improvements constructed on School Site by City shall be considered fixtures of the
School Site, and title to such improvements shall be vest to the School District, unless
City and School District agree in writing that title to said improvements shall vest to the
benefit of the other party. School District retains the right to require City to remove any
improvements made by City without School District consent, at sole cost of City.
4
Further, upon termination of this Agreement, the City shall terminate its lease of the
Community Building Leased Area.
13. Term of Agreement
This Agreement may be terminated Fifty (50) years from the date of this
Agreement with 90 days written notice to the non - terminating party. If the Agreement is
not terminated upon the completion of the fifty (50) year term, it shall be automatically
extended for successive five -year terms unless terminated pursuant to the terms of this
paragraph. If the Agreement is extended pursuant to this section, the ground lease of
the portion of the School Site for the Community Building shall be similarly extended
14. Insurance
a. School District
School District shall maintain at all times a policy of comprehensive
general liability insurance in the principal amount of a least Two Million Dollars
($2,000,000.00) combined single limit per occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury
and property damage, automobile liability insurance in the principal amount of a least
Two Million Dollars ($2,000,000.00) combined single limit per occurrence for bodily
persVi ial ;i jui y acid prcipe ty UQi � �a.. c aI IU ,VV VI t \GIJ OUl l lf.i C.I IJaUVI I I( IJuftii IUe ao
may be required by law. Said policy shall be endorsed to name the City of Alameda,
rnoards, Commissions, its officers, employees, agents, and volunteers as adaitional
insureds regarding liabilities arising out of School District's use of the Park Site. Said
policy shall be endorsed as primary and shall contain provisions which preclude policy
suspension, policy cancellation, or reduction in policy limits except after thirty (30) days
prior written notice to the City by certified mail, return receipt requested.
b. CITY
City shall at all times maintain a policy of comprehensive general
liability insurance in the principal amount of at least Two Million Dollars ($2,000,000.00)
combined single limit per occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury and property
damage, automobile liability insurance in the principal amount of a least Two Million
Dollars ($2,000,000.00) combined single limit per occurrence for bodily injury, personal
injury and property damage, and Workers' Compensation Insurance as may be required
by law. Said policy shall be endorsed to name the School District, its officers,
employees, agents, and volunteers as additional insureds regarding liabilities arising out
of City's use of the School Site or any improvement located on the School Site. Said
policy shall be endorsed as primary and shall contain provisions which preclude policy
suspension, policy cancellation, or reduction in policy limits except for thirty (30) days
prior written notice to the School District by certified mail, return receipt requested.
15. Indemnification
City shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless the School District, is Bcards,
Commissions, officers and employees from and against any and all loss, damages,
liability, claims, suits, costs and expenses whatsoever, including reasonable attorneys'
fees, regardless of the merits or outcome of any such claim or suit arising form or in any
manner connected to City's use of the School Site, including any improvement !coated
on the School Site pursuant to this Agreement.
School District shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless the City, its City
Council, Boards and Commissions, officers and employees from and against any and all
Toss, damages, liability, claims, suits, costs and expenses whatsoever, including
reasonable attorneys' fees, regardless of the merits or outcome of any such claim or
suit arising from or in any manner connected to District's use of the Park Site or the
Community Building pursuant to this Agreement.
16. Notice
When written notice is required under this Agreement it shall.be made by
registered mail to the School District at:
And to the City at:
School Superintendent
Alameda Unified School District
2200 Central Ave.
Alameda, CA 94501
“11,4110.G1
City of Alameda
2263 Santa (. ara Ave.
Alameda, CA 94501
Notice regarding scheduling matters shall be written and shall be delivered to the
Maintenance, Operations and Facilities Director for the School District or its designated
representative and shall be delivered to the City through the Recreation and Parks
Director for the City of Alameda or the Recreation Services Manager for the City of
Alameda. Reasonable prior notice as used in this Agreement shall under no
circumstances be less than 24 hours prior notice.
17. No Requirement to Construct Improvements
Nothing in this Agreement shall be deemed to require the School District or
City to construct any improvements on the Park Site or the School Site.
18. Effectiveness of the Agreement
The rights and duties of each party to this Agreement shall be effective only
after all of the improvements, with the exception of the Community Building, have been
constructed and accepted as complete by the constructing party. In addition, if all of the
improvements contemplated under this Agreement have not been completed within ten
(10) years of the date of this Agreement, the rights and duties set forth herein shall
expire and have no force and effect. Further, if the City has not constructed the
Community Building or the School Distr -i has not constructed the school within ten (10)
years from the date of this Agreement, or if the School District at any time declares the
School Site as Surplus Property under applicable State law, the City will terminate its
ground lease on the School Site.
6
19. No Third Party Beneficiary
This Agreement is by and between the parties named herein and no third
party is intended either by expression or implication to be benefited by this Agreement.
20. Attorneys Fees
In the event of any controversy, claim or dispute between the parties arising
out of or relating to this Agreement or the breach, interpretation or enforcement of
same, the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover from the other party reasonable
expenses, attorney's fees and costs.
21. Modification
This Agreement may only be modified in writing by mutual agreement of the
parties.
22. Invalid Term
In the event that any provision of this Agreement shall in any respect be
declared invalid, illegal, or unenforceable, such invalidity, legality or unenforceability
shall not effect any other term or condition of this Agreement, and this Agreement shall
be interpreted as though such illegal, unenforceable or invalid term or condition was not
a part hereof.
23. Assignment
Neither party to this Agreement shall assign the Agreement as a whole
without the written consent of the other.
24. Entire Agreement
This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the parties. There
are no understandings, agreements, representations, or warranties, express or implied,
not specified in this Agreement.
25. Authorization
Each person executing this Agreement represents that the party on whose
behalf the person is executing the Agreement has duly authorized the execution of this
Agreement and that such person is authorized to execute the Agreement on behalf of
such party.
7
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be
executed this 5441 day of ',-1 , 2004'
ALAMEDA UNIFIED SCHOOL CITY OF ALAMEDA
DISTRICT
e.
Alan K ishino,uperintendent
Rev. 11/17/04
b/h /Catellus
pksiteagreement
A Municipal Corporation
r.r
\--kk...<- , -4--.--. • C -1 11..a�-L -;
Man „City Ma ger
RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL:
/,---L-
uz nnepta, Director
Al rriedig Recreation & Parks
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Donna Mooney, Deputy City Atto ney
8
ATTACHMENT 2
ts
ALAMEDA PARK - CATELLUS SITE
ALAMEDA, CALIFORNIA
MASTER PLAN CONCEPT
2 I
1.2
ll
nil
•,
m
0
f..
��i
•
lt
etteatteek .414 040xito .,,_
-4-iiiiiiiiiiiii2:_gotathmtift...,-,ok $
in 1■11M1
•
11
111 dialed 5 ■L�7i.�i.li ■ ■renr.l.ly.l • �t1. �i�y.
gm
41) �I�IIIIIIn11r>tW #W #W 41''.x.
WI= WI! anallketifi
1IEI1iT1 [■- c,al �, ,•! '
I; air. 1111fIi1111i1o1111srIIQ111! . ,1111 9 ]
. : rrllr1�(r7jj11c•r' Alm m ■ S9ta�loa
-- ., NEB_ - ;:���iwT�`` 1iti `+ Aril F ■ w�
¶ X1111111111 !11111IIIU1111IIIIIII►!I�' Air 11 • +'
IRO DM. . I!'O1 _II /o
FA o OM ? 11' <I? 113 �yi $
'lull ILL' I l�•II �`�`, � : rs..
, MI 5 II +`I mi l! ■ �,I' a3 �'
lel IIVNI 1011 fe
111111YVl11I■ 1111i1Y111V1111IIlIIIIIII �Ea�MaEEqqRp� I Il�lll '�'
F / _ ■■�r' it =u ®'♦/ErI'
■L-- - -� ■�� ��11���,� ►' IiI�WI�m�aitIIII��n� g� 111 .
s 1111111111111 ■111111■UIIIIIIIIIIkilIIII �w i soneII�11a .AP'
i 1 °�/ 0 11 •.'111 -4(1P 'I:.II WAIL: 'I� s■■.l,
m n (, =00000■
04,41 R 1111 ..■■■.■■i■■i■■.■■■■iUi ■I1111:11116:i I 1' 1 -. iw■
1 '' r,�■ 1(
/ MI - - -� - ■i■11= = 111'x: ;1I i � m ■
11 w s = III VIII :/11 �
elli��L1]11= -' -III =R...■ s v III ,
UV ►1i.■ I 1 ■
' ru,rlti4 1II .■■■n ■■■■■■■0s ■. /
mom. s / ; N o nc�nrs� : :� ��
1 / ■ ■I S �aaw:s�T ,p■
a 1
Illini ,--- --,..-- •
■.I...1�■illl ■ IF
■
L / 41
• ' » „! •
Iii
Ili
11161
Illi-
• r■
ATTACHMENT 3
Ir40
+r.un•itw:
1th
;'°'O
i%
Lin
ir
OEN
wrim
...
BIM
MM
i�
AAA
ABM
m•Ime .11F
(,I)
1
OO (I,1
g9
LL U m
44110
Igo
Nedd ALINf11114103
z
� °ul
ALAMEDA PARK - CATELLUS SITE
MASTER PLAN CONCEPT
W0SIOq 'Wd 66:OT :t 1700Z /I•I/ZI '6Mp•ueld adeDspue7 \u6!sap \0'
ERSE
ATTACHMENT 4
ATTACHMENT 5
ALAM9E.DA PARK RECREATION AND PARKS FACILITY
FLOOR PLAN & EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS
Proclamation
Whereas, the United Nations was founded in San Francisco in 1945, and the
anniversary of its founding is observed each year on October 24th
making this its sixtieth anniversary; and
Whereas, the United Nations system has a commendable record of achievement
and faces extraordinary challenges in preventing and resolving conflict,
protecting the earth's environment, elevating standards of living through
sustainable economic development, and promoting humane and
democratic values; and
Whereas, the work of the United Nations has a direct impact on the people of the
United States and all the world's peoples, directly affecting their
security, health, economic well - being, and enjoyment of basic freedoms;
and
Whereas, the immense challenges facing the 191 member governments of the
United Nations require public support of the goals of the United Nations
Charter; and
Whereas, the U.N. Secretary- General and the General Assembly have called upon
all peoples to observe the organization's sixtieth anniversary along with
the United Nations Association of the U.S.A. and many other citizen
organizations who are marking the sixtieth anniversary;
NOW, THEREFORE, we, the Mayor and Council of the City of Alameda, do hereby
proclaim October 2005 as
United Nations Month
in the City of Alameda and invite our fellow citizens to honor the mission, spirit, and
potential of the United ► : . - _ and encourage participation in events that celebrate
the 60th anniversary of is uni ' 4e and irreplaceable organization.
Mayor
ohnson
Vice Mayor Marie Gilmore
Councilmember Doug deHaan
GIT OF4,
O Fp
tQ 1; n
"ORATGO
Councilmember Tony Daysog
Councilmember Frank Matarrese
Proclamation 3 -A
9 -20 -05
Proclamation
Whereas, the City of Alameda supports a clean and safe environment for its
residents; and
Whereas, pollution prevention is an approach to environmental protection
that focuses on source reduction, and is therefore a preferable
strategy because there is less waste to handle and thereby, protects
public health and the environment; and
Whereas, pollution prevention can increase industrial efficiency and save
businesses money by avoiding the need for expensive investments
in waste management and cleanup; and
Whereas, pollution prevention fosters both environmental protection and
increased economic competitiveness; and
Whereas, by focusing attention on pollution prevention, the City of Alameda
will meet the challenges for improving economic competitiveness,
strengthening environmental protection, and streamlining
environmental regulation; and
Whereas, National Pollution Prevention Week is an opportunity for
government, industry, and environmental organizations to
recognize the potential of pollution prevention and work together
toward a prosperous and sustainable future,
NOW, THEREFORE, I, Beverly Johnson, Mayor of the City of Alameda, do
hereby recognize the week of September 18-24, 2005 as
National Pollution Prevention Week, 2005
and urge all citizens, businesses, civic groups, government agencies and other
organizations to participate in local and regional bratory and educational
activities, including the Coastal Clean-Up o Saturd , September 17, 2005
and the Tire Amnesty Program on Saturday, epte $ er 2
ev
Mayo
son
Proclamation 3-B
9-20-05
UNAPPROVED MINUTES
MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING
TUESDAY - - - SEPTEMBER 6, 2005 - - - 6:10 P.M.
Mayor Johnson convened the Special Meeting at 6:15 p.m.
Roll Call -
Present: Councilmembers Daysog, deHaan, Gilmore,
Matarrese, and Mayor Johnson - 5.
Absent: None.
The Special Meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider:
(05- ) Conference with Labor Negotiators - Agency Negotiator: Beverly
Johnson; Employee: City Attorney.
(05- ) Public Employee Performance Evaluation - Title: City Attorney.
(05- ) Conference with Legal Counsel - Anticipated Litigation;
Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section
54956.9; Number of cases: One.
(05- ) Conference with Real Property Negotiators - Property: 2900
Main Street; Negotiating parties: City of Alameda and Alameda Gateway,
Ltd; Under negotiation: Price and terms.
* **
Mayor Johnson called a recess to hold the Regular City Council Meeting at
7:25 p.m and reconvened the Closed Session at 10:05 p.m.
* **
Following the Closed Session, the Special Meeting was reconvened and
Mayor Johnson announced that regarding Conference with Labor Negotiators,
the Council discussed labor negotiations; regarding Public Employee
Performance Evaluation, the Council did not discuss the matter; regarding
Conference with Legal Council, the Council directed that the matter be
further researched and brought back on September 20, 2005; and regarding
Conference with Real Property Negotiators, the Council directed that a
response letter be sent.
Adjournment
There being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the Special
Meeting at 11:30 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Lara Weisiger
City Clerk
The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown
Act.
Special Meeting
Alameda City Council
September 6, 2005
1
UNAPPROVED MINUTES
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
TUESDAY - - SEPTEMBER 6, 2005 - - 7:30 P.M.
Mayor Johnson convened the Regular Meeting at 7:36 p.m.
ROLL CALL - Present: Councilmembers Daysog, deHaan, Gilmore,
Matarrese, and Mayor Johnson - 5.
Absent: None.
AGENDA CHANGES
None.
PROCLAMATIONS, SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY AND ANNOUNCEMENTS
(05- ) Library Project update.
The Project Manager gave a brief presentation.
Mayor Johnson stated that she continually receives positive
comments from the public.
(05- ) Sherri Stieg, West Alameda Business Association,
announced that the Peanut Butter Jam Festival would be held on
September 10 and .11, 2005 between Webster Street and Pacific
Avenue; presented wine glasses to the Council; thanked the City and
Alameda Power & Telecom for sponsoring the event.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Mayor Johnson announced that the recommendation to authorize the
Mayor to send letters to federal legislators [paragraph no. 05-
was removed from the Consent Calendar for discussion.
Councilmember Matarrese moved approval of the remainder of the
Consent Calendar.
Vice Mayor Gilmore seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous
voice vote - 5.
[Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk preceding
the paragraph number.]
( *05- ) Minutes of the Special and Regular City Council meetings
held on August 16, 2005. Approved.
( *05- ) Ratified bills in the amount of $11,953,915.90.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
September 6, 2005
1
(05- ) Recommendation to authorize the Mayor to send letters to
federal legislators supporting S. 1260 (Vitter), S. 113
(Feinstein), H.R. 2353 (Rogers), and H.R. 3431 (Dent) which amend
federal legislation to further restrict the establishment of tribal
gambling casinos.
Doug Siden, East Bay Regional Park District (EBRPD), thanked the
Council for the efforts to stop the gambling casino proposal at
Martin Luther King Park; encouraged continual vigilance; stated
that the Tribe's application has not been withdrawn; there has been
no response to EBRPD's communications to the Bureau of Indian
Affairs.
Mayor Johnson stated there has been a true partnership between all
the affected cities, EBRPD, and the County; the public should be
informed of federal representatives actions;; read a portion of the
proposed legislation; stated local control at the federal level
means the Governor; that she would prefer local control be more
local; the Governor does not have much control over casinos; there
is a lot of important work being done that will help the community.
Councilmember Daysog stated that there is a slew of legislation
pushing back on casinos' efforts to enter urban areas; H.R. 3431
would ensure local governments within 15 miles of a proposed site
have a say; encouraged H.R. 3431 be strengthened.
Councilmember Matarrese moved to approval of the staff
recommendation.
Councilmember deHaan seconded the motion, which carried by
unanimous voice vote - 5.
( *05- ) Recommendation to accept the work of Gallagher & Burk,
Inc. for repair and resurfacing of certain streets, Phase 25, No.
P.W. 05- 04 -06. Accepted.
( *05- ) Recommendation to approve the Request for Proposals (RFP)
for Restaurant and Bar Services at the Chuck Corica Golf Complex.
Accepted.
REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS
(05- ) Resolution No. 13888, "Commending Alameda Free Library
Director Susan H. Hardie for Her Contributions to the City of
Alameda." Adopted.
Councilmember Daysog moved adoption of the resolution.
Councilmember Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by
unanimous voice vote - 5.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
September 6, 2005
2
Ms. Hardie thanked the Council for the resolution; stated that it
has been her pleasure and privilege to be involved with the new
library project.
(05- ) Resolution No. 13889, "Appointing Marilyn Ezzy Ashcraft
as a Member of the Economic Development Commission." Adopted;
(05- A) Resolution No. 13890, "Reappointing Robert F. Kelly as a
Member of the Economic Development Commission." Adopted; and
(05- C) Resolution No. 13891, "Reappointing Anthony M. Santare as
a Member of the Golf Commission." Adopted.
Councilmember Matarrese moved adoption of the resolutions.
Councilmember Daysog seconded the motion, which carried by the
following voice vote: Ayes: Councilmembers Daysog, Gilmore,
Matarrese, and Mayor Johnson - 4. Absent: Councilmember deHaan - 1.
[Note: Councilmember dHaan was away from the dias when the matter
was voted upon.]
The City Clerk administered the Oath and presented certificates of
appointment to Ms. Ashcraft and Mr. Santare.
(05- ) Public hearing to consider Introduction of Ordinance
"Amending Alameda Municipal Code by Amending Chapter XIII (Building
and Housing) by Repealing Article I, Section 13 -4 (Alameda
Electrical Code) in Its Entirety and Adding a New Article I,
Section 13 -4 (Alameda Electrical Code) to Adopt the 2004 California
Electrical Code and Approve Certain Amendments Thereto."
Introduced.
The Acting Planning and Building Director gave a brief
presentation.
Mayor Johnson opened the public portion of the Hearing.
There being no speakers, Mayor Johnson closed the public portion of
the Hearing.
Councilmember deHaan moved introduction of the Ordinance.
Vice Mayor Gilmore seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous
voice vote - 5.
(05- ) Public hearing to consider an Appeal of the Historical
Advisory Board's decision to impose penalties for unauthorized
demolition. The site is located at 616 Pacific Avenue, within the
R -4, Neighborhood Residential District. Applicant /Appellant: Erwin
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
September 6, 2005
3
Roxas; and
(05- A) Resolution No. 13892, "Granting the Appeal and Overturning
the Historical Advisory Board's Decision to Uphold the Five -Year
Stay in Development for the Property Located at 616 Pacific
Avenue." Adopted.
The Supervising Planner gave a brief presentation.
Councilmember Daysog stated that the site's historic designation is
Level H; inquired whether Levels A through G are before Level H.
The Supervising Planner responded that designation "N" is for
buildings that could be placed on the National Register, "S" is for
buildings that could be placed on the State Register, and "H" is
the lowest level for potentially historic buildings that require
further investigation.
Mayor Johnson opened the public portion of the Hearing.
Opponent (Not in favor of appeal): Kevin Frederick, Alameda.
Proponent (In favor of appeal): Paul Rezucha, Alameda.
There being no further speakers, Mayor Johnson closed the public
portion of the Hearing.
Mayor Johnson stated that she could not tell from the drawings that
24 studs were retained; the neighbor mentioned that studs from the
north and west walls were being retained; inquired whether parts of
the walls would be used in the interior of the house.
The Acting Planning and Building Director responded in the
affirmative.
Mayor Johnson inquired whether any of the exteriors walls would
remain, to which the Acting Planning and Building Director
responded that the side wall and part of the front wall would
remain.
Mayor Johnson stated that the west and front walls appear to be
completely new.
The Acting Planning and Building Director stated that the walls on
the right -hand side of the house and most of the front wall would
remain; a number of the back and left side walls would be inside;
the ordinance addresses demolition of more than 30% of the value of
a home; enclosing an exterior wall is not considered demolition.
Mayor Johnson inquired whether the intent of the ordinance was to
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
September 6, 2005
4
preserve the historic structure; questioned how retaining some of
the studs preserves a historic structure.
The Acting Planning and Building Director responded that the
ordinance was intended to preserve the historic structure; the
first floor, side wall, and front wall would remain; the roof would
be raised; determining that the demolition would be less than 30%
was reasonable.
Mayor Johnson stated that the front and west walls look like new
walls.
The Acting Planner /Building Official stated that the front wall
would be changed; the original house had 45 degree angles at the
corners; the new house would be squared off; the side walls would
remain; moving doors and windows is not considered demolition.
Mayor Johnson stated the issue is deconstruction versus demolition;
the owner believes that deconstruction is not demolition.
The Acting Planning and Building Director stated that he truly
believes that the owner understood that the Planning Department
gave permission to dismantle or deconstruct, stack the pieces in
the backyard, and put the pieces back when the dry rot was
repaired; the ordinance needs to be reviewed; interpretation is
somewhat vague.
Mayor Johnson stated the ordinance is not doing what was intended,
is not protecting the historic assets, and could result in more
damage than protection; inquired what are the options under the
ordinance; stated that she did not understand how the 3,400 square
foot structure got through the design review process; the houses in
the area are smaller, one -story craftsman style homes; a 3,400
square foot home is gigantic for the neighborhood.
The Acting Planning and Building Director stated the lot is one of
the biggest on the block; there are 21 residential structures,
including 10 two -story homes and 11 one -story homes ranging from
792 to 4,480 square feet; 17 of the structures are single - family
dwellings, 3 are duplexes, and one is a 5 -unit apartment building;
three buildings are between 3,000 and 3,500 square feet each
directly in back of the lot on Lincoln Avenue; 15 of the buildings
are owner- occupied and 6 are rentals; the construction period
ranges from 1895 to 1999; the neighborhood has a fairly good mix
[of houses] .
Mayor Johnson stated that the design review process needs to be
reviewed; there are commercial and two -story structures in the
area; Lincoln Avenue structures should not be considered; inquired
whether moving a piece of the structure counts as demolition.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
September 6, 2005
5
The Acting Planning and Building Director responded not
necessarily; the project is viewed as a whole to determine if
demolition is more or less than 30 %; a new, red stamp will be
placed on all plans to indicate the Historical Advisory Board's
(HAB's) approval is needed prior to demolishing more than 30% of a
pre -1942 home.
Mayor Johnson stated the issue needs to be reviewed; people think
that deconstruction and reconstruction do not count as demolition.
Vice Mayor Gilmore stated the demolition issue is being reviewed
independently; someone could demolish less than 30% of a house and
build a structure that does not look historic; on the other hand, a
50% demolition and remodeling project could retain the historic
look; that she is not sure how the demolition can be separated from
the design review; the matter needs to be reviewed in terms of what
is being protected.
The Acting Planning and Building Director stated the exterior walls
and roof percentages are reviewed.
Mayor Johnson stated that the design does not reflect the historic
character of the building.
Councilmember Daysog inquired when demolition versus deconstruction
issues would be addressed.
The Acting Planning and Building Director responded the issues
would be addressed as quickly as possible; that he would like to
review other jurisdiction's process.
Councilmember Daysog stated the situation is unfortunate; the
existing ordinance needs to be clarified; the Appellant needs to
move forward with the project for reasons stated in the report;
staff and the Appellant have different interpretations; suggested
moving forward with the project and, at the same time, move forward
with resolving the larger issues.
Vice Mayor Gilmore inquired how the dry rot issue should be handled
from a construction standpoint.
The Acting Planning and Building Director responded that rotted
wood needs to be removed; new members could be attached if termite
damage has been repaired; termite repair can be more than 30% of a
house.
Mayor Johnson stated the Appellant should have been referred to the
HAB to get a demolition permit when the rot was discovered.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
September 6, 2005
6
Councilmember Matarrese inquired what would be the implication in
upholding the five -year stay.
The Supervising Planner responded the Appellant would need to
provide a landscaping plan and maintain the site for five years
with no building on it.
Councilmember deHaan stated there are other dynamics occurring;
inquired how many similar projects there are in the City.
The Acting Planning and Building Director responded there are three
projects subject to the ordinance.
Councilmember deHaan inquired whether one project was resolved, to
which the Acting Planning and Building Director responded in the
affirmative.
Councilmember deHaan stated the bubble has been lost in the
interpretation of the ordinance; he is concerned with retaining the
architectural design; the scale seems to be imposing on the
neighborhood; inquired what the adjacent houses look like.
Mayor Johnson responded that the adjacent houses are both two -story
structures; that she does not recall the houses being close to
3,400 square feet.
The Acting Planning and Building Director stated that the adjacent
houses are approximately 1,500 square feet each.
Councilmember deHaan stated that there are multiple dwellings that
are expanding and becoming disproportional to the adjacent housing;
inquired whether the HAB reviews the issue.
The Acting Planning and Building Director responded that the HAB
would address the issue if a historical structure was involved.
Councilmember Daysog inquired what floor area ratio was being
employed.
The Acting Planning and Building Director responded that he was not
sure; stated that the floor area ratio falls within the lot
coverage requirements.
Councilmember Daysog inquired what was the maximum lot coverage.
The Acting Planning and Building Director responded 40 %; stated the
lot is deceiving because of the area behind the neighbor's garage.
Mayor Johnson stated the portion that goes around the corner is not
visible; the house would be very large on the lot; inquired whether
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
September 6, 2005
7
a fine could be imposed instead of the five -year penalty.
The Acting Planning and Building Director responded there would be
increased fees based on the valuation of the construction, for work
without permit, and for investigation.
Mayor Johnson stated other people should not be allowed to
deconstruct and reconstruct until the ordinance is revised.
The Acting Planning and Building Director stated that the staff is
erring on the cautious side and referring people to the HAB.
Councilmember Daysog stated the lot would be roughly 9,450 square
feet if the dog run was not included, which would be a .37% floor
area ratio; housing should be viewed in terms of adjacent homes as
well as appropriate lot size; the home fits the lot size; there is
not a monstrous home affect.
Councilmember Matarrese inquired whether the direction has been
given to refer people to the HAB, to which the Acting Planning and
Building Director responded that people are being referred to the
HAB if demolition appears to be close to 30 %.
Councilmember Matarrese stated that 30% could be a calculation
based on the structure of the building and not necessarily in
context with the intent of the ordinance; there should be some
discretion applied or guidance adopted; allowing 25% or 30%
demolition to the front of a building and roofline would not meet
the real intent of the ordinance; inquired whether there is any
refinement on the plan check level that ties back to the issue of
design review.
The Acting Planning and Building Director stated that he makes the
30% determination during design review; that he always gives more
weight to the removal of exterior walls, particularly front walls,
versus interior walls.
Councilmember Matarrese inquired whether there was any guidance
being given now to prevent misinterpretation.
The Acting Planning and Building Director responded that there are
no new guidelines; staff would be looking more closely.
Mayor Johnson stated that the Council needs to know that the intent
of the ordinance will be carried out; the drawings do not show any
resemblance to the original house.
Councilmember deHaan stated 30% is hard to interpret; inquired
whether the percentage should be more.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
September 6, 2005
8
The Acting Planning and Building Director responded a method other
than percentage should be defined.
Mayor Johnson stated that there is no need to wait for an ordinance
revision to carry out the intent; noted that a defacto demolition
of a historic structure will not be allowed because of a badly
drafted ordinance.
The Acting Planning and Building Director stated that the matter is
being addressed; there should not be any similar issues in the
future.
The City Manager stated that there have been many internal
discussions regarding the lack of direction in some parts of the
ordinance; inconsistencies need to be address; guidelines would be
handled internally.
Mayor Johnson inquired whether deconstruction and reconstruction
would be addressed, to which the Acting Planning and Building
Director responded in the affirmative.
The City Manager stated that HAB input would be sought.
Vice Mayor Gilmore stated some structures have the potential for
historic designation but have not been certified; home owners
should not have to jump through hoops if the house is not truly
historic; many houses are old, but not historic; she does not want
to preserve old, non - historic houses; inquired how the issue
could be balanced.
Mayor Johnson stated that owners can apply to have their houses
removed from the historic study list.
Councilmember Matarrese stated that the "H" designation is for old
houses that may have the potential to be historic, but need to be
studied more; houses may not be worth further study; a withdrawal
process for non - historic houses may be necessary; the project's
character issues can be addressed in design review.
Councilmember deHaan stated that 500 Central Avenue is a historical
structure.
The Supervising Planner stated that 500 Central Avenue has an "S"
designation.
Councilmember deHaan stated that 30% demolition for 500 Central
Avenue was unrealistic and should have been at 80 %; stated that he
has concerns with how tonight's decision would impact the two other
outstanding projects.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
September 6, 2005
9
The Acting Planning and Building Director stated that tonight's
decision would only affect 500 Central Avenue; the other property
was not a listed building; there is another set of criteria for
pre -1942 houses; there was a whole different set of facts regarding
500 Central Avenue; the owner was aware of what he was doing.
Mayor Johnson inquired whether the owner's awareness was a
distinction that could be used.
The Acting Planning and Building Director responded that he thought
so; the owner tore down a house on the same property last year
without permits.
Mayor Johnson stated not setting precedents is important; inquired
whether the Appellant would have been successful in removing the
property from the historical list at either the HAB or Council
level.
The Acting Planning and Building Director responded that staff
believes that the Appellant would have been granted a certificate
of approval for demolition if sought prior to demolition; the house
has been significantly remodeled in the past 100 years; the house
is very similar to a building that received a certificate of
approval for demolition from the HAB; the Appellant was denied
after the fact.
Mayor Johnson stated that contributing factors are part of the
ordinance.
The City Manager stated that the ordinance needs to be reviewed in
terms of options and penalties; each project will be reviewed and
determinations will be made based upon the circumstances of the
building.
Mayor Johnson inquired whether hold harmless clauses are standard
on planning and building resolutions.
The City Attorney responded the clause is not standard; the clause
is requested to be included in certain cases.
Councilmember deHaan stated that much of tonight's discussion is
based upon interpretation; stated that he is comfortable with the
staff's recommendation based upon what has been provided.
The Acting Planning and Building Director stated that the Alameda
Architectural Preservation Society (AAPS) is very active; AAPS
regularly advises him when there is any hint of activity.
Vice Mayor Gilmore inquired whether residents are advised about the
process to have their houses de- listed; some ambiguity could be
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
September 6, 2005
10
cleared.
The Acting Planning and Building Director responded there is not a
current process.
Councilmember Daysog stated many issues suggest the need to
strengthening the ordinance with regard to
demolition /deconstruction of historic properties; the project
should move forward; the Appellant was working in good faith; there
appears to be strong reasons for moving forward with the project
while the ordinance is improved.
Councilmember Daysog moved to approval of the staff recommendation.
[Adoption of the resolution Granting the Appeal and directing the
City Manager to review provisions of Section 13 -21 of the Alameda
Municipal Code related to the demolition of historic structures and
develop, with input from the community and HAB, recommended
amendments and penalty options.]
Mayor Johnson inquired whether the design issue could be re-
examined.
The Supervising Planner stated that the design review has already
been approved; the Appellant has been acting under the approval.
Mayor Johnson stated that 3,400 square feet is too much for the
neighborhood.
The Supervising Planner stated that the Appellant could be
requested to consider re- design; noted the Appellant has already
pulled permits and has vested the construction.
Mayor Johnson stated people will question why the project was
approved in ten years.
Councilmember Daysog stated that he understands Mayor Johnson's
concern with the size, but that the footprint is appropriate for
the parcel.
Mayor Johnson stated lot coverage cannot be dealt with in a vacuum;
the rest of the neighborhood needs to be addressed; requested that
staff inquire whether the Appellant would be willing to look at the
design review issue.
Vice Mayor Gilmore stated that she sympathizes with Mayor Johnson's
concern about the size of the house; Alameda property owners have
certain rights if the structure fits within the box of the zoning
code; zoning for every other property in the City would be changed
unless the zoning code is changed.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
September 6, 2005
11
Mayor Johnson stated that the issue should be re- examined; lot
coverage is not an entitlement; there is a design review standard
for neighborhood compatibility.
Councilmember deHaan stated that the house would be architecturally
the same if cut back by 800 to 1,000 square feet.
Councilmember Daysog inquired what the neighbors thought about the
project.
The Acting Planning and Building Director responded that there was
a ten -day notice and no comments were received.
Mayor Johnson inquired who received the notice, to which the Acting
Planning and Building Director responded the property owners.
Mayor Johnson stated renters would not be informed about the
project.
The Acting Planning and Building Director stated that the
neighborhood is predominately owner occupied; County records
indicate that 15 of the 21 buildings are owner occupied; 6 of the
buildings are rental.
Mayor Johnson requested staff to address the possibility of
redesign with the Appellant.
* **
Mayor Johnson called a recess at 9:01 p.m. and reconvened the
Regular City Council Meeting at 9:10 p.m.
* **
The Acting Planning and Building Director stated that the Applicant
is unable to redesign the house; the house is designed for an
elderly person in a wheelchair; the hallways are 5 feet wide;
several bathrooms have a turning radius for a wheelchair.
Mayor Johnson stated redesigning the side wall would make the house
look better; noted the wall looks like a factory wall.
Councilmember deHaan concurred with Mayor Johnson; stated that an
architectural separation between the stories would not be that
costly.
The Acting Planning and Building Director stated that the Appellant
could be requested to consider a different exterior side wall
design.
The Appellant agreed.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
September 6, 2005
12
Mayor Johnson stated the building could look a lot better than the
drawings; less detailed work is easier for an owner- builder; making
the building look better is worth the effort; the larger issue of
design review needs to be addressed; awareness of neighborhood
compatibility needs to be addressed in the design review process.
Councilmember deHaan seconded the motion, which carried by
unanimous voice vote - 5.
(05- ) Resolution No. 13893, "Empowering the City Attorney to
Employ Special Legal Counsel." Adopted; and
(05- A) Recommendation to approve Policy regarding Hiring
Procedures for Special Legal Counsel.
Councilmember Daysog extended his appreciation to the City Attorney
for addressing some of the Council's issues; stated that the
resolution is not just for the Council but for the City for many
years.
Vice Mayor Gilmore moved adoption of the resolution.
Councilmember deHaan seconded the motion, which carried by
unanimous voice vote - 5.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON - AGENDA
(05- ) Former Councilmemer Lil Arnerich, Alameda, discussed
disaster preparedness; stated that the Council should take charge
in working with the Police, Fire, Public Works Departments, and
schools to ensure that there is a detailed plan to provide
emergency services and information to the community in case of a
disaster; submitted a list of the Alameda County Fair's response
team.
Mayor Johnson inquired whether the table top exercise was performed
once a year.
Mr. Arnerich responded in the affirmative; stated that the exercise
is different from the City's exercise; noted the responsible
parties should be identified before a disaster occurs; the table
top exercise has been conducted every year for six years and works
very well.
(05- ) Bill Smith, Alameda discussed work /live studios, 500
Central Avenue, and fast boats.
COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS
(05- ) Consideration of Mayor's nominations for appointment to
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
September 6, 2005
13
the Civil Service Board, Economic Development Commission,
Historical Advisory Board, Housing and Building Code Hearing and
Appeals Board, Public Art Commission and Recreation and Parks
Commission.
Mayor Johnson nominated Karen Lee and K.C. Rosenberg for
reappointment to the Public Art Commission, and Terri Bertero Ogden
for appointment to the Recreation and Parks Commission.
(05- ) The Fire Chief provided information on Hurricane Katrina
Disaster Relief and the City's Emergency Operation Plan and
upcoming exercises.
Mayor Johnson stated that a lot of communication has been received
regarding Hurricane Katrina and the City's disaster preparedness;
noted that the Fire Chief would provide information on how the
community could help the hurricane victims.
The Fire Chief stated that Hurricane Katrina is a challenging and
unique type of disaster; continual flooding waters have delayed
infrastructure repair; financial contributions are needed; provided
contact information for the American Red Cross, the Salvation Army
and the United Way, Bay Area; stated that the City's Emergency
Operation Plan is very comprehensive and outlines who is in charge
and the responsibilities of each individual; the Mayor and the
Council are the policy makers; the City Manager is in charge of the
Emergency Operations Center (EOC); the City Manager would provide
information on key decision points to the Council; EOC staff would
work 12 -hour shifts throughout the duration of a disaster; the City
has a siren and warning system to effectively alert the community
in an emergency; the system keys the community to tune into Channel
15 or 1280 AM on the radio; there are over 100 people trained
through the Community Emergency Response Team (CERT); some teams
have been organized in specific areas; there will be a series of
table top exercises in October and a functional exercise in
November; the EOC would be activated during the table top
exercises; the City Manager and staff would be present and would be
given a complex scenario; logistical issues such as shelter, lost
power and water, and accesses to the City are addressed; the
emergency responders would work through a City -based scenario
during the functional exercise, while the Council would be making
policy decisions.
Mayor Johnson stated that it would be good for Councilmembers to
attend the exercises; part of the exercise should address which
issues are policy orientated; Councilmembers need to know where to
report and what their responsibilities are when a disaster occurs;
the phones and cable channels might not work during a disaster.
The Fire Chief stated that the Council would report to the
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
September 6, 2005
14
Chambers.
Mayor Johnson stated that she was not sure that the Council should
report to the Chambers if the electricity and cable are not
working; the issue needs to be addressed.
The Fire Chief stated that the first process would be for the
Council to report to the Chambers; another building would be
specified if the equipment in the Chambers was not working.
Mayor Johnson stated that she would like to better understand the
intent of having the Council report to the Chambers.
The Fire Chief stated that the Council would be involved in the
planning process.
Mayor Johnson stated that the Council needs to be better informed
and confident that plans are in place; stated that the Council
needs to know the worst -case scenario; there is a lot of sandy soil
and fill throughout the City; more than the bridges could be lost
in the event of an earthquake; some issues that the Council needs
to address are: how people would be evacuated, whether helicopters
would be available, and what would happen to the water supply;
people need to know how to turn off gas lines; stated that cable
communication would most likely be out during a disaster.
Councilmember Matarrese requested a current copy of the City's
Emergency Operation Plan and that the matter be agendized for
discussion; stated that questions have been raised regarding the
placement of people and the use of public facilities including the
schools; that he would rather not wait until the exercise is
performed in October; the matter needs to be addressed as soon as
possible; recommendations could be made and policy direction could
be given on what is in place now.
The City Manager stated that the Council would be provided with a
copy of the Emergency Operation Plan and that the matter could be
placed on an agenda for future discussion; issues that need
direction would be identified; sheltering questions could be
answered through the City's relationships with other agencies;
tonight's intention was to ensure that the audience knows where
contributions can be made to the current disaster victims and that
the City has a plan in case a disaster occurs.
Councilmember deHaan stated that everyone has a heavy heart right
now; the gas surge was a best -case scenario; resources were
available to handle the situation; the liquefaction was monumental
(particularly at the Naval Air Station) during the earthquake;
tonight's discussion is timely; noted that he was sorry the
discussion had to be within the current circumstances; stated that
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
September 6, 2005
15
the comments are worthwhile and appreciated; the Council has
responsibilities; stated that he takes the responsibility
seriously; he is concerned with communication and support resources
in the City; the Fire and Police Departments are on 24 -hour shifts,
but other departments are not; stated that he looks forward to
further discussion.
(05- ) Councilmember Daysog requested: 1) an update on the
status of the live /work issues, 2) a timetable outlining when the
matter would be addressed, and 3) an update on the court issues.
(05- ) Councilmember Daysog requested a review of current and
future developments occurring in the City of Oakland that could
have impacts on the City of Alameda; stated that a recent cable
television show mentioned a project that would be occurring at Jack
London Square.
(05- ) Councilmember Daysog stated that there seem to have been
a number of accidents at the intersection of Constitution Way and
Pacific Avenue; there was an accident yesterday around 4:00 p.m.;
the Police and Fire Departments responded quickly; there was a
death at the location last year and another death one block up;
requested the area be reviewed such as the possibility of bushes
being too high.
(05- ) Councilmember Daysog stated that he was glad that
disaster readiness was on the minds of everyone; the next disaster
or terrorism strike is not a matter of if, but when; planning ahead .
benefits the community.
(05- ) Councilmember Matarrese stated that he received a
communication from the town of Asuchio, El Salvador in response to
a request from the Social Service Human Relations Board's (SSHRB)
Sister City Committee; requested the response be conveyed to the
SSHRB for consideration.
(05- ) Councilmember Matarrese stated that there is a proposed
development between 29th Avenue and 23rd Avenue below International
Boulevard in Oakland for 800 to 1200 units of housing; the two
streets feed into the Fruitvale and Park Street Bridges; the City
should keep an eye on development that occurs on both sides of the
Estuary.
(05- ) Councilmember deHaan stated periodic updates on the
budget are supposed to be provided to Council; inquired how often
the updates were to occur.
Mayor Johnson responded quarterly.
The City Manager stated that an update is scheduled for next month.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
September 6, 2005
16
Councilmember deHaan inquired when the ten -year forecast would be
presented, to which the City Manager responded November, along with
the infrastructure budget.
ADJOURNMENT
(05- )There being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned
the Regular Meeting at 10:00 p.m. in memory of the Hurricane
Katrina victims.
Respectfully submitted,
Lara Weisiger
City Clerk
The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown
Act.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
September 6, 2005
17
September 15, 2005
Honorable Mayor and Councilmembers:
This is to certify that the claims listed on the check register and shown below have been
approved by the proper officials and, in my opinion, represent fair and just charges against the
City in accordance with their respective amounts as indicated thereon.
Check Numbers
140387 - 140839
EFT 137
EFT 138
Void Checks:
Amount
2,234,257.22
1,548,928.70
25,610.00
139838 (1,165.00)
GRAND TOTAL 3,807,630.92
Respectfully submitted,
meta J. Sibley
Si btl.
Council Warrants 09/20/2005
BILLS #4 -B
09/20/05
CITY OF ALAMEDA
MEMORANDUM
DATE: September 13, 2005
TO: Honorable Mayor and
Council Members
FROM: Debra Kurita
City Manager
RE: Quarterly Financial Report for Period Ending June 30, 2005 (Year -End)
BACKGROUND
The unaudited year -end financial report for the fiscal year 2004 -05 for all City funds has
been completed and is attached as Exhibits A -E. Maze and Associates will audit the
City's financial records with final fieldwork scheduled for October 2005. The final audit
report for the period ending June 30, 2005 is scheduled to be presented to the Council
no later than December 6, 2005.
DISCUSSION /ANALYSIS
Enclosed are Exhibits A -E detailing, by fund category, the profile of the 2004 -05
expenditures and revenues. Combined expenditures (all funds including Alameda
Power & Telecom and Alameda Housing Authority) for 2004 -05 totaled $285,025,090.
Estimated combined revenues totaled approximately $267,045,589. Fund balances and
bond proceeds complement the revenues to meet current year expenditures.
General Fund expenditures, including transfers to other funds totaled $65,082,289,
while actual revenues were $66,363,661. Actual revenues collected were 2.3% less
than our revised projection of $67,895,510. Actual expenditures were 2.1% less than
the revised projection of $66,456,337. On June 30, 2005 the City posted a fund
balance of $19,527,101, an increase of $1,281,372. The following table details
estimates compared to actual for the fiscal year.
The detail of the revenues and expenditures by category are found at Exhibits C and D.
Report 4 -C
9 -20 -05
Dedicated to Excellence, Committed to Service
2004/05
Revised
6/30/05
Variance
Variance
Estimate
Actual
Amount
%
Revenue
$67,895,510
$66,363,661
$(1,531,849)
2.3%
Expenditure
$66,456,337
$65,082,289
$(1,374,048)
2.1%
Balance
$ 1,439,173
$ 1,281,372
$ 157,801
10.9%
The detail of the revenues and expenditures by category are found at Exhibits C and D.
Report 4 -C
9 -20 -05
Dedicated to Excellence, Committed to Service
Honorable Mayor and
Councilmembers
General Fund Revenues:
September 13, 2005
Page 2
General Fund Revenues
Categories
Actual
Percent
Actual
Percent
Actual
2004 -05
Change
2003 -04
Change
2002 -03
Property Taxes
$16,347,496
6.7%
$15,316,019
3.5%
$14,793,277
Other Local Taxes
25,807,846
6.7%
24,198,483
6.0%
22,833,267
Licenses and Permits
3,563,063
24.0%
2,873,025
16.9%
2,458,386
Use of Money & Property
1,119,288
22.5%
913,860
(61.4)%
2,366,059
Fines & Forfeitures
716,948
2.4%
699,835
(4.5)%
732,588
Revenues from other agencies
5,675,711
27.4%
4,455,578
(14.9)%
5,235,234
Current Services
6,715,779
9.1%
6,153,592
0.1%
6,144,901
Contributions from other Funds
5,479,512
(20.9)%
6,923,749
45.3%
4,765,898
Equipment Replacement
938,018
(29.1)%
1,322,479
13.0
1,170,516
Grand Total
$66,363,661
5.6%
$62,856,620
3.9%
60,500,126
The City's General Fund revenues increased by 5.6% over the prior year primarily in
revenues from other agencies, licenses and permits and use of money and property.
The City derives a significant portion of its General Fund revenues from an
economically sensitive mix of sources. Some of the more economically sensitive
sources include property tax, sales tax, utility users tax, construction related permit fees
and property transfer tax.
Property tax revenues increased by 6.7 %, which supports the fact that Alameda
continues to be a desirable place to live and do business. However, it is important to
note that Fiscal Year 2004 -05 was the first year of state funding restructuring under
Proposition 1A. The "Triple Flip" reduced our property tax revenues by $990,741. On
the other hand, sales tax allocations from the county pool added $1,297,960 to the
property tax revenues. Ignoring this additional $307,219 would result in an increase
year- over -year of 4.7 %. Other local taxes increased by 6.7 %, with the largest increase
in in -lieu taxes, transfer taxes and transient occupancy tax. Sales tax revenues
decreased 14.3% from the prior year. Utility users tax revenues were 2.3% greater than
the prior year. Franchise fees increased 4.3% overall.
The 24% increase in licenses and permits as compared to the prior fiscal year is due to
increases in the following revenue sources: building, electric & plumbing permits
($358,475) and Business Licenses ($145,248).
The increase of 22.5% over the prior year in use of money and property is partly a result
of the implementation of GASB 31, which mandates that gains and losses generated by
fluctuating market values of securities be systematically recognized. Fluctuation or
changes in federal monetary policies, money supply and demand, and the economic
outlook as a whole, drive market values of securities up or down. It is important to note
that market values fluctuate regularly and that these gains and losses are not realized
unless the securities are liquidated. Annually, however, these gains and losses are
Dedicated to Excellence, Committed to Service
Honorable Mayor and September 13, 2005
Councilmembers
Page 3
netted against investment earnings. The General Fund's share of investment income
for 2005 was $1.014 million compared to $.791 million in 2004.
The 27.4% increase in "Revenues from Other Agencies" is primarily from the increase in
subventions for vehicle in lieu fees and donations and /or one time revenue. The 20.9%
decrease in contributions from other funds is primarily due to realignment of cost
allocations primarily to ARRA.
General Fund Expenditures:
General Fund expenditures increased by 0.6% over the prior year. The largest single
increase over the prior year is a 38.8% increase in contractual services. General Fund
expenditures were less than appropriations by 2.07% or $1,347,048. A comparison of
General Fund expenditures by major activities is as follows:
General Fund
Expenditure
Category
Actual
2004 -05
Percent
Change
Actual
2003 -04
Percent
Change
Actual
2002 -03
General Govt.
6,427,414
6.0%
6,064,031
-2.5%
6,221,364
Public Safety
41,395,355
2.6%
40,352,629
8.3%
37,250,909
Planning & Bldg.
2,937,265
-1.4%
2,979,199
2.1%
2,917,428
Public Works
6,117,975
-1.2%
6,192,657
-0.3%
6,208,408
Recreation and Parks
3,622,842
-2.7%
3,721,627
0.5%
3,702,565
Depreciation
970,375
-13.0%
1,114,745
0.0%
1,114,792
Equip. Replacement
455,681
-32.6%
676,076
-12.5%
772,226
Capital Outlay
62,659
40.7%
44,539
-72.0%
159,028
Transf. + Non Dept
2,118,875
-18.3%
2,594,662
6.9%
2,427,807
Debt Service
973,848
4.7%
930,000
77.1%
525,000
Total
65,082,289
0.6%
64,670,165
5.5%
61,299,527
The following charts display the General Fund expenditures by major activities and by
type for comparative purposes.
Expenditures by Type
• Salaries &
Benefits
• Supplies
❑ Services
❑ Capital Outlay
• Debt Svc & Trsfs
Dedicated to Excellence, Committed to Service
FY05 Expenditures
by
Major Activities
410
• General Govt.
• Public Safety
0 Planning & Bldg
❑ Public Works
• Rec & Parks
• Depreciation
• Equip Repl
❑ Capital Outlay
• Transf +non dept
• Debt Service
Expenditures by Type
• Salaries &
Benefits
• Supplies
❑ Services
❑ Capital Outlay
• Debt Svc & Trsfs
Dedicated to Excellence, Committed to Service
Honorable Mayor and September 13, 2005
Councilmembers Page 4
Reserves:
For the year ended June 30, 2005, $1,281,372 will be added to General Fund reserves
for a total of $19,527,101. The Council's stated goal is 25% of operating expenses
should be held in reserve. The target for year -end is $16,270,572. The Governmental
Accounting Standards Board (GASB) requires that the accrued vacation liabilities and
post employment health benefits be designated at year -end. These items represent
$3,862,814 of the fund balance. Further, $5,858,995 in loans to other funds are
outstanding as of year -end.
The City of Alameda, consistent with the requirements of the Governmental Accounting
Standards Board, has established a number of required reserves in its various funds,
i.e. Risk Management Fund, Unemployment Insurance Fund and reserves for
compensated leave. The reserves reflected in the Risk Management Fund are for
reported and incurred claims.
Other City Funds:
A brief discussion of the activities of the Special Revenue Funds can be found on the
attached Exhibit A titled "Special Revenue Funds ". The corresponding financial
information for all Special Revenue Funds is contained in Exhibits F, G and H.
BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACT
The attached exhibits outline the budget to actual comparison for revenues and
expenditures for all City funds. In addition, a "Summary Analysis of Funds" is attached
herein as Exhibit H. It is important to note that these are unaudited results for the 2004-
2005 fiscal year.
RECOMMENDATION
Accept the unaudited financial report for year ending June 30, 2005.
JB /dl
Respectfully submitted,
V
-Ann Boy
ief Financial Officer
Dedicated to Excellence, Committed to Service
Honorable Mayor and September 13, 2005
Councilmembers Page 5
Attachments: Exhibit A — Special Revenue Funds analysis
Exhibit B — Recap
Exhibit C — General Fund Revenue
Exhibit D — General Fund Expense
Exhibit E — General Fund Adjustments for Quarter 4
Exhibit F — Special Revenue Funds, Revenue
Exhibit G — Special Revenue Funds, Expense
Exhibit H — Summary of Adjustments — Other Funds Quarter 4
Exhibit I — Summary Analysis of Funds
G: \FINANCE \CO U N CI L\2005 \090605 \QtrFi nyea rend.doc
Dedicated to Excellence, Committed to Service
EXHIBIT A
SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS ANALYSES
Police /Fire Impact Fees
Fees calculated for police and fire impacts of new construction. Fees collected were
$82,880 and $35,000 was expended for debt service. The fund balance at June 30, 2005
was $53,379.
Construction Improvement Fund
Established to set aside monies for major capital improvement projects not otherwise
provided. Revenues were $826,783; $278,956 was expended leaving a fund balance of
$1,013,302 at June 30, 2005.
Library Operations Fund
Revenues from the 1.75 cent property tax plus fines and other miscellaneous revenues
totaled $2,840,914 while operating costs totaled $2,918,223. The operating deficit was
covered by a beginning fund balance thus leaving a fund balance of $11,967 at June 30,
2005.
Gas Tax Funds
Revenues recovered from the State under Streets and Highways Code Sections 2105,
2106, 2107 and 2107.5 totaled $1,410,349. Expenditures for street maintenance and
construction projects totaled $1,338,188. The fund balance at June 30, 2005 is $72,161.
Traffic Safety Fund
The City's share of receipts from moving violation citations issued by the Alameda Police
Department totaled $190,052. These funds were expended leaving a zero balance at year-
end.
Measure B Funds
Voter - approved November 1986.
Our pro -rata share of the one -half cent sales tax generated $34,876 in
revenues and $960,270 was expended for projects. The remaining fund
balance is $691,902 at June 30, 2005.
1
Exhibit A (cont.)
Measure B 2000 (Voter- approved November 2000)
The fund is divided into seven categories with restricted uses. Uses and fund
balances are as follows:
• Local streets and roads
• Bicycle and pedestrian improvements
• Alameda Ferry
• Paratransit
• Capital construction projects
• Gap funding
• New county program
Tidelands Fund
$1,210,167
$86,528
$586,790
$245,160
$110,721
-0-
-0-
This trust fund accounts for revenues from tidelands property leases of $291,974.
Expenditures of $129,654 were made from maintenance of the properties. The fund
balance was $903,773 as of June 30, 2005.
Narcotics Asset Seizure Fund
Revenues are derived from the sale of assets confiscated from convicted felons. This
year's revenues were $24,286. Expenditures of $47,005 were made to pay debt service for
the jail construction projects. The fund balance was a deficit of $(83,273) at June 30, 2005.
Dwelling Unit Tax Fund
Enabling legislation directs 5/6 of the fees collected be used for park improvements and 1/6
to the Library Construction Fund. Of the $158,497 in revenues, $26,286 was transferred to
the Library Construction Fund and $137,058 was expended on park maintenance and park
improvements. The fund balance is $42,840 as of June 30, 2005.
Parking In -Lieu Fund
Fees are collected against certain properties and are expended for parking projects.
Interest of $1,215 was earned but no other fees were collected. The fund balance is
$72,038 as of June 30, 2005.
Parking Meter Fund
Parking meter revenues are collected from Park Street, Webster Street and other city lots.
Revenues totaled $516,605 while expenditures were $1,461,783 leaving a balance of
$1,306,675 as of June 30, 2005.
2
Exhibit A (cont.)
Vehicle Registration Surcharge (AB 434)
This fee imposed on all registered vehicles was intended to help fund traffic management
programs. This year, only interest income of $636 was received. The fund balance as of
June 30, 2005 is $37,722.
Garbage Surcharge Fund
A surcharge on residential and commercial accounts funds the closure and monitoring of
the former dumpsite. Revenues were $182,937 and expenditures were $141,495 with a
fund balance of $472,232 as of June 30, 2005.
Curbside Recycling
Fees are no longer collected. However, interest revenues were $14,227 while
expenditures were $72,563. The fund balance is $188,883 as of June 30, 2005.
Waste Reduction Surcharge
This revenue is intended to reduce the volume of trash and is a fee paid by the franchise.
In addition, revenues are received from County Measure D. This year the funds received
were $810,356 and expended were $464,494 for programs related to volume reduction.
The fund balance at June 30, 2005 is $4,159,188.
Assessment Districts (Operations and Maintenance)
There are three districts and one district has seven zones. Revenues from property
assessments plus interest earnings totaled $1,275,858 while expenditures totaled
$975,033. The sum of fund balances was $871,019 as of June 30, 2005.
Athletic Trust
Participants in the recreation fee programs paid fees totaling $1,624,170 while the cost to
provide the programs was $1,535,087. The fund balance at June 30, 2005 was $450,975.
Public Art Fund
Developer contributions support the purchase and placement of public art in new
commercial, industrial, residential and municipal areas. At June 30, 2005 the fund balance
was $15,065.
Senior Citizen Transportation Assistance Fund
3
Exhibit A (cont.)
Door -to -door transportation service for frail, elderly and /or disabled persons is provided by
county grant monies administered by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission.
Revenues and expenditures were each $80,136. The fund balance is $26,022 as of June
30, 2005.
Dike Maintenance
The Bay Farm Island Reclamation District has paid into this trust for the continued
maintenance and operation of various dikes on Bay Farm Island. The investment income
added $5,367 to the fund balance of $318,164 as of June 30, 2005.
The following funds are managed by the Development Services Department and represent
the major redevelopment, economic development and community development projects
and programs with oversight by the City Council, the Community Improvement Commission
and the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority.
West End Community Improvement Project
Redevelopment — incremental property taxes from the designated area are
distributed to owners, to low- and moderate - income housing and to the agency for
annual operating costs. This year, bond proceeds for projects were also made
available. Total revenues were $12,645,976 with $18,447,910 expended. The
remaining fund balance is $32,440,000
Housing — 20% of incremental property taxes are set aside for low- and moderate -
income housing projects. Revenues of $949,812 were offset by $1,493,815 in
expenditures with a fund balance of $497,567 as of June 30, 2005.
Business and Waterfront Improvement Project
Redevelopment — incremental property taxes from the designated area are
distributed as follows: 20% low- and moderate - income housing, 25% passed to
other taxing entities per agreement and 55% retained by the agency for operations
and projects. Revenues of $3,326,512 supported expenditures of $4,396,620
leaving a fund balance deficit of $(20,277).
Housing — the tax increment, bond proceeds and in -lieu fees produced $1,487,267 in
revenues. In turn, $1,812,886 was expended leaving a fund balance of $1,139,866.
4
Exhibit A (cont.)
Alameda Point Improvement Project
Redevelopment — incremental property taxes produced $703,475 in revenues to
support $789,602 in expenditures. The fund balance deficit is $(1,512,102).
Housing — the 20% of tax increment produced $179,696 of revenues in support of
$77,802 in expenditures. The fund balance is $308,414.
Fleet Industrial Supply Center (FISC)
Lease Revenue — Revenues from leases totaled $3,406,071 and supported
operations and capital projects totaling $3,393,629. The fund balance deficit is
$(2,500,781).
Catellus — Revenues and expenditures support the development project per
agreement. The deficit fund balance is $(2,072,406).
Commercial Revitalization
Rental income of $60,878 supported expenditures of $155,539 leaving a fund
balance of $509,639.
Rehabilitation Prepayment Fund
Revenues of $332,956 represent payments in connection with low interest and
subsidized loans via community development block grant funds. Expenditures
totaled $402,979 leaving a fund balance of $842,294 at year -end.
Housing Development
The fund balance is $104,736 at year -end.
Affordable Housing
Fees are paid by developers in support of affordable housing projects. Revenues of
$222,895 supported expenditures of $170,943. The fund balance is $218,365.
Human Services
Several major programs, i.e. Social Services and Human Relations Board, are
accumulated in this fund. There are a variety of funding sources totaling $280,134.
The program expenditures totaled $317,503. The fund balance is $9,113.
5
Exhibit A (cont.)
CHRPO /Lead
The State Department of Housing and Community Development provides funds for
housing rehabilitation. Revenues were $23,048 to support expenditures of $58,407.
The fund balance deficit is $(10,230).
CAPITAL PROJECT FUNDS
Wastewater Capital Reserve
The State Water Resources Control Board requires the establishment of a reserve set -
aside as a condition of loans for sanitary sewer purposes. This fund was created to
meet this requirement with a transfer in from the sewer fund of $8,135.
Capital Improvement Fund
Funds received from a variety of sources in support of public infrastructure projects.
The fund balance is $12,736,768 as of June 30, 2005.
Marina Village Assessment District
Established to finance the construction and acquisition of public improvements in the
district. There was interest earned of $49,984 and no expenditures. The fund balance
is $2,538,556.
Harbor Bay Isle Assessment District
$500,818 in contributions was provided to support construction of public improvements.
Expenditures were $866,660, leaving a fund balance of $1,087,170 at year -end.
Library Construction Fund
Revenues from grant payments and bond proceeds support construction projects.
Revenues were $38,912 and expenses were $167,947. The fund balance is
$1,202,088.
Open Space Improvement Fund
The purpose is to support open space and recreation facilities. Revenues were
$16,923. Property was purchased for an addition to Towata Park for $111,852. The
fund balance is $903,486 at June 30, 2005.
6
Exhibit A (cont.)
2003 Alameda Point Bond Project
Demand Revenue Bonds sold in 2003 fund major construction and improvement
projects in the area. Revenues were $59,914 while expenditures were $1,965,683.
The year -end fund balance is $1,281,576.
Citywide Development Impact Fees
Established to fund improvement and replacement needs in parks, recreation, public
buildings, traffic and other facilities. Fees are collected by use within geographic areas.
Total revenues were negative as a majority of funds needed to be reclassified. There
were no expenditures. Fund balance at year -end was $1,047,869.
Transportation Improvement Fund
These monies are restricted to construction and improvement of traffic mitigation
projects at Bay Farm Island. Revenues were $457,869 and expenditures were
$1,696,306. The fund balance is $481,006 at year -end.
Urban Runoff
The Storm Water Utility Fee is collected with property taxes in order to fund programs in
compliance with federal requirements for the Clean Water Act. Revenues of $2,705,089
supported expenditures of $1,695,615 leaving a fund balance of $4,014,759 at June 30,
2005.
Community Facilities Districts
Established to finance acquisition and construction of facilities within the district:
CFD #1 (Harbor Bay) — has a fund balance of $212.
CFD #2 (Lincoln Property) — earned interest revenue of $9,532 leaving a fund
balance of $461,263.
DEBT SERVICE FUNDS
Debt Service funds receive revenues from a variety of designated funding sources to
pay the debt service on the outstanding issues.
Total revenues were $19,496,742 and expenditures were $21,945,721. The
remaining fund balance is $71,176,194.
7
ENTERPRISE FUNDS
Golf
Exhibit A (cont.)
This fund accounts for all transactions relating to the Chuck Corica Golf Complex.
Receipts totaled $4,360,358 and expenditures totaled $4,948,025. The fund balance is
$7,664,761.
Sewer Service
This fund accounts for all transactions relating to the operation and maintenance of
sewer operations. Revenues were $5,425,271 and expenditures were $3,937,616. The
fund balance is $44,355,693.
Ferry Service
This fund accounts for all transactions relating to the provision of ferry service.
Revenues were $2,735,884 and expenditures were $3,408,297. The fund balance at
year -end is $9,951,459.
INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS
The purpose of Internal Service Funds is to finance and account for special activities
and services performed by one department for other departments of the City on a cost
reimbursement basis. In total the revenues were $5,144,633 and expenditures were
$5,406,086. The fund balance is a deficit of $(3,418,139). The Workers Compensation
Self Insurance Fund has the largest fund balance deficit based primarily on future
claims. These claims will mature over five to ten years.
TRUST FUNDS
Pension Fund 1079
General Fund contributions and interest earnings support payments to retirees and
other reporting expenditures. Contributions of $3,163,419 for approximately 56 retirees .
and qualified beneficiaries are covered by this fund.
Pension Fund 1082
There are two retirees supported by contributions from the General Fund. In addition,
post employment health benefits were funded and paid for eligible retirees. These costs
were $1,257,521.
8
I— Exhib
2004 -05
Adopted
$ 16,748,613
•
$ 14,864,000
25.536.467
3,158,252
1.798.200
000
I�
r
i00NT47
SOD
n.
O
O0v0)
mf
40)
•e- N
r 00
OD Of
00
O
4)
n
CD
N
07
C7
n
O
co
43,727,528 I
2.721.104
i�
• 'h
' 47
1(D
.r
r f0
3,762,191 I
0
i00�00
000
OD
4)
C)
(�
07
205,352 I
0
(r
h
OD
O
t0
�U
ONO
W
10
in
v
C4 0)
M
00
r
in
0
r
8
Q
$ 1,829,763
$ 259,620
(2.026.8401
CO O
N
(500,000)
1,502,875
$ (740,459)
(0D.
''0
M
00)
0
0
`
28,400
1.502.875
0 CO
, Is '0
ef•NCD
Q)
00)+)
$ 2.477.561
O
co
Cl
V!
$ (1,388,257)
CO
0
C
0
4(
$ (332,647)
O
N
26,059
1.002.164
i
'
$ 1,228,223
$ 125.521
71,570
239.059
900.303
O
N
^
(26,600)
(117.600)
27.077
G
158,610
$ 1.307.741 1
co
to
—
1q
$ (412,165)
1
it
ENTS
Qtr 3
Amendments
191,036
345,000
1,049,512
(253,082)
(2,355,000)
$ (1,022,534)
(0
.d.
(2,496,716)
(86,050)
(515,700)1
(80,600)
(217,500)
(49,109)
(9,435)
(2,874,120)
$ (6,299,384)1
$ 5,276,8501
1
N OF RECEIPTS AND DISBURSEMI
JUNE 30, 2005
Qtr 4
LAmendments
$ 718,000
(497,082)
0
0
M
20,000
25,100
379,244
(23,465).
,
0)
0))
$ 80,168
442,974
77,071
370,686 1
(h
0
0 0000
06
00))
(157�610�
$ (97,348)
$ 1,019,145
0
W
Q
z
0
2004 -05
Amended
Budget
$ 18,245,729
$ 15,841,620
23,403,581
3,503,252
2,098,200
901,500
03
r
rn
b
6,143,327
$8,581,957
$1,502,875
$ 67,895,510
10
r
10
C>
co
0)
41,340,387
2,951,184
t+)
0
(0
0?
(
3,708,234
1,285,375
395,600
129,134
2,252,065
973,848
206,352
1--
M
1
Nt
co
0)
$ 1,439,173 [
00)
(0
r
0)
RECAPITUALTIO
0
�2
{L
W
a
Actual vs
Budgeted
Y
n
0)
O
0)
2004 -05
Actual
$ 18,245,729
r
(D
no
M
co
co
�
$ 65,082,289 1
$ 1,281,372 1
r
2004
$ 16,347,496
23,307,846
3,563,063
1,119,288
716,948
5,675,711
6,715,779
7,979,512
00
O
M
T
ej
'rd
N
41,395,355
2,937,265
6,117,975
3,622,842
970,375
455,681
62,659
1,942,820
973,848
176,055
$ 2,557,814
1,305,000
v
r
00
00
Revenue from Other Agencies
Current Services
Contributions from other funds
e
w
W
0
as
x
Vl
N cn
w
Ce
z
0
v
m
z
m u.
G
W
=
w
Total L
'AUDITED FUND BALAI
Property Taxes
Other Local Taxes
Licenses and Permits 1
Use of Money and Pro
Fines and Forfeitures 1
ti
a
E
a
w
(City Administration
Public Safety
Planning /Building
Public Works
Recreation Services
Depreciation
Equipment Replaceme
Capital Outlay
Transfers
yI
..
0
,
CURRENT YEAR BALA
. 4
Accrued Vacation 1
Post Employment Heal
a
4
N g
0
a 0
M
0 o M 0 o e
N 0) M (O V V' O V 3
w W w w
O 00)) m M r 0
C
V
d
rNa(ON 0
N w N w (0 (O
(O 4) (O f (O M 0
p-rnoa,
i 444
69
NW N N W0
ID (D Nw V N W ON
w 107, N N M N
� r r
69
4 O 0 O O O 0 o O 0
w C
o o O O o M O
00 (1) r (r0 00) 00) (00
W N O N ,0101
W S V,
• S 69
JR I 000
E f 0 0 0
t
vi F
• 0 O 000
w (0040)
111999
E
M
1-1
Z
w 0
re F
a 0
ii
j o
o
212
O 1w
a
U • w
(0 a
W �
o a
U O
U z
69
(NO
N
0000000
00000
00000
C'00) ('- d
w N r w N
0) ,-
69
0)
W
0
0
N
4
(0
N
m
V
N
O
n
N
O
N
N
0000000000000
w W NWNO V M- OMw
N O w0 c--000
( 0 ( 0 ( ‚4 0 ) 0 ( ' j ( ( 3 ( 1 ) 03 0 0 1 ' )
0)0)00000row000
(0 W r r, 0 .-• N O N O ((p0�� N
N 0)900,(00 vW Nv v ((0
80040 (0 (0 •
d9
yr W -(0O 03 (CC/1'1V
C 0 a_(4) 00 ((0n 0)
10 (OO (O(0� ((Dp N M V' W O (([ 00) 0M) V
rvC)OW N N Or
7 4'e ' N
69
00000,0000000
0 0 0 0 0 M 0 0 0 0 0 0 (0
00000100 0 0 0 0 o r
dddoo4)00) 0000)V'
00004mNmM N m O N
O' 7 n , N
69
0) O O 00) �
00)0 o
10 (0 (O N
w
69
M O O O W O O
woo O O O
(000(0 00) m 0) O N
M 4) r N w
69
N
0
0)
00)
N
✓
A
0
N
0)
M
a
N
N
N
w
4
N
CO
O
0)
N
O O
O O
00 00
N N
O 0000000)00000
0 0 x 0 0 0 0 0) 0 0 0 0
O 0003300000) 0000
a droo00000)1000
(0 or- 0 M (OD N CO V' r- N, N
a 4)v 0)r
N' 69
N
W
o
m
o V)
,ap-= w W
01 mm o
a
v E m c° g Q O
o m ~ 1- J
@ o fm m g m
U N O O E O.
m F
C •C 'C O G
m�aaxza v) 0
000000,
°0�0v0)1 -Worn
( 4
(0 (.3 1') (.3 (0 (.3 (.3
69
25,536,467 $
00000000000
2.222 t� W r W (0 N M
or 7-1 V'( NO mom W W g
0 ( 0 0 0 - ( 1 ) ( 0 ( 0 ( ' 4 0- ( ‚4
(D r O w N (O N M
(00)03 r M ct M V; 4) M
4) N a- 0 e 7 - N
N
69
(0 0,- M M, M W O w
a N
aee- (D O
NN
69
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N
0 0 0 0 0 0 0) O O O (O
O O M O O 0 0 0 0 0 M
4000)0) ) d ro o 4) 4) 0i
(0 0 w w
N c r N M
69
0
1
0
0)
N
M
N
N
N
M
N
N
0 0 0 00 O 0.
V O N 40) V
M
69
0 0000 000) 000 (NO
00(00,000000M
oo4)M oro0w4)('3
Wow w w w .
N V p
Ill • M
v
>. 7,g m t
N 7 N (2 m
S LL _9 m >
xx g N 1) y m m O m 9 ▪ a Q C 1- U V C L L a 0) 0 LL = 2 a 0
,. N E W m O 0) m 0) m . a) t
2 0m t to W
!A Q UN p ~ N t j
mmm,m 01-‹mm o m
m
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 N 00 V 00 W N W W 00 w 0
(10) N N N N N N N N N N N
(0 (0 (0 (.3 (.3 (0 (0 ('3 (0 (0 (0 (0 (.3
N
O
N
N
000
248
O 0 0
00 0) 000
.e-
0
69
N r O
W M
M o
0
69
•
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 Or)
N
69
O
M
69
N
yt
0) O)
N
00
N
N
0
00
O
N
O
O
W
N
N
N
0
000 o
O • N O N
00)
O 0)
69
Z
0
LL
0
E
0
o E ur J
c o
0
_R 1-
m C C 03
0 O O
(O7 m M
0
X
0 0W
ao
J
m0
.1:41
R
Q0
(O�1
F-
W W
z Q1°
w .4.
1 n8
R' 2 N
p 0
Z
4.
LL
w
J
W I-
W
W W O
o a O
0000
000oo
((0 o a W
(0 (0 0 0)
0 N r N
0) (0 0)
(C O M
N
69
00) N 0 9))
O CD O 0)
A 0 O
V r
69
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
O 0 10 O
m O O
0
m
1-
N
CD
A
N
h
a-
1:0
49 H
o
o
o 0
O
d0
N
H
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 O
O O co O N
O O
aD O O a0
co m
vi
N
O
W
O _
W w
o a
W
z a m m 0
W C a m Z O
O LLe Q LL
LL m
d LL ° °3 p 0 > c J LL
0 Q C LL E 0 O
N 2 = O F Z
W Z E m c e = W
I o u. OLLWF- vi
I� 0000( e03
I-0Drr0`r OrU)O)
00)) ° O r° N 0 0 0I O o
10 I0 A O r° OV gN
O O W m O 0 N h (0
M 00 d' O) ((0 0)
N W V O m M V r N L1. N 0 N 0
c6 O N
CO M W
I-
N O
N
'9
0 0 0 0 0 0 N 0 0 0
0 0 0 m 0 0 r 0 0 0
�
Nj O O m O O r 0 0 0
0 O 0 M 0) O (0 O N' (
O N N a0 M a0 O 0
fA
a0
N
O
N
0 r 0 0
O r O 7
i� M O 0)
vr
0 0 0 ° 0 0 0 0 0
N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
W 'O O M O O N V
V 0 0 N m O 0 N
69
H
N
co
0)
W
0)
H
0
0
H
N
0)
00000000000000
nVA0)0.CO0..0) (00)o.0 ra.
CO M' IOn) V O< N N r
0 W (0 ( a00 N r V 9){ °0 0 N 0 N
1'- 1 V) rO -(Ow f0 (0 (4) Nof
4) 1° N ( (N.. 0 ' W N 00) (0 N (('1
(A
(N7rr- NO0Cr mO01° a°iN
O N 60 0) 0 h 0.0 (0 CO - O CO
W O (O O N N D U) W 0 O LO
(0 m 0 r
r r r
69
M 0 0 0) t0 p0 0 0 a0 000
FR CO (N p r 0 D 0 N N 0) 0 0 0) 0
(O M a0 LO M M O 00o- N 0 O
NtO rr Nr Mr OmM
V r r
69
N (W a O N O 0 0 I° O 0
(00 (0 r O ar0 n.R V I°0 N O 2 O
n N (D (O N v fD 0)� (C'( In
�" N 0) 00)
(9
0N 1. O O N O
(00 (°0 N n
CO
69
4)
O
N
m O
m O
m O
N 0
N
0
0
V
H
co
0 0 0 10 O O O M O (0 O
O o O O (r0 ((0 O(0 O 0)) O
M M co 0)' 0 0 7 aJ M O
0 O M N N_ aD m m
t0
0 N 7 r v CO CO
69
N
0)
H
Dor
N
(0
N
V
N
A
M
H
N
1')
N..
H
h
O
co
N
O
O
0
H
0
co
(D
N
•
0 m 0 {I
O 0! 0 O1 Z
.LO C LL E ' LL V . • fQ m =
C C 0 O 0) m m E C'
'E�0LLa)� �n (y(��0�
m m C C o 0 L J
M m t° Um 0 0> Q a; O
m i C U Q V® 'C LL.? U m w ~
(7 • G 2UZ Ti e 2if. mC7 °
dWLL O 0- o vi
Z0 0 0 0 0 (0 r 0 N O N O °W 0 °°0 0 0 0 0 m 0 (0 (0 r
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 000300
GENERAL FUND REVENUES
0
w
z-1
0
z
a 0
to 0
O
H
eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeseeeeeeeeeeeeeee
0 0 0 0 0 0 8.8.8.2;2.2.8 N O O 8.8.2.888. 0 0 (WD I0) 8 88 88
000000 Nf 0(000 0000 OJ(09) 0000
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0) N (O 0 0) 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 CO CO (O 0 0 0 0
0 0) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 (O 0 h 0 (N(0O 0 0 0 0 r 0' 0 0 0 0 0) 0 0 0 0 0 0
O N NI 0000 V 0 ((00 O 50(00
O O' 0 O (O n" O V) (li 0 r 0
N (O 0) or or 0) CO (O
69
N O N (- c0 N N r 0 (0 N CO 00 9) 0 0) V (O (0 M N 0 0 (0 0 (O
a Q (O W� ((00 r NI CO 0 0 CO 0 (0(0 - CO 00) N 0) M N N M 0 V O O 0 CO 0 r-
(0 M 0 c0 0)' I- O N N r O M M N •V 0) t` A 0) 9i (O N O O aaN f` N
C) i N a) V N N co N O r r to O 0) r O r O 00 M (00 Tt N r-
e.,
N
C
E
N 0 2
,
a
11
c
J
2 F
W O
I-
0 I-
a O
O
r
0
0
Z
CONTRIBUTIONS FR OTHER FUNDS
O 0 r co r N ao M O co O.0 N co co 0 O 0 N co M N N M O O O [0 O (NO 0
O 0.�} co c) r 0 0 0 co N r 0i O cc) N'r 0) I- h Q) 0 0 c0 O or h
0 000 (M0 7 a (0 N W CO (0 r r (() r (0 0) N r r u) h V V u0i M M 1-
N M r (0 r r r
69
Co- 93
N
m
0 O O O
o O O 0 O
N 0 (0
0
69
O (00 O 00) O M (00 0
MI. 0 (O N N 0 N 0 0
CO O ON N 0 r 7 (00 (00 (00
CO r r
N
609 0 ((0 (C0 Op ONO 0 NI- 00 N- 0 or O o 0 N 0(0 0 0 (N0 (09 (00 (0'I 0 9) 0 0 CID 0 N O or
07 r- I'- N (O ON (0 CO 0)(1) (0 CO N 9) 0 (0 0 CO or I-
M O 00 0) I� N O O 0,-,,,f 0 N' r 0) r 0) (0 O O N (. N
(0 7 0 (0 0) r (0 (0 .",.1,1- r r 9 r N 0 (0 .c-
.,- V N N N r r (O 0 (0 9 ) N
r N (0
mm 0)
LL C c C C LL
d •0 W 0 U 0 0 m
LLW �LL 0F5 01 070C OOL0U
o LL o E o 0 v m� w 0 0 rc 0 i- a. (c E 3 (p
C 01. (Y [A 0 0 O
IiI—cS ` � �(0oF- Eo —m E m u rai m d2
J (� -I 0 d 00 LLQ00�M Q LL 0 N D w (D !n
E E E E E E 0 E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E `O E E
gggggg Qggg gggggg ggggggggggg =gg
1- I-
N CO (0 (0 0 r M (0 r' N (0 (0 (O 0 CO t (O O 0003,-0,-NO3
O 0 0 0 0 0 N N N M (0 (0 I. h r n 00 00 (V (0 0 (0
N N N N N N N N N N N ((VV ((VV N N N N N N N N N (y M CO (O (O (O CO
00 00 W 0 00 00 00 e0 00 07 00 (0 w N (0 W 00 00 (0 a0 00 00 00 00 00 (0 0O 0 0J 0000
CO M M 04 (D CO CO CO M M CO M(0 CO M(0 CO M M CO CO (7 M CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO
a i .-
NCO N
CO 0) CO
at
I,
0) I
I
N 9) 0)
at 414 at
CO.
CO 0 CO CO N M
M.
N a O CO
IA n VI 2
00 Q 0)) (7
(CO (00
(A N n 0
of (0 m 9)
h (MO N (OD
CO CO t= A
(D (O
f�) A (-
7 0) A
CO co sx
ea E ON)
(2,355,000) $
H
((0
N
H
(1,022,534) $
H
N
H
0
H (.9
ei
CO V
N
H
N OV
(0 c
0
W (00 n.
SUB TOTAL - CONTRIBUTIONS
H
o 11
TOTAL - GENERAL FUND
n
CO
h
H H
0 V
H 0
A
(O
Equipment Replacement Depreciation
0)
0
7
LL
H
GRAND TOTAL - GENERAL FUND
H G
ZW
W
W a.
11. w
W No
v
w N
g
O
Q M
m
0 0 0 ( 0 o e
ti O (00 N cN0 M
1� t` 0) O (O o0 0)
O 0) 0) 0 0 0) 0)
(O CO CO (D CO V
O r-- LO N lA
co_ M .- .-- (O C6 t!)
ui
((D D O M LC) .. co
N. to M 1• o co
1` N M a0 O M
et
O co OO) 0
d9
(0 CO V On 00) (4') co N
LO O .-- .- N n
(• M M N N M (O CO
CO
O CO CO ano .O-
)- 0 0 0 N n0 V CO
5 N N N O a0 co.
L E ' CO O co. co.
i' 5
7
LL D
Q
69
.. (0 0 0 7N{ t(O (00 0))
C (o N O to
(J d V v (D O 0)
o E co co
N
t 7
Q 04
6,350,115 $
(0
O
0
ur
CD
co
0)
N
e e e 0 0
co (Mi v n �i
O O O e-
m
Nre
co
0
0
4 ti 0n), 00) 0))
N 51 (0 N W
N
0
0)
N
N O (OO W IN• 0)
co 0) v 0) .-
LO 0 N CC0 ,- CO
N OD N
04
W N 00)) CO CO
r V N
N.7 L6
o N. a00 CO
N
u') (O
43
22,327,103 $
49
0 LO
7 v
O 0) C40 0
u)
CO 0)
a0O (~O
N N COO
N .- N
u)
(0 (0 ))
0)
N n
O- V N
18,879,186 $
04
M
N
3
co
0
O
0
Hi
0
w
49 w
O 0) CO CO 1. O .4- N (D
W,- 0 CO N V' CO 0 CD er
n 0. a .-- N (0 u) N u
CO CO ) V' 0') CO 7 OV
N N N N
69 u)
M n ONO, N .4- 10 0 (NO_ a-
(O (O W N (4 W .-
0) 10 a V -'
r.. �., v 1... (0 (
e
M
0
0
at
3
41,395,355 $
d)
CO
CO
0
3
u) I 64 49
O
0
O
O
d: 49 f9 C9 ! u> 49
N
in CO V to
12 E o 'OO CO CO ) v r .. W 1.
o 7 N
"a
u)
64 u)
0 0 m
co (0 CO
O (0 0)
V- V O
V
J co N c0 co 0 r- 0 Cr 1• O
< z O
Z 0 4 M CO et CO M V' 0 V• 0)
0 1- O c0 O M .- n 1` N. M CV N. V a0 M 0) 1.
re Q N O O) CO O 1. O
O a c
0
re
0.
El ) u)
0.
Q
GENERAL FUND
City Administration
Li
0
T m
O
o N
>, 0 H (D
c m Ze E c c QJQ
U O Q m E W
c E o Z
OOOOiL2 E 0 N
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
N N CO V (0 c0 .D
N- N N N N N N 0.
Police Services
10 O CO 0
co
<0 0O) o aD
N
15 u-;
43
o o 0 0 0
N M V- 0)
CO M M M M
43
O)
(0
0)
.4.
V
64
0
1-
0)
N
w
Fire Services
O co
64 64
N- CO 0
M CO N
v tO O)
ui
E9
CV O 0)
CO
CO O
(OO 0 N
69 •
(`D CO
M
49
O (N0
V
0
00)
N
M
0
O
h
n
N
O
ti
v
M
43
O
(00
(0
:9 49 (9
O 0 O O 0)
LO LO () CO O Cl. A O M (O to
I
co v N N
O)
(0
et0)
O
0)
M (NO CO 0 0 CO 1 CO CCOO 0
0 (0 CO O N I N u1
N 00) cco+) O O N 1 co M co n
V co N N. t. I (n CO
O) .- co u) V
49 49 49 491 49
J
I-
0
o O 0
a) o a . N
a
m �' W
> J LL <
0 > v 0)
Q)) '� 0 $ c.)
CD > m o m
Ill 0- Q d 0. 0.
O N M
N N N
M CO CO
ce N
C
CD oc
(0
co
m w
Ea>i Q
a p 01
a) 6'
> c
m
o
0- O.
E o csi0
a
0
N
0
(0
0)
43
Z W
LU al
CL W
am
0 W In
.0 Z O
:s 5N.
O
x Q y
W m c
N 0
W 0
me N
7
O
I-.
M
Z c
W
a
6
N
O
=
7 N
Q O
a
a
Q
.. C
0a)
r
O
LL Q 1 o
1-
t
r
w
0 O E
aci
1
c
o co
a1
(A Q
8"
c
E
jy N
7
'6
Q
J (A 10
9
Z 0 v
E2 Q N
O o0.
0
re
0.
a
Q
GENERAL FUND
ment Services
0
ar
Q
CO CV CV
CD
04
49
CV CO
CO N
0) CO
(O M
0
0
(0
M
69
O
ti
v
69
A
M
w
O
N
0)
w
M
0
3
(R
ti
w
1°0
co.
M
0i
0)
0)
0)
CO
ur
0
N
M
0)
N
69
N
0)
N
O
1-
1-
69
O
0
O
(O
co
u,
a)
CO
6 69
0 0
w VP
(00 (00 N r
Yr N CV -
.-- - N
e9 69 (A
PLAN /BUILDING SUB TOTAL:
Public Works
e N O O e e e
N O 53 O N
00 O 0 co N D1 t-
0) 0) 0) 0) tS 0) 10
M
0)
0
CO
0) CO CO M*0 N M O
O N co (00 CO 1C) ca
n
49
N 1- CO V 0 (00 N.
CO CO ( O
(O 10 I- O (O s• h
r r N
69
CO 0 e0- 0) 7 M
4 6 V d0' ti ti
M r M O
r r N
N a7 V (O CO CO
CID CO CO CO M N
1', a a LO O
K3
O O O 0 O
O O O O 0
O N (O 0
N 0 M
w
(1)
0)
1-
(O
w
•
0
O
3
0
(O
ace
0
(00
A
co
M•
O
O
ti
N
0_.
e o o e
L. (*q (Mq 7
0) 0 0) N-
CO (0 0) CO
00) N 0 M
V
O 0 r
69
49
cc0 M O
co O M O
CO 0 O M ((0
(0 CO. Yr
(n
CO N-
0 0 V) N
V ti
0.1
M
49
49 w 49
0 00 (00 0 00 CO M 0 L00 a 0 00
N O O O O M ? 0) c0 O
CV Yr v O ti 0 (0 at 10
O 0)
(A
0
10 (0 CO CO 0- CO 0
0) CO CO (0 0 C
(O 0 0 CO 0
O O O (() O 0)
co CO
(0 0) CO •- N
r N
d)
0
0
(0
N
C
C
oI-
o Z
N E a)
o a ) o °23
2 .2 ; f6
a d
C N 0 N
E d C C
m
Q U —1 2
8
co
N
c
o 'o
() c
N 0) 7
{� C
a) Q
Ulna
(0 (0 10 O (0 O O
N N N N N N (0+)
v v v v a .
w
0
00
in
PUBLIC WORKS SUB TOTAL:
Recreation Services
n
0)
N
0
N
0
w
3
N
0
h
M
w
69
O
(0
O
co
69
0
N
0
69
0
N
O!
c00 (D (00 0 0)
CO 0) c0 m-
a-- r N N
(0n v CO
CO
Mastick Senior Center
ARPD Annual Maintenance
0 0 (00 0
r
(0p
0 (0 (0 Ui
RECREATION /PARKS SUB TOTAL:
3
00)
N
M
h
61,213,963 $ 60,500,851 $
49
3
M
1,266,253 $ (3,149,220) $
w
N
(0
w
A
w
0
0
69
69
0'
0
CD
ti
69
0) u)
0 ro
(O N
N N
d) 69
O 0
M 69
Depreciation
I— 0
Z
wa
ax
W
y N
W 0
N
f.3
0 d
Z
W
6
'O YI
1 O
N
7
0
a
a
r
o u
` E
LL N
a
Q
e e e e e 0 0
0 0) 0 0 0 0 0
4 0 0 (• 0 0
O co 4 O O (0 0 0
N M o o M o O
N 0) O
M
O
69
N V� 0 CO 0 0
i• O O
O (O .- 0) M
W V N
(A
0 0 CV 0 0 0 0
49 0 O 10 O N
100 0 r 0)
e e e e e e e e e e 0 0 0 0 0 0.- 0 V 10 1-
00 O 00 O O ar0 O O) O) r
r
Of9 00 O O O V O 4
0 N N
N —O M
CO CO 0 0 0 0 I,- 0
M N 0) 10
0) M 0.
44 4*
N
(1.
N
44
0 0
(O (O
N
N
O
1
0 0 0
O (D ((0
a z o ` O O OV O o 0 0
Z O Ti O' N
C7 QN M (0 0)
a
0
0.
0.
0.
M
O
CICI Tr o 0 100 0 0 (0 00
OD 0 CO N O
IM. 00 Xcp 00) (0o
0) N '6t
(fJ
2,916,668 $
3,225,913 $
(R
coo 0 c00
O 1-
O
0 0 0 0 0
O
0 O
0 0
0 0) N
('4
(2,874,120) $
44
64,626,607 $
14
M
ti
(0
O
(00
N
40
N
N
N
co
CD 0 0 r VO
O O O O M
0 0 O • N C
(`')
CD CV M
•
44
O?
y O 1- 1. N
O 0) 0) N
o ci ci (O
,- 1 co O
CV
M
N
N
4*
N
44 w
00 0 0 I. 0 0)
c00 1... O O N 0 at
0) N M L00 O 0 4
N .- co'
E
m
0
atf
U
m
c LL
(n
O r
2 0 c 1° w
LL
F g (p 2
- c E Z �' E S.
0
O 0) c U w a) a Z
Z• c g 0 a m E L^
_ _ '= N y N 'O V) N O Ik W LL
N (0 co 0) N~ 0 N .O LL 7 N Q'
Ev Eames 0 Z r!� a Za2To c F W
m
o N N 7' O= c c U l0 W
UQ24coQ0 r H � w C9
J
V) y 1Q'
0
O
M
n
w
0
40
69,067,768 $ 2,477,561
64
0
0 in
(� Z
O. LL
C Jq
W
E Z
E
cD
o c7
O J
r 1-
O
d
C.
W (
0)
LL
Q4
Exhibit E
SUMMARY OF ADJUSTMENTS - GENERAL FUNDS
Revenue
Appropriations
Department & Description
General Fund
$ 818,000
Adjust estimate to actual property tax revenue receipt
124,762
Adjust estimate to actual revenue receipt
(30,738)
Forego last qtr cost allocation from Affordable Hsg
(157,600)
Remove unallocated ACEA increment
157,600
Allocation to departments for ACEA increment
40,000
St & Lighting - to include AP & T loan payment
22,879
Fire Dept -To include appropriation funded by FEMA grant
2,500
New Neuter fee revenue
7,273
7,273
Transfer from Marina Cove Assessment District for maintenance
2,500
Police dept - To fund vetrinarian fees for neutering services
(170,000)
To retrieve earlier apropriation from GF for Otis /Park St signal proj
$ 921,797
$ (97,348)
Total General Fund Adjustment
LL
m w W
x W J
a
0
30
J
m 0
0
Q 0
D9
0.
Qo
N
Ow
W W
Z
J WW>
Q W
a'
00 0 0000000000000000000000
000000001000000000a 0 0�
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C'1 O
V O 0 0 0 0 0 0 V O 0 4 M N O m N N f 0 0 O 0 O 0 O O 0 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 O O 0. ,, r O O n f) �0 O O 'S 0. m N
00 0 0 O O O 0 10 n 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 m 1 O 0100 N 10 0 m a
O N,- N m .- 10 7 d
Loco
21 m
N C Q 0) m vO) O N m N v O 0 0 D 1 8 N 0 + N n M 2 1 ` N O O N m N 8 O m r C mN r R N N N m O n v ONv m n 2
0 E r N 0 0
d0 N m co O 01 01N m 1 (D O N m 0 m to N Nm : v m 0 O m V. ul 0. V. V.
0 4N Vm m O M e v 1( N M n O (n O) O 10 v v 0 N
N V. H N
1p ...
v 0 N 41
w
10 1D W a (00 O 110 W O) 0 n (00 ` m N N M N 100 WN0 1 10 10 0 0 mm 10 0 N r 100 r a m a M m O) m r n N 110 N M oo N
N W N T f: V; 10 0 m N N 10 10 10 0 1t) 0 10 1_ V• N 10 1: V N N 10 N Pl N a- O 10 10 V 7 1n 00 1[.
N N f� W 0- 0 1� Oi ry (0(11010100)100101004 N N m 1� N N Nm O N n C 0 000 0) N a 10 (D 0
W 10 0 N gI V a 0 W 10 M m N W n n m m 10 m
a0 m 1 1
O m 0 0 0 0 0 0 N O m 0 n 0 0 m 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O) 0 0 M 0 0 0 N n 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 (0 N CO. O 01 0 O. 0 0)_ 0) 0 0 CO 0
O 10 O m O) 0 10 0 10 10 000-000 1 0 m 00 00) 0 0) 10 1100
yj a0 3G482319-8 i i (0
a- n N N W 0 0 10 a- O
m O N M V• M
N �
m
•
C V .
▪ d
a N
L W
r 3
.0 V'
Q
E 7
{0 .6
Q
C
ati. E
a
C
N
Q
a▪ €
a+ N
N 7
Q
p W'
2
W
0 00) 0
O 0) O
0 (0 14)
00_ a C O
N a V
mm.
at
1
m
10
1D
0
0
N
O m 0 0 0 0 0 0 N 0 m O N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 000000,00000
m 0 0 0 0 0
O O 0 o f O 1n 10 0 O) a-• W o O 0) O O) O O 00 m 0
m m (6,-moo 0 1 10 Off) m N 0) n 00 V' 10 M 0) N 100 0, 100_
m c� 0 N m FA
�j 0 NW
Fri
W ❑
a
LL 0 O • LL
v U• ❑ O_ O Z m 0 w
F-� ¢`Q 0]a ❑ ~lRi >f-N ~Ny w}} ~Q w W Ia I az W w
W W 1-0000; Za' OH~�H �aFF� F 00 LL Z _mow
0❑ m Z 0 0 0 m U 7❑❑ 0 Z IL O •J W LL O J W ILL W („) LL LL �•% J ❑} D Z_ m a 0' LL' Z Q m
WoNNN Z Z❑ 0 0 0 O W N LL Z Z W 2 Fan W Q Q Fan L, Q¢ w o Q W w W U LL LL w m z J ❑ O Z- W 2 U GO 0m
O 00 W 000mD0 LL W W ,3LLFnUasu NU UUU aC LLNC9 W KOZO °Ow>
m m Z❑ J O O CC 1n W N 1`') Q LL N U LL 1n U =� LL Y J J U U a M O U' _ N a W Z 5'
w w m Z x <<<0
a XQ a x< 0 W p W❑ K❑ 3. a u- u- Y m J Q W m m w J J K 003‹,-,5"<....10 ' ' Q woo()
ww-. W FFI --QQDQ W UIa-N- mm0- 1- aaawwwwt-' a aa( CO<Caa2mznpwww
U U 0 ❑ m 0 <n m 0) J W W W W W W W W LL LL LL ll. ' O W❑
-• >--
▪ w
<< 0 0 U 1- D a w W w n0. z 1- >' �' �i Z z Z z O D U U m m m m 1 # N* x¢ m Q 2 i a) m I.N.. H F
m O) 1 0) P) N 0) 1 LL< U) _} O) a IL LL. lL U LL IL LL LL LI LL LL LL LL LL 11. LL Z Z❑ 0 U [S U_ U_ m 2 z w m m m
O) 0) 0 0 0 0 0 0
O) O) 0 0 0 0 0 0 I)- Fn F m m Q❑ ❑❑❑ ❑❑ ❑❑❑❑ 0❑ ❑❑ p❑ W W LL LL- O O o W W W
N N N N N N Q Q Q Q Q m m U U U UUU UUU U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U ❑ 0❑
0 CO 033 03 a• FO 0 LOW CO 03 O) O CO 1 O a- N m Fy m a N FO N m O 01 N O 0 (0 d• 0 I, CO V W 1COD �0 N
DI • m m aN) D. a- a- V N ao Cp N N N N N) Vey oa • pQ yO a rypQ pQ N pQ pQ� app pQ q y 0 R ~~ N N v2.0 N N N 1D N V' V NN
RU. O M R 1`7 F7 R FO 1'1 N F+) F+) Fes+) l�l 1+) N N
W r
3J
J
m U
0
Q
C
V
Q
eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eveeee.eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee *e
N a 0 M O M N 0 N CO 0 0 M CO 0 0 N CO M a 0 0 0 CO 1` 0 P N N 1- CO 0 h N N N 0 0 N N 0 CO CO
O N N O a 00 CO 0 0 M 0 O O CO. W. O O N 0 a N 0 0 0 O m O a O N 7 00 0 O N w. a 0 IA C"") O (0 r N
O a O N O a O M (C 0 O N a s 0) OD O (0 co O N O) 0 of f0 00 0` (1I a 0 0 0 0 O a 0) a O) 0) f0
O O 0 O O 000 O ' N 0) O GO O N 0 1` .M- r 0 0) 0 0) 0) r 0 .0-- co O O 0) N a 0) 0 0 0 f0
m N (p .M_. N r M O 0 N CO CO N f` CO M a 0 h N 0 CO o O N a O N 10 N N N .y (0 7 (,...c2 0 8 8 O) 0) N
fD N r O) CO 0 0 CO O 1` 0 0 h O O CO Nit CO O M CO 0 a0 0 O N 0 O N 0 1(1 (O O N 1. N
(0 M 0 01 01 r a M O f0 0 CO CO. CO. a M CO. CO 1: m N O T N N h 1 O) CO. 0) 0) In 01 00 N 0) W t: OD
N (0 O O (V C O N 00 a r O CO. 0 N N 0- N M N 1. r 0 M N a co 0 m N }
CD CO nj 10 M N `- C. co N 0) CO CO CO N v CO 00j r 0 v 4. �M... CO co N co M ti v IOO co CO 0 O h (ry
(V CO r 0:
"' "'
(O M N M V (O M O O N f� f� N M (O M ■ a f� O OD O m O N 01 (O O N W to N aD N (O N 1- (O O N O O N
M CO. 0) (OQ) N 0 7 ^ ■ O O1 1` a 0 n O r M a 10 M �} N e� 0 x 0 0 O? ' 1007 ((��11
N (n 0) a O 1 0 a 0 0) C0 0) 1: m a 14-. (O a n N !n N 0 0 W W W m In N V N (00
W r N M (� wow 00 0- O O (O N O O M O r a W co 00 M o (O M C0 O (O W M O a 0 tq N 00 o
IO W N N 0 N 0 0 0 0 O r r CO N O r N M .} 0 a a M a 0 0) "
C{1 0 N (0 0 0 0 r H N M •t r Z } O) N M r ti CO CO 0 0 N r 0
r CO CO r N r
0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 (O 0 O O 0 0 0 0 0 M N O O O 0 0 O 0 0 0 O CO 0) 0 co 0) 0 0' 1 00 a
1- 0 0 01 0) (D M O M 0 0 0 O 0. 1� 0 0 0 0 N CO 0 N N 0 0 N 0 0 0
0 W O O N OD M V O 00 O CO O O O 1) O In N O (O n O CO 0 0 0 1: N N O M 0 M 0 ti CO. ....co M O 1f)
w 00 CO 0 0 O) co N 0) O O r 00 00 0 N co a N O a co T N O M O O CO u) 0 00 O N O V'
W CO LO CO 0 N CO a, coo M 110 N CO N CO N 0 V N 00) (h0'' N 0 0) (O N 00) M N N •�-- r N (O
7 Z N r r r M r N r ('4 r
-2 ILI
Q 0
b
Q
7
.o
Q
m
0
Z
LL
W
Z
w
>
W
K
-J
U
w
a
m
0 W
Z
2 w
K
W
FUND# DESCRIPTION
N
co n 0 0 0 O a
16 of .--
(y co M A co o 4.
( (O
N
0_ (D. 0 00 v .1
0 7 ((00 v CV
M (0
ca n CO 0)
00 O 0 CO.
0) 0J F 00 co
0 0) M
CO
CO.
N
(O ti 0 0 0
M 0 O O
00) O 100 co M
r N
0 0 (D O CD 0 0 0 0 N O 0 0 O N O O M 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N o O 01 00 O M M CO M O O
0 0 80 0) (D 10 0 80 0 CO 0 0 O N M 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N O 0 N 0 0 0 f` 0 0 d' CO 0 N M O
0 0 80 CO M Nt 0 CO 0 CO O. O. at CO r 0 N 0- O CD O CO (O 0 0 n N N o 0 CO 0 0 co 't 1() O)
(o" a 0 00 co v o) co. N 0i O O 0) N O r N 00 A O a m N o (h O O 00 O O) c0 o,
(O 00 0 M f` 'R N CO N N (O N (O N 10 M (V (O N N r (O N r N 0 0 M ' CO 1.- 0- 0)
0 1n 0 N CO 0 0 N O 1) CO r 1_ N CO CO CO M r N CO 0) (V r n r
N r r r r N N r
-J
J
Q
= 0.
a Z r N M a N 0 1` tL W t).
-" J m Z W ❑ LL Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z m `i r ❑
_ U O} O O Z O ❑ m c) 1.- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Z Q— O W m❑ W~ F O
- (=q F �-
<oceoz Z LL❑❑❑ (QQ W U' ] 0 (y O W F F- H 1- F- F H O Q 2 2❑ # a} Z Z a
al U U U J m< W F.. U LL LL LL F W 2 co O Z O❑❑❑ W❑ ❑ O ❑ F O K a = a J U a g a ga QgQ Li.
W 111 1 R Q dQ Z U _U U W p 0. 4 J W W W W F F 1- w l ❑' 0020
O U Q a Q Q IIJUILIIZ
_U U U _U 0 0 0 U U J n W m>>> J J D Z K 0} } F2- 2 Z Z Z Z W 2
}}2222} JmF -da('J
> > > > > > > > >a,:t 1- rc Rm JJ W mJ W ZQOQ❑ FF- F1-F -F W O❑O Jm mmmmmm
UJ W C d' R m m m > F- Z (i' w w W Pi ro Li LL F_ O_ m Z O. U U U U U U U U Q U LL O O OU > W W W W W W W
w w w w W W W W W X J Z m m m Q Q (D X Z F R' LL m z m }} d. Z m m Z m Z
F I- I- - I - -Fm' I- Fm - II-- I JCeIXrf UU Jm HLL W m W W m ZZ ZQz z ZZlla�42 ^a olzz> CO CO CO CO > CO CO > CO
w w w w wwwwwwwYWwwwwww <<OQ4000ggggggg2mmO� §1T
❑ ❑ O ❑ ❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑LLLLLLLLLLLLO(7(72222Z mmmmNmmJJJJJ 2i 2i ii
M O N M 01 a h CO CO r. ry r r 0 O r r co co co N r cy e) a N b 1• CO O a N 0 N co r (y M a in 10
0 CO 0 (D N ID 10 N ^ N N N n O M V 0 10 O o 0-
CO CO a a a v a 0 a 00 1- 00 N 0 04 01 N O N N N CO . CO N N N n r A n n A N (O N N N N (O N W N u) N Y) v)
N 0) N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
00
J
ao
coo
0
F-
J
4
U
V m
<7
00000000000 veeeeeee00000ee
0000 m 000(Drnw(DnMaolnoMOVOOOao V
o O O,- V N (0 (0 0 0 0 0) n 4 (O 0 0 (0 O (0 0 M (D
07 O N 0 O) 0 V 0 0 0 0 01 N M
00) (0 O)
O (O (n (O O 0) (O CO 'O (O N 0 V N (0 N CO CO (0 (0 0)
O N 0 CO 01 CO 0- N O 01 0- CO 0) V( (0 O N M (0 M 1(1 CO 0) 0
O O N
o o N d) (0 N W fO ` O (A V O C 0` N M 00 M 0 0)
O M (0 (0 O) 0 (O 0 (0 CO 14. N 0 N (O (00 ([I CO (O O N (D
(N�( aa}} 00 CO (0 ' <0 CO
N V (N M N 001 O N 0 f0 D! O m f0 O fO M N
(6 (0 M R N Oi N N O 0 O !f m O h a 0
000)0)
0 CO .- CO (O CO N CO .0 01 O) 0) 0 CO O 01
(O M` V N 01 0 N V 01 0 nq
M uj N (V (V r
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0(0 (0 h (0 (0 0 0 0' 0 N 0 0 00 0 M N
1- O 0 0 0 0 0 0( (0 V (0 (0 0 0 0
p W- O O In O O O O (O N N m O O O W (O 0 0
O 0 0e�.N (q O O m V (O (0 O 0O O O O 1- (0 NO
H W CO CO O) N CO N (00_ W 0 7 h (0) ,- 000 M 0) (00 O N
D 2 M,- N N N v.,-
W
°aW
d
0 E
r g
V
O€
V �
M 9
C
5(
C 7
N 'y^
C
0 aF
r N
3
SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS
z
0
F-
a
cc
it
V
N
W
0
0- CO (M0 V( N (0 01 N O N 0 (D 0 CO CO O (((0yy LO CO V N
• N M N N 000 00D - N N a-• (NO (0O N '0Q I0- N N Lc) N h (0 N N M N 1-
LL
0 00 (O V 0
O N V 0
00 MO) Ng f0
M N M
0
00 (0 0)
S S.
(A ^ 0)
M
O 0o
O
O (0
O m
0000000000(0.0(0000 V O 0 0 0 O W
0 0 0 0 0 0 N V V O 0 O O O (O N V O or ON-
00O00000101000°0 (0 0 0) N.*.
,411.66.001.6.,-6(64000,D.- 0 r (0 ,....:m
CD (D CO CO N CO CO V 0 LO' ( M 0 0) 0
V0.0 0 (O h 0) co 0 co N N
0) .- (() N (0 M
1-
U
z W
Q
0 a tx a
p U W F- 0 P W O °(n o aZ (W7LL w�Oao
z z W . z co a Z m
7> CI LL z W V zz pzHd4
F- a > > ? z
�a>_W W ¢ wWc 0Wu~ia}p F- LLi-wo --
�W Za zu)pF-
ZW j�yJ z m mm
%"LLli�mQWN� m(.��WFQ- �ZWZWOO
m U Z 2 2 R' w Q 2 U O y O U m Q O u)
WO-00. QLLQKZQSQUW _,OZZaUa2 -1W W �W w
wzR2000 JQ DWm<XJazt2., FW FF-Y
W LL' a' .-1 J J m 2 Z = U W W m= u) u) m�u a'
2Oaa Qaaaaaaa W wocou)l-FP1-1-i-» >5>i
105,452,198 $ 112,116,611 $
90539,127 $
N N
Z
00
H
N
0..
0.
0
0.
a
a
SPECIAL FUNDS
e e e s e e e e e ee s e e(O eeees eeesesee ee s e eaee a {e o aye e o ee a e o 0D
M N 0) 0 00 ID 0 0 0 101 N m 0 0 0 0)) 0V, t00. CO 0 O N {h7. 0 PO, 0) 0 m 0 O (0D 0 O N OVi 00 O 0 M 10 N O 0 CO 10) ID N
M OO O co CD IIO 0 0 00 N h 71:c:5868884) 0 0 0 0 0 V O O m 0 Oi h 0 10 0D m O �- V 10 o 0 M N tID
0 O ID et M O,) 000 (O 10 O O m 0)) v m 0 O N n m
N
CO m IN In r- 0 CO 03 CO N CO O N M m N CO O N CO N CO h m CO 0 0 0 h 0 0 0 N 0 CO h CO m CO m h CO 0 V
0 0 O O N m co N h aa O m CO N O V m N O 0 a N h O m N V p O m m .y h N CO N N 0 O
O m 00 O N CO. L.O. m `-' CO N O N m M N N M Co .-. O O 00 0 7 fO N CO O OD N In 10 H O 0 00 mmm m M O O N
tO N N N O fC N N OD O N co N N v Nv N....- 0 v v N e- f0 b 07 et 10 CO N M N N N N 0 N 0 CD M N CO a-,
M h a CD CO M CO V CO V m N CD `-' O CO 0 0 h v CO h h h h N to CD N N M a M
N et 1n N N V 0) h V CO N M CD N CO v
.i N N .J N.. N. V I ... .... v
O CO 0 N h h 0 CO N CO 0 CO m M M N CO 10 m O N CO m N m 0 0 N 10 m 0 CO CO m h 0 0 co N co 10 O N 0
N V 0 0 CO 0 0 0^ N m CO V h CO N aa co 0 co N N. N at m 0 0 N 0 V h m 0 m N CO m CO N CO N V
at at N O O tf V CO La N. at. N m 0 0 N O OD at cD m W O 0 7 0 O) f0 0 N M 10 N 0 01 N m el O f0 N. 'l'
0 O M 1• N CO M 0 N 0 co N(0 .- '7 n O co co co co t. ca. f0 M M N 10 0i N M (v o )n f9 e- OD co co ' h
co r- .f et M N co 0 N in co h h m a h V' CO 0 m CO M W 0 M CO m m I, N m 0 M m N N. m V M at m
(O N .- M m CO N O) N M m M CO CO m f- m m O V N I,. N CO m v. co. fp co N .- (+) m m .- co
0
a. .- v •- .- N O. N M , .0(0 .- •- M N .- V
N 0) D 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 V h CO 00 0 CO 0 0 0 0 0 0 m 0 ID 0 0 ID 0 0 N O m N 0 M m 0 N 0 ID CO 0 m N 0 09 CO
V et 0 m CO CO m 0 h m N m m N 0 0 N N m M a- m 01 0 CO N 0 N. 0 0) h in f� O 0 N
0 t[) m O CO. N (D 1D O aVa M 0 M. CO M O O N O) m I0 a h 0 0 0 0 00 O O V 'O 1_ .- O m O N. at
Di O fh0 N co 0) O. O V co MV 0f N 0 or 0 0 (m0 N N co yy m m h O h 0 N h fD M m N 10 O N V
co M 01 IO 0) h N N N m m m .- N. ID 0 co C N 0 N(
V m co ID n h N h N M m M N CO CO CO 01 m� m m V .- N O M ID N h fV
O .- m V ' CI N CO m . .2 .- OD .- N a- .-
O
co
7
O)
N 0 N
0 Oo 1m.
O. 0 m
N 0 O
0 N 1°0
N
M •'
V O N co ) 0 V
N O N co O 10
CO 10 CD N 0 f0
MCO'
0 0 h
O O 0
e M m
N V
0 m 0 0 0 W
0 0 O N 0
h V 7 co N
a M
N
0
0 CD 1)
1
r
co N 0
h M M 0
M 10 O
N m N
N V 0 0 m 0 0 0 N N 0 CO 0 m 0 0 0 0 0 0 m 0 m 0 0) m 0 01 N 0 m V m CO V 0 N 0 O N O O N 0 0 0 0
V m f. 0 CO N m 0 M M 0 N 0) m N 0 0 N N m M m N 0 CO 0) m h h 0 0) 0 h m CO 0 0
0 V 0 0) 0. 1p O (D N O 0) CO M a 0 0 N m 0 I0 V 1- 0 CO V CO CO 0 V 0) m h 10 0 O m
M V 10 10 0) et eF 0 h O co 0I m N V N 0 m Oi et 1. N OD V f0 OD OD co- O. O O N OD co h- N f0 O h
Mt V 0 0 a- 0 0 M h V M m N M N N CO h 0 V V m m m m CO N h N M N
N t: fh CO h N m h N CO t0 CO N m m m .- m m m et a- .- 0 0 10 N.- 0) 1� .- 0� O1 e co
a- s- m . N N M .- f0 .- co e- f7 .- V ,-
1-
o I1J I- d
F Z Z a a 0
O W I2 ? OQ W W U (Oy CO o m m 0 0 0 Z p 0 CV
W Z j Q U I- ^i 2 a 0 � CO V ) O a a U U a 7 W W Z c j Z 10
w wZ -710,W08 80 10 10 0 0 v
.,-O> D ( .s-
wo ~> w....0 0 7 0 Ea O C- 0 0 CO 0) 0 0(1.00000 U0 a z Q wOF
W= W W,-O O Us wZ Up"'�aa a Mm o 03%.-- O z F-N L-1,0,5 UZ.Z
> 0.0 oo_ ag 71 -1.1 °i Qm Ba c.-M O]pD UUN xQX BaXca F-w� W W
OW W R2K1+-O _,}0 w>wa fD mooa g t.- o a >mM > >ticSUQQyZ V cc nj20ai>-
0 fi 2 N W Q U` I- 2 a F U cc K 2(0 0 y w I- co U a F' x y.2 m fD 0 0 S F- F- I- 7 7 W W LL 7 Z 2 CI) <
aU w E Eo•- 0) �._ > > c�1 1_ ZLL wwm7wwa�
Z<<W OZ- + _1 ".'aKZR0LL00 0 0) y000 c XULLO d mtn U a_Q DO F-U1 W pz F -wLLFwa C
O. LL' W F- w O a N W 7 I-" UJ M O 0 m H v U C M M M N m 0 W W 0 0 0 a Z} W W -i U Q. "I' W to 0_' ti
z O •L' W J 1L H F- F- # 22 i CO m O m m a a y y d d K O O O 0) O O° (1i m N N N Z w VJ U (..i 0-' F J a W W
a LL CO 2 -.i LL Z Z O M 2 Z W 0 0 0 0 0 0 1D 0 00000 W W W C! N Q <0E100
000. (01-aa W W LL0007N 0 0aa001 N N O a<U_UU_U QQ
<<<<<000000000 1O p yy UUUUO{OyLL W LLLLf,9 U' (7202pp 2
00 CO W N CO CO CO 10. CO. Coq (NV N a- N CO N '7 V V VN N CO V ID V V V V 7 a0 0- a0 CO CO CO 0 „, ' P N CD 7, N • N N ;° N N CD CO N N MI
0 N N N N m m N
0
W
w0
C' W
OW. X
W 0
QU
7
m,°,
W
0 O
z M
W
a
x
w
'O 0
.�. ,
V C
Q o.
0.
a
E
7 �
LL 9
8 C
0 N
U 0 n
co irs
• Lo
Z
0 0
F
Q N
a.
a.
0
a
a
SPECIAL FUNDS
• o* e e * * *** e e e ** * e * a* o* e e e e e a* e a* o �° e a° ** e2 * e e e �E
N 0 N W M N M M aa N ��{{ CO n 0 0 N 01 01 n 0 l`') 0 O CO fO 0 0 0 0 W cs, co W CO L OI O co O cv
O 0 0 O co co 0 N co 0 V' 0 c0 o c0 o M V n 0 0 n 0 f0 V n 0 0 0 h M N O M n 0) 0 VV
° m c0D co Cb CO 0 O N 00)) 0 0- CO CO I- 0° r n r to N 0 0 0 0 0° ? 0) CO CO O CO V m- 000 co CO llnO IC) o N
O O 0) N V 00 N o n (0 M 0 0 n O N n CO CO 0 N O 0 O O O N n W O (0 LO N 0) N V N
O 0 V n n M O N V 0 V 0 v n 0 n 0 0 0 O Va} CO OO N O n N 0 O CO V N 0 u) CO V co CO
0 0•- 0 V N 0 c0 0 0 0 n O n o N. .- 0 0 0 V 00 O O O V O 0 N O c0 M O OD 0
O (0 N 0 7 .- N co O O a N 0 M M n 0 N n n N O l N 0 c . , co 0 (o Oi 6 0 0 O r O n 0 0 I, Oi m N
N L- CO "' N M .0.. N. W. CO CO V N n V 0 CO 0 M V CO .M.. --- LO `N" ONl ' C v 0 0 co 0
N • N
0 0 CO 0 n CO CO CO CO n N 0 N 0 0 0 n (('� V 0 N 0 cV CO CO 0 0 0 co N 0) n 0 (0 n } N 0 N l0 V N
0O0(0000 N n 0 0 N n O W 0 0 N 0 0 N n 0 n O CO 0 c0 0 0 aV} W co
at 0 00 f: N 0 0 N O) 0 n 0( N N 00 0 0 0 0 I_ a cn O 0 c0 I. co m 0. 0 0 c0 0 M 0 l0 V 03
0 t: .- I' In Oi N 0 0 0- M N N 00 O V 0: W m 1. o co n co i 6 c0 o Oi N 0 n O n Oi O 0 !fl 0 p Or
0 0 n CO 0 co) I!) n 0 0 (o co c0 CO0 0 ( D 0 0 ( 0 (0 CO CO CO
O M O N co L- V co 0 M N V '- - N M N. n V 0 '- 0 CO_ V CO
N s +- s- C0 <1. ',- N M L-
0 M 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n 0 O M 0 e- 01 CO 0 N 0 V 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CO 0 M 0 n 0 O) 0 0 0 0 CO n
O OO .-0/00 0 0 O O V CO CO 7 0 n 0 CO n O V 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 et O h c 0 N N 0 N 0_ 0 co co
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N O O M 0 0 N 0 0 O O N O N O M V u) 0 O 0 I. N n 0 N. cD 0 0 0 N. 0 CO
O M 0i V m, N O M O c0 c0 c0 A cc O/ O c0 u) co O V c0 N N 0 V 0 O Oi V T N N. V c0 00 O n N O
N M 0 L- r co 0 CO 0 CO 0 CO 0 CO O V� M 0 0 0 M N M N 0 0 n V 0 0) n V CO OO (0 M
N V 0 W CO. O) 0 0 c0 0 CO CO N N a t0 N CO M CO 0 O m.- 0 1\ CO_ n(
e- L- L- M �- M V N V .- (.
0) co co 0 0 0 V 0 0 1- CO V 0
co N N n 0 0 0 0 o n 0
u) 0 co. N 0.0. O cq 0 M O V (0 O
M 0 0 r s O a M 0V 0 (VD 0
CO 0 n 0 N 0 .-
M O In 0 0 0 0 0) O
co 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
V o V 0 o 0 n o
v co co m 0) m co o
V t: w m
O 0 0 0 N 0 0 (0 N- N 0 0 0 0
0 n 0 0 0) 0 0 M N O 0 0 0
O O O M N O O N V O n 0 O
0 n M 0 n 0 V CO CO 00 V 0 0)
O (0 0 n N 0 0 0) 0 co 0 n M 0
V 0 0 v O 0) n
o 0 CO o 0 0 0
°o -0 CO n
U)� (0� o N r
N V CO M- N l°0 - CO
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0) 0 0 0 0) 0 0 0 0 0 CO 0 CO n N 0 0 0 0 0 0 n
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 °o 0 V M 0 0 0 0 0 0 V 0 0 0 0 N c) 0 0 N 0 V O) 0 0 0 0) 0
O O N 0 0 0 0 0 ct) N co O N 0 0 0 10 V o N 0 0 0 0 V ct) '- O .f 0 N 0 0 0 O O at 0 OO
O o a Ed' (. N O co 0 co- - 0- 7 0 0 O c0 c0 0) 01 co M 0 N O 0 c0 O c0 N O
N 0 V CO 0 L- 0 V 0 CO 0) n co 0 0 M M O n o V 0 0 O) 0 CO M V M
M 0 CO V 0 0 N O N O 0 0 N. CO 0 0- V- c'( M n n
N ID Nc NN of
$ 126,428,150 $ 123,479,531 $ 2,948,619 97.67%
lA
Of I
I
in I
lh
O I
0 �
0 1
CO I
0
O I
N 11
11
03 ii
0 a z z 5
= 5 0 2.- U_� 1-- (7I-
w
0
1- o� a 0 W< z J�
I- Z5° �_ 0 U D. w CO 0 co ? O O U ZO
z = O », 15,0.. , Y Z LS O Z W O w m ,_ W z 0� �~
W' uJ F 0 0 0 o ii ¢ y W O 0 d 1- a Z CO
d (• 0 U U U =¢ J U ¢~¢ d L. 101. 0 0-' LL O O U Z Z W �' F- LL W Z y
wwv �zzzUZZUZKaa3aK az �W �z(wi���Z1i W a c
J�.- NM V lmm�zz000 jHLLLLm,a00z W�zz2LLaa Q W 1y�Nopw¢ WO¢O a
( n , w0 0 0 0 0 0 5 }0}o0000 W W W W W WW W< 7zzuT- .Qm�QIZNU0O¢o2Rz� ;i
(p 0 0 0 0 0 C CD o E U 0 0 W W W W W W W W¢ W W < 7 V)
O U a J y
Z Z Z N N N N N N N << z Z Z Q Z]]> co o. co m co (0 Z O O 0 U cu >>> m ¢ O Z 1y (0 a Z W W N
& to ¢ N N N N N N N ¢¢¢ Z Z CO ) CO Q CO Q NQ UQ NQ yQ VQ1 Z N to V J W W W¢ O 2 lL c2 ¢ F" Y
002gggvIg ammO O OtZE W W W W W W W W KzzJ00001 110W Qv W mq)2 l3
o m O O m ¢ a¢ W w O M W W W W N¢ W w 0 z m¢ O
II JJJJJ 2222222220 a a a a aCC re mC0 mmml- F=r1 -77 I°
�rylgVU)lon
cO 0 n O n N 0 0 0 N 0 0, N CO V 0 10 n 0 V N 0 M 0 t)) N N O 0 CO M G 0 V e-
CO O 1 0 0 0) u) N N O O O n 01 0 0 /O 00 O O O V O N 0 0 N n
N V N 0 n n 0- n n n N M N N N N c`7 N YI Y1 N N N vl c0 t+) N m OO N N N N N 0� 0 0 n N N M C. M N 0�
N N N N N N N N 01 04 04 01 01
Exhibit H
SUMMARY OF ADJUSTMENTS - OTHER FUNDS
Revenue
Appropriations
Fund
25,325
To increase library revenue estimate
58,325
To increase library appropriation being funded by grant
201,000
To appropriate Meas B for ferry repairs per council approval
200,000
To appropriate Meas B capital project revenue for I- 880 /Broadwy proj per
earlier council approval
200,000
To fund I- 880 /Broadway proj from new Meas B revenue
64,514
To increase New Meas B Medical return program revenue
64,514
Funding additional medical retum trip program
64,514
To appropriate fund transfer to medical return trip program
64,514
To appropriate fund medical return trip program
36,000
New funding from Meas B for Citywide pedestrian plan
36,000
To fund citywide pedestrian plan
9,000
Measure B local match for pedestrian plan per council approval
6,929
6,929
SSHRB sister city program
27,487
(698,792)
CDBG adjustment to correct budget
10,473
Rehab Repayment adjustment to correct budget
5,050
Tech Fund - additional appropriation for security scanning
57,381
65,000
Revised revenue & appropriation estimate per ACTIA for Meas B
(1,130,000)
To correct transfer for pension plans per council's Feb action
23,052
To adjust for lead abatement program
(1,501)
(1,501)
To adjust for HOME fund program
32,623
32,624
To adjust for HOME Repayment program
7,273
To appropriate fund tfr to GF for maintenance for Marina Cove
Assessment District
(33,405)
Forego last qtr cost allocation to GF and other funds
112,300
Open Space Fund - Council approved land purchase near Towata Park
(2,455)
Yearend Adjustment to risk mgmt
49,011
BWIP adjustment to actual
483,581
Housing In Lieu Fee adjustment to actual
100,000
Commercial revitaliztion adjustment to actual
$ (619,183)
$ 794,948
Total Fund Adjustment - Other Funds
p
d
1
'C
A
1 Actual Balance 1
O
O
M
(O
$ 17,004,044I
2.523.058
1 $ 19,527,101
1 1.013.302 1
O)Na0
((pp
''V'
. N
(TO.
hp6p
CO N
(n
0-)
el-
0
4.743.748 1
hhh(0
(0
lO
• I,
V
h
N
O
NI
N
M
CO
`-
E.
Op
•
428,633 I
(1.512.102)
'rNe
"Q
•co.-
Mrh
h
(0
O)
(O
r
N
Nh000
0 CO
r
O
(00 NM
r
N
lO
(O
0)
h
(p6p
(n
245.160
N
h
O
r
OOMM
h
h
M
0))
h
N
(+)
CO
0000010)000
N
.Cr
C)
O
N
h'
h
(O
(O
0.-(O
r
0
CO
aO
CO
(O
O)
07
N
(0
M
(2,500,781 11
1 FY 04 -05
Q
1 Net Change
$ 799,036
482,336
$_ 1,281,372
547,826
408.363
(776.476)
f0
W
M
(1,093,855)
M
O
O
,
(1.070.108)
CO
N
V
M
(0
(O
(288,392)
(86.126)
101.895
0)
O
M�
(O
0
(925,394)
(72.657)
(90,886)
231,458
64,356
110.721
0
0 0
N
M
o0
h
h
V'
a0
(p
N
f-
h
r
0)
(1•)
CO
0
CO
O
O
O
C)
N
12,442
1 Estimated
1 Fund Balance
(O
g =a -f
$ 16,536,906
3,147,997
1 $ 19,684,902
221,510
1,678,838
5,554,288
17,502,072
3,870,587
309,605
(30,686) 1
501,614
co
cp.
233,9631
(128,398)1
(424,515)1
o
308,285
742,455
e„
171,750
56,921
O00
h
(45.554)
22.194.1
70.823
1.304.400
M
500.6111
oo�
N
(2,513,223)
FY 04 -05
1 Estimated
1 Net Change
II
$ 331,898
I 1,107,275
1 $ 1,439,173
1 (243,966)
1 (297,268)
1 (1,050,000)
1 (6,321,873)
CO
O
e-
((7
0)
1 (1,080,518)1
5,091
1 (257,055)1
(672,545)
(256,761)
27,443
1 (217,674)1
(424,515)1
O
(1,309,011)
(540,369)
(159,767)
(183,582)
0
3,181
(25,492)
• O
(947,453) 1
• 0
0)
O
O
(909,583)
• O
Expenses
T.
$ 64,626,607
455,681
1 $ 65,0 2,289
1 278,956
1,790,779
1,722,240
12,595,373
L_ 2,339,518
1,493,815
4,396,620
552,700
N
P-
1,086,990
789,602
77,802
2,918,223
1,338,188
190,052
960,270
1,314,167
257,291
463,822
O CO
O
N
47,005
(MO
O
1,461,783 f
O
155,539 1
317,449
1,892,728 1
114,752 1
402,979 1
3,393,629 1
1 Approprations
$ . 66,060,737
395,600
$ 66,456,337
1 743,966
1 4,389,806
1,050,000
6,321,873
f0
O
0
1,687,361
3,820,148
686,541
257,055 1
1,233,581
804,771
O
(D
117
r
2,866,047
1,872,015 1
O
C)
O
r
1,309,011
1,840,139
335,078
O
O
(n
p)
265,242
64,514
36,000
146,819
5,000 1
185,492 1
O
1,412,453 1
O
244,414 1
1,674,653 1
4,133,377
125,783 1
1,079,583 1
3,223,771 1
1 Actual
Revenue
$ 65,425,644
938,018
co
M
CO
CA
826,783
2,199,142
945,765
8,255,406
1,245,663
949,812
3,326,512
N
(O
(00
0
v
v
798,598
703,475
co
O)
.-•
2,840,914
1,410,349 1
190,052
34,876
1,241,510
v_
f0
e
695,280
132,430
CO N
(o
O
O n
a
24,286
v_
(O
,-
1,215 1
516,605 1
14,651 1
60,878 1
317,449
1,892,728 1
N
n
r
332,956 1
3,406,071
1 Estimated
1 Revenue
$ 66,392,635
1,502,875
1 $ 67,895,510
500,000
4,092,538
0
0
0
955,396
2,739,630
N
(O
0
561,037
548,010
137,003
2,648,373
1,447,500
0
0
0
1,299,770
175,311
731,418
141,359
64,514
0 0
0
0 0 0
20,000 1
0
0
0
0
d
0
140,725
1,674,653 1
4,133,377 1
125,782
0
3,223,771
1 Audited
Fund Balance
O
N
O
(O
$ 16,205,008
2,040,722
$ 18,245,729
465,476
O
r
O)
r
6,604,288
23,823,945
5,837,603
1,041,570
1,049,831
O
N
Or
-
(0
0
(00
h
717,025
(1,425,975)
N
lO
N
89,276
O
O
1,617,296
1,282,824
177,414
355,332
180,804 1
O
0
741,453
(60,554)`
47,686
70,823 1
2,251,853
3,652 1
604,300 1
o
0
0
912,317 1
(2,513,223)1
SUMMARY ANALYSIS OF FUNDS
FY 04 -05
As of June 30, 2005
DESCRIPTION
ter:'1:;i4,7a:irMetraNNIIPaRtgallifflal
General Fund
Equipment Replacement
Total General Fund
Police /Fire Const. Impact
Const Improvement Fund
CIC -WECIP
2003 CIC Tax Alio 2003A1
2003 CIC Tax Alio 2003A2
2003 CIC Tax AIIo 2003B
CIC -WECIP Housing
CIC -BWIP
CIC -BWIP Housing
CIC -BWIP Hsg 2002 Bond Procee
CIC - Housing In -Lieu Fee
CIC -APIP
CIC -APIP Housing
Alameda City Library Fund
C
LLx
R
H
co In
Traffic Safety Fund
County Measure B Fund
Measure B - Local St & Rd
Measure B - Bicycle Ped Imp
Measure B - Transbay Ferry
Measure B - Para Transit
Measure B - Gap Funding
Measure B -New Couny Prog
Tidelands Fund
Narcotics Asset Seizure
Dwelling Unit Fund
Parking In -Lieu Fund
Parking Meter Fund
TSM/TDM Fund
Commercial Revitalization
Home Fund
(7
CO
D
Home Repymt Fund
Rehab Repayment Fund
FISC Lease Revenue Fund
p
Z
LL
O
O
4�
r
r
r
fO
r
r
O
N
r0(f)
s— t' r
r, r
N N N
N
0
N
CO
0
N
0
N
et
N
O • (()
0
N N
(O
0
N
O
r
N
r
r
N
el
r
N
10 r
r N
N N
N
(0
N
M
4Y
N
to
N
N
to
N
(O
O
N
h f0
O N
N
O)
N
(e-
N
((���
N
(r
N
1.0
N
(h�
N
(O
N
(O
N
pap
N
OI
N
N
t
01
n
bC
ca
CC
r,
a
(NI
Cn
a
CD
ON
V
N
oM
N
h
1-
O
0
M0.-
I,-
'
ON
O
03
00)
CO
�NN(O�
O
MM000)
O
vnv
N
N
M
00
CO
CO
0)
LO
sF
V
—
�(O
O
0)
CO
N
O
LO
0)
C+)
(O
46,129 I
224.056
at
Lm
IINNO
fV
O
V
O
(0
O)
0
.-
55,662 I
450.975
i In
(ONN
i00
1()(00)00
N
N0
CO
COQ
O
M
co
0
Oi
0)
o0
63
In
M
�-
(0(0
'M7
69
s}
�1n.
O
0)0)
CO
0
In
a01.
1O
O
P
-O
(000
O
CO
(0
NM
0
CO
co �In
O)
f0
ON
N.
03
V
OCO
1n
CD
0
In
In
11)
0.
N
0)
(Or
N
�NNN.
LO
O
00
0)�
V
h
O
N.
co
O
CO
0
NO
-
N
0)
N
co
0
4
O
W
Actual
1 Net Change
1•
01')
M0
(A
M
CO
O
—M
0
n
0i
51.952
0)
(O0
MM
N
v
to
vv
O
M(0
MOco
0In
(og
N
CO
M
0)
N .
,-
CO
Nh
CO
Nvt
`- ('1
r
CO
C O
MOI()
O
(O
••
0)
CO
55,662
89.083
PN
L
∎V
O
f`
CD
0)U)
V
(O
r.
(0
CO
N
0)
m
f`
0
69
co e}
CO CO
.-
ON
.--
'-
69
V
0
V
OO
0)v
m
CO
0)000
NV
V
1f)oi
0
co
CO
CV
.-
cn
N
O)
V
0))
O
1-
In
0
0)
CO
CO
oi
co
N
ID
0OvMN
vN-
Of
M
In
N
CO
NhN-
co
1()
0
N
V
CO
00
N0
CO
N
Estimated
1
Fund Balance
N
O
N
CO)
CO
g =a -f
(2.811.713)
CO
O
O
0
O
126,876
W
CO
co
m
342.675
237,861
(00
In
ti
r
m
(00
0
0
"
CO
M
0)
CO
53,752
100,465
195,677
14.274
124.030
70,000
292.568
30,844
26.022
3,695,138
332.797
co
0
M
OOO
4i ,-
0
N
N
.-
2.474.7111
N_
0
0
V
368,0421
886,116
3.187.346
000
In
0
O
O
CON
V
'OR
15,954
216.402
N
e-
CO
CO
N
N.
00
v-
FY 04 -05
1 Estimated
1 Net Change
.0
11
w
0000
1 (39,537)
(74,348)
(21,266)
(_D
(19,358)
(35,758)
000
0,
20,750
00
(0
CO
N
70,000
(69,323)
00
O
N
COO
O O
O
I,-
$ (18,680,565)
$0 E64,000
O
(13,862)1
O
O
N
'
(963,080)
(112,300)
0
J Expenses
1 2,511,366
0
0
0
1 170,943
317,503
58,407
141,495
72,563
464,494
O
m
'—
17,175
14,727
65,918
579,168
282,881
5,543
8,320
0
1,535,087
OD CO
O
<6 0
0
12,343,599
0
$ 61,635,327
$0
11,273,439
0
0
866,660 1
167,947
111,852
1,965,683
0
0
0
0 0
0
0
0
0
1 Approprations
o
] 20,000
0
403,549
M(0
0 co
0 CO
V
238,116
19,358
732,658
4,850
o
CO O
W 1,-
62,000
600,000
313,500
10,200
8,273
0
1,438,880
o
r-
V
0)
10,867,984
0
$ 60,731,7201
$0
16,803,628
137,000 1
1,330,000 1
0000000000000
0 co
0) c.
(O .-
Actual
1
Revenue
(c)
1 3,250,673
0
15
1 3,730
J 222,895
280,134
23,048
182,937
4,227
810,356
0)
CO
V
18,466
16,740
58,295
723,509
308,518
16,102
73,917
55,662
1,624,170
19,221
80,136
12,993,271
5,367
$ 54,961,835
$ 8,135
11,385,623
390,404 1
49,984
CO
0
00
In
38,912
16,923
59,914
(O
O)
CO
1(j
000
(10,539)
(3,262)
3,713
.0-
N
CO
"NV
CO
N
CO
CO
N
1 Estimated
Revenue
0
0
J 20,000
O
364,012
425,265
70,000
00
O
,-
0
00
at
00)
(0
4,850
0 00
0 O
"
62,000
620,750
313,500
10,200
36,949
70,000
1,369,557
20,000
194,756
10,148,968
20,000
(0
to
O
0
fV
69
$0
16,867,628
O
123,138 1
368,000
00000000006
Audited
Fund Balance
V
00
co
co
CO
N
.-
ao
CO
0
CO M
(O
CO
0
O
J 166,413
46,482
25,128
430,791
257,219
3,813,326
8,086
61,400
61,937
53,752
79,715
195,677
14,274
95,353
0
(0
co
M
10,844
26,022
4,414,154
312,797
$ 54,572,506 1
$0
12,234,181
0
2,488,573
1,453,012
1,331,122
998,416
3,187,346
510,516
87,028
25,494
15,954
216,402
125,347
24,823
11,827
DESCRIPTION
Human Services
CHRPO /LEAD
Garbage Subcharge Fund
Curbside Recycling
Waste Reduction Subcharge
Island City Maint 84 -2 Z1
Island City Maint 84 -2 Z2
Island City Maint 84 -2 Z3
Island City Maint 84 -2 Z4
Island City Maint 84-2 Z5
Island City Maint 84-2 Z6
Island City Maint 84 -2 Z7
Marina Cove Maint Dist 01 -1
Bayport AD 03 -1
Athletic Fund
Public Art Fund
Sr Citizen Transportation
Alameda Reuse & Redevelop
Dike Maintenance Fund
Total Special Revenue Fund
Wastewater Capital Reserve
Capital Improvement Proj.
FISC - Traffic Fees
Marina Village A.D. 89 -1
H.B.I. 92 -1 Assessmt Dist
Library Construction Fund
Open Space Improvement Fund
2003 AP Rev Bond Project Fund
CDF -WE Traffic Safety
CDF -WE Parks & Rec
CDF -WE Public Facilities
CDF -WE Public Safety
CDF -NW Traffic Safety
CDF -NW Park & Recreation
CDF -NW Public Safety
CDF -NW Public Safety
CDF -CEE Traffic Safety
I, co O
CO NN
M V
NN
• N • C+• • N CO • • CD co
tiNn01NOIN
N N N N N N N
O H O
NNCND
co CO
CO 0 CO A
+++...L���%
"
N
(07
O
M
•
M
N
M
M 1, CO CO
MM P9 M
_ _
V
� 'r' N N oN N I •
33333333;
Unaudited
1 Actual Balance!
ID
N
C
M
(D
2,237 1
Cl
1 13,959
0
et
1
O
O
00
0
481,006
C4,014,7591
N
N
461,263 1
O
$25,762,888
$ 234,081
O
616,780
421,657
O
534,547
1,532,387
1,450,450
4,221,822
2,403,885
O
$ 11,415,608
$ 7,664,761 I
44.355.693
(0
tq
u
271.349 1
M
O
V3
$ 37,253
FY 04 -05
Actual
Net Change
2,785
480
205
00
(0
7,673
2,236
1,372
(1,238,438)
1,009,474
V
tt
o
O
O
O
N
(V
b9
$ (13,108)
M
10,712
4,545
10,664
51,232
(708,938)
43,835
(603,880)
$ (1,206,601)
$ (587,667)
1,487,655
(422,022)
(22,876)
(227,515)
$ 227,575
$ 31,041
1 Estimated
1 Fund Balance
6/30/2005
g =a -f
Ot-
00
1,758
864
7,373
37,873
6,432
2,773
284,112
1 2,958,336
74,108
551,749
000
(O
$ 24,735,636
1 $ 247,189
M
r
612,069
417,112
523,883
1,478,054
1,324,420
6,888,853
1,880,226
32,000
$ 13,405,468
$ 8,549,284
43,526,528
10,063,568
_
O
498,864 1
$ 62,739,684
$ 205,308
1 FY 04 -05
1 Estimated
Net Change
y
a
II
w
O
O 00 O 00
1 (1,435,331)
O
73,900
100,000
00
CO
1 $ (3,233,822)1
COO
O
O
O
O
O O
r
05
(834,968)
2,710,866
(1,127,539)1
00
O
M
$ 783,260
$ 296,856
658,490
O
40,000
O
(O
O)
fA
(p
O
69
Expenses
.dv
00000000
CD
CO
O
0
c- (0
(0
tri
0
O
18
O
N
l0
If.-
69
$ 241,042
1,318
374,575
647,016
348
868,631
831,998
838,035
2,711,126
(�
r
(p
0
$ 7,205,258
$ 4,948,025
3,937,616
422,097
0)
W
O
M
1,675,281 1
$ 12,293,937
$ 651,142
Approprations
0
0 0 0 0 0
0
r
2,864,789
O
O
O
1 $ 23,997,992 1
$ 238,898
O
372,360
644,450
O
868,526
829,950
OD
0)
A
O
1,127,539 1
O
m
(0
0
0)
v
$ 5,275,844
4,857,657
O
0
((0
O
0:ai
c-
<
)
0
r
n
y-
$ 13,078,736
$ 700,000
Actual
Revenue
2,785
480
205
6,586
7,673
2,236
1,372
457,869
2,705,089
9,5321
O
1 $ 15,570,949
$ 227,934
O
385,286
651,561
M
879,295
883,230
0
o
0)
2,754,961
87,291 1
O
(0
a0
0)
0)
(0
$ 4,360,358
5,425,271
1,288,043
1,447,766
$ 12,521,513
$ 682,183
Estimated
Revenue
0
0 0 0 0 0 O
v
OD
-
2,817,840
0
00)
e
0
00_
00
61,800 1
$ 20,764,170
$ 238,898
O
378,361
644,450
0
868,526
826,850
0
2,710,866
0
32,000
0)
(0)
(0
$ 5,572,700
5,516,147
O
1,217,076 1
0)
(0
r
$ 14,074,0821
(D
0
0
0)
(»
Audited
Fund Balance
G
NN
N
M
to
A
8,075
1,758
864
7,373
37,873
6,432
2,773
1,719,443
3,005,285
208
451,749
0
$ 27,969,458
00
1,318 1
606,068
417,112
344
523,883
1,481,154
2,159,388
4,177,987
3,007,765
0
$ 12,622,208 1
$ 8,252,428
42,868,038
10,063,568 1
0
(0
498,864 1
$ 61,744,338
N
CO
I SUMMARY ANALYSIS OF FUNDS
O
'4It
IAs of June 30, 2005
DESCRIPTION
1 CDF -CEE Parks & Recreation
CDF -CEE Public Facilities
CDF -CEE Public Safety
CDF -BF Traffic Safety
CDF -BF Parks & Recreation
CDF -BF Public Facilities
CDF- BFPublic Safety
(Transportation Impmt. Fund
Urban Runoff
CFD #1 Harbor Bay
CFD #2 Paragon Gateway
Alameda Pt Bond Project Fd
1 Total Capital Project Fund
Debt Svc -1990 Police Bldg
1 Debt Svc -ABAG XX
Debt Svc - Library/Golf Proj
1 Debt Svc - Library Bond 2003
Debt Svc -Debt Sery CIC Tx All Bd
Debt Svc -CIC Sub Bond
Debt Svc -Refin CityHall 2002
Debt Svc 2003 Tax Alio Refd BWIP
Debt Svc 2003 CIC Tax Alloc Bd
Debt Svc 2003 AP Rev Bond
Debt Svc for Alameda Pt Bond
Total Debt Service Fund
Golf Course Fund
Sewer Service Fund
Ferry Service Fund
East End Ferry
West End Ferry
Total Enterprise Fund
702 Central Stores Fund
CI
LL
I+Nf
et
M
.�y}
MMef 'Nd'�.7
0�}, 0�7} a}
M M (� M
O
O
M
r O
N to
MM
r OD
to N
Mao
M
�= r
a
ID
r
v
01 r
r N
a v
r
(D
v
a
N (O
CO
v v
N
(D
v
(D
OD
v
a0
(O
v
h
(f1t
0o
r
O
(D(D(D(N
v- 04
N r
O N r r
N
D(D
1 Unaudited 1
1 Actual Balance
O
N
CA
CO
47.271 1
c0
61, W
(0
N
CO
C.7
0
CO 000
y
n
00
CO
r
,0)
N
V
N
In
N
O)
00
v
69
000
r. c
0 l0
CO 0
69
C9(0(00
co
f:
03
co
M
V
o
N
co. c
N
3,053,754
1.630.792
$ 59,760,586
222,918,971 1
FY 04-05
R
3
Q
Net Change
M
000
v4
N
0
357.884
O
0
.O
CO
26.303
m
V
r
$ (261,453)
$ 19,757
(14.855)
O
O
299.472
(31,124)
(2.863.853)
(0 co
O
N
154,723
1.219.539
$ (1,242,379)
(10,081,547.76)1
Estimated
Fund Balance
o
O
N
O
M
CO
g =a-f
290,487
306,619
(7,652,607)
1,241,576
(60,665)
42,329
$ (5,626,953)
$ 616,989
124,525
0
0
6,728,243
2,994,440
22,238,815 I
26,531,652
2,987,031
411,366
$ 62,633,061
$ 213,463,739 1
FY 04 -05
Estimated
Net Change
f =b-
d
239,323
O
CO
�..
(2,455,343)
(434,153)
00)
v v
$ (2,470,267)
0000
O 0
n (0
.— 0))
69
839,882
2,963,000 1
(1,345,464)
(n
O
M
ao
88,000
112
$ 1,630,095
$ (19,536,780)
y
0)
O.
._
a0
M
( +)
1 647,007
1 857,882
1 2,069,007
832,269
48,642
$ 5,406,086
$330,680
103,655
0
V
•-
M
I 1,257,521
3,508,051
31,440
5,087,089
3,968,992
1,496,601
213,955
M
.-
0
69
$ 188,561,820 1
L _
O
a00
(O
(O
N
69
69,835,4701
$ 285,025,090
1 Appropratlons
'6
14,580
0
(0
M
3,710,817
I 2,042,726
560,000 I
31,000
$ 7,635,814
$ 332,000
210,000
3,345,500 1
1,224,500
2,812,118 1
0
2,813,469
3,654,722
1,496,000
178,888
$ 16,067,197
$ 192,884,488 1
$ 25,731,664I
68,482,612
$ 287,098,764
A
7
V
a
I Revenue
(c)
296,245
1 598,645
I 1,215,766
I 1,462,070
858,572
31,153
$ 5,144,633
$ 350,437
88,800
I 3,163,419
1,257,521
3,807,524
CO
M
2,223,237
3,942,9551
1,651,323
1,433,493
N
O
Oi
0
t;
69
$ 178,480,272
$ 27,522,312 [
61,043,005 [
$ 267,045,589
Estimated
1 Revenue
253,903
558,000
1,255,475
1,608,573
559,880
30,621
$ 5,165,547
$ 349,000
113,800
3,345,500
1,224,500 1
o
o
N
CO
CO
M
2,963,000
1,468,005
2,818,487 1
1,584,000
179,000
$ 17,697,292
$ 173,347,7081
$ 25,867,562 I
CO
CO
(0
0
f`
O
(0
$ 260,014,127 [
1 Audited
Fund Balance
d
O
N
O
M
(0
•••
l0
325,310
(0
N
h
W
1
1,675,729
(60,545)
42,708
(
CO
(0
69
$ 599,989
220,725
O
O
5,888,361
31,440
23,584,279
27,367,887
2,899,031
411,254
$ 61,002,966
$ 233,000,5191
I SUMMARY ANALYSIS OF FUNDS
O0
0
une 30, 2005
0
aT
G'.
U
0)
to
[Central Garage Fund
Techology Sery Fund
[Worker's Comp Self Insur
Risk Management Fund
Dental Insurance Fund
Unemployment Insurance
Total Internal Service Fund
Debt Svc for 508 84-3A
Debt Svc for 510 84-3B
Police /Fire Pension 1079
Police /Fire Pension 1082
Debt Svc for 512 89 -1
Debt Svc for 513 92 -1
1998 Revenue Bond Debt Fd
1999 Revenue Bond Debt Fd I
Assessment District CFD #1
Assessment District CFD#2
Total Trust & Agency Fund
GRAND TOTAL
0
E
at
Housing Authority
Alameda Power & Telecom k
All Inclusive Total
Z
LL
M
O
Is
mt
O
is
r
r
is
N
r
is
M ED
r
is is
y
O
CD
V
O
03
N
O
03
N
M
03
M
M
03
N
M
CO
CD
M
CO
O r
CO CD
CO CO
CITY OF ALAMEDA
MEMORANDUM
Date: September 14, 2005
To: Honorable Mayor and
Councilmembers
From: Debra Kurita
City Manager
Re: Recommendation to Adopt Specifications and Authorize Calling for
Bids for Three Marked Police Vehicles
BACKGROUND
The City of Alameda purchasing policy requires that the City Council review and
approve the specifications for materials that are estimated to cost in excess of
$25,000 prior to the initiation of a formal bid process. ; During the 2005 -2006
budget process, the Police Department, in consultation with the Fleet Supervisor,
determined a need to replace three marked patrol vehicles. On July 19, 2005,
the specifications for these vehicles, which are included in this report as
Attachment A, were presented to the City Council for review and approval. At
that meeting, the Council continued the action and requested additional
information regarding the specifications and the condition of these vehicles.
DISCUSSION /ANALYSIS
Since 1991, the Police Department has specified the Ford Crown Victoria Police
Interceptors as the standard for its patrol vehicles. The Interceptor is a rear-
wheel drive vehicle that has received the federal government's highest crash -
safety rating. The City's patrol fleet consists of 23 of these vehicles that are
shared amongst the 43 officers in the division. In order to ensure that the usage
is equitably distributed amongst the fleet, the Department policy is to have
officers on the different shifts utilize the same vehicle. As a result, the patrol cars
are driven approximately 18 to 20 hours in each 24 -hour period.
The Fleet Supervisor has recommended that police patrol units be removed from
the fleet after four years or when the vehicle has been operated for more than
85,000 miles. This recommendation is based on service records that indicate
that patrol vehicles with usage that exceed these criteria are less reliable, require
Report 4 -D
9 -20 -05
°Dedicated to Excellence, Committed to Service°
Honorable Mayor and September 15, 2005
Councilmembers
Page 2 of 3
a higher level of maintenance and consume more fuel. These standards are
similar to those utilized by a number of Alameda County cities and are
incorporated into the Vehicle Use Policy recently revised by the City Manager's
Office.
The recommended action is to adopt the specifications and authorize the
competitive bid process to replace three of the existing patrol fleet vehicles. The
details of the service history of these three vehicles are as follows:
Vehicle #
Repair Costs
Mileage
Model Year
Service History
117
$4,387.55
94,356
2000
No field failures
109
$6,007.50
71,484
2000
Field failure and
currently out of
service due to a
broken engine rod
that will cost $2,000
to repair.
110
$4,279.37
87,110
2000
Damaged beyond
repair when it was
broadsided by a
drunken driver.
Upon Council authorization, the City Clerk will publish a notice in the Alameda
Journal, which serves as the official newspaper for legal advertising for the City,
requesting bids for the purchase of three Ford Crown Victoria police vehicles.
MUNICIPAL CODE /POLICY DOCUMENT CROSS REFERENCE
This action does not affect the municipal code.
BUDGET CONSIDERATION /FINANCIAL IMPACT
The estimated cost to purchase a Ford Crown Victoria Police Interceptor is
$26,000 for the base vehicle. The safety equipment for each vehicle will include
a combination of recycled parts and new parts; the estimated additional cost for
the new safety equipment is approximately $6,000 per vehicle. Funds for these
expenditures are included in the Equipment Replacement Fund for 2005 -2006.
Any monies received from the resale of the existing units will be either credited to
the sales price or re- deposited into the Equipment Replacement Fund.
"Dedicated to ¶cellence, Committed to Service"
Honorable Mayor and September 14, 2005
Councilmembers Page 3 of 3
RECOMMENDATION
Adopt the specifications and authorize the initiation of the competitive bid
process for the purchase of three marked patrol police vehicles.
DK/CLO /mn /cj
Attachments
Respectfully submitted,
Craig L. Ojala
Interim Chief of Police
'Dedicated to ExceQence, Committed to Service"
Notice to Proposers
SPECIFICATIONS FOR POLICE VEHICLE PURCHASE
The City of Alameda is seeking proposers for the purchase of three marked patrol
vehicles.
All vehicles must meet the following specifications:
2006 Ford
Crown Victoria
Vehicle Type
Police Interceptor Package
Engine
4.6 L SEFI V8
Brake Type
Power 4 -Wheel Disc Anti -Lock Braking System
Horsepower
250 @ 4000
Alternator
200 -Amp Alternator
Interior
AM/FM Stereo /Clock
Interior extras
Air Conditioning
Exterior Color
Black/White
ATTACHMENT A
Survey of Outside Agency
Police Patrol Vehicle Replacement Policies
City Replacement Policy,
Albany: 65,000 miles regardless of model year. Will rotate out early
if vehicle has history of high repair costs.
Berkeley: 4 years or 100,000 miles.
Burlingame: 75,000 miles regardless of model year.
*Castro Valley: 3 years or 75,000 miles.
Dublin: 3 to 4 years. Mileage not used as a guideline.
Emeryville: 3 years regardless of model year.
Fremont: 100,000 miles regardless of model year.
Hayward: 100,000 miles regardless of model year.
Livermore: 4 years or 85,000 miles.
Newark: 90,000 miles.
Oakland: 4 years or 85,000 miles.
Piedmont: 5 years. With mileage justification.
Pleasanton: 4 years or 80,000 miles.
San Leandro: 3 years or 100,000 miles.
*San Lorenzo: 3 years or 75,000 miles.
San Mateo: 90,000 miles regardless of model year.
*Sunol: 3 years or 75,000 miles.
Union City: 98,000 miles regardless of model year. Will rotate out early
if vehicle has history of high repair costs.
*Unincorporated city patrolled by ACSO.
Compiled: August 2005
ATTACHMENT B
CITY OF ALAMEDA
MEMORANDUM
Date: September 13, 2005
To: Honorable Mayor and
Councilmembers
From: Debra Kurita
City Manager
Re: Recommendation to Reject Bids, Adopt Modified Specifications and Authorize a Second
Call for Bids for the Cyclic Sewer Repair Project Phase 4, No. P.W. 05 -03 -11
BACKGROUND
On May 17, 2005, the City Council adopted plans and specifications and authorized a call for bids
for the Cyclic Sewer Repair Project Phase 4, No. P.W. 05- 03 -11. The project consists of
rehabilitating approximately 11,300 linear feet of sanitary sewer pipeline and 380 lower service
laterals by open -cut and pipe bursting methods, as well as associated work at the following locations:
• Sewer line within 10' sewer easement between Bayo Vista Avenue and Fernside Boulevard
(Monte Vista Avenue to the end of sewer line past Fairview Avenue); and
• Laurel Street (Clinton Avenue to Powell Street); and
• Regent Street (Otis Drive to Central Avenue); and
• Walnut Street (Clement Avenue to Clinton Avenue); and
• Willow Street (Central Avenue to Clinton Avenue).
DISCUSSION
To solicit the maximum number of bids and the most competitive price, specifications were provided
to 18 separate building exchanges throughout the Bay Area. In addition, a notice of bid was
published in the Alameda Journal. Bids were opened on August 10, 2005. Bidders from lowest to
highest for total project cost (base bid plus add alternates A and B) are listed below:
Bidder
Location
Bid Amount
K.J. Woods Construction
San Francisco
$2,108,000.00
Ranger Pipeline
San Francisco
$2,335,763.00
D'Arcy & Harty Construction
San Francisco
$2,446,575.00
Mountain Cascade Inc.
Livermore
$2,731,130.00
The engineer's estimate, which was based on recent bids received by other Bay area cities for similar
projects, was $1,329,431.00. The lowest bid, offered by K.J. Woods Construction, is approximately
59% over the engineer's estimate.
Report 4 -E
9 -20 -05
Dedicated to Excellence, Committed to Service
Honorable Mayor and Page 2
Councilmembers September 13, 2005
Staff analyzed the bids and determined that most major sewer main rehabilitation bid items were
higher than the engineer's estimate, some by more than 167 %. Staff contacted the bidders to inquire
about the high bid prices. The bidders indicated that the higher costs were primarily due to the
aggressive 70 working day construction period included in the project specification and the need to
have three to four crews working concurrently to meet the schedule. They also stated that increasing
the number of working days could result in lower bid prices for the project.
The construction period was set to avoid noise and dust impacts to residents during the holidays and
to minimize the amount of construction occurring during the wet weather. To address the bidders'
comments, the project could be advertised in November 2005, bids received in December 2005 and a
proposed start date of March 2006. Therefore, staff recommends that the project specifications be
modified from 70 days to 120 days, with construction beginning in Spring 2006. This change should
attract more reasonable bid prices.
ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE
The Cyclic Sewer Repair Project Phase 4 has been determined to be Categorically Exempt from
California Environmental Quality Act in accordance with CEQA Section 15301.
BUDGET CONSIDERATION/FINANCIAL IMPACT
The project is budgeted as CIP # 95 -02, Sanitary Sewer Enterprise Fund.
MUNICIPAL CODE/POLICY DOCUMENT CROSS REFERENCE
This action will not affect the Municipal Code.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council, by motion, reject the bids, adopt the modified
specifications, and authorize a second call for bids for the Cyclic Sewer Repair Project Phase 4, No.
P.W. 05- 03 -11.
Respectfully submitted,
atthew T. Naclerio
Public Works Director
MTN:BH:gc
G: \pubworks \pwadmin\ COUNCIL \2005 \092005\cyciicsewer. doc
Dedicated to Excellence, Committed to Service
CITY OF ALAMEDA
MEMORANDUM
Date: September 13, 2005
To: Honorable Mayor and
Councilmembers
From: Debra Kurita
City Manager
Re: Recommendation to Amend the Construction Contract with Ghilotti Brothers Inc. for the
Park Street Streetscape and Town Center Project, No. P.W. 10- 02 -13, to Increase the
Contingency Amount by $120,000
BACKGROUND
On February 15, 2005, the City Council awarded the construction contract for the Park Street
Streetscape and Town Center Project to Ghilotti Brothers, Inc. in the amount of $2,110,000,
including contingencies. This project provides streetscape improvements along Park Street from just
north of Central Avenue to Webb Avenue, with utility joint trench work occurring from Lincoln
Avenue to Central Avenue. Streetscape improvements include transit and pedestrians plazas,
irrigated planter areas as well as street furniture such as benches, trash receptacles, bike racks and
double- headed Victorian streetlights.
DISCUSSION:
The subject action recommends increasing the project contingency amount to accommodate
enhancements for sidewalks, street pavement and utilities. The original design for the Park Street
project limited sidewalk replacement and pavement restoration to the transit and pedestrian plaza
locations. The Park Street Business Association has requested that additional sidewalk be replaced
along Park Street to improve the final appearance of the streetscape. The Public Works Department
has worked with the contractor to identify areas where additional sidewalk could be replaced without
affecting the existing sidewalk above basements extending into the public right -of -way and
immediately adjacent to building facades. This additional sidewalk work is estimated to cost
$30,000. In addition, the Public Works Department has been working with the contractor to obtain a
price to resurface the full width of Park Street within the project limits. The additional pavement
work is estimated to cost $60,000. Finally, the contractor has encountered unknown utilities while
installing the arch culverts at two pedestrian plazas and additional structural engineering work was
required to design the street light foundations, increasing the depth and diameter of the footings.
This extra work is estimated to cost approximately $30,000.
Since the contractor has already mobilized, the additional concrete and pavement work can be
performed more cost effectively than doing it at a later date. The contractor estimates that this
additional work can be completed by the end of October without impacting the business association's
Report 4 -F
9 -20 -05
Dedicated to Excellence, Committed to Service
Honorable Mayor and Page 2
Councilmembers September 13, 2005
objective to have all major construction work completed prior to the holiday shopping season.
Installation of street furniture and landscaping is expected to occur during the beginning weeks of
November.
The proposed amendment to the construction contract is on file in the City Clerk's office.
BUDGET CONSIDERATION/FINANCIAL ANALYSIS
The Park Street Streetscape and Town Center Project is funded through a $921,000 grant from the
Metropolitan Transportation Commission's (MTC) Transportation for Livable Communities Program,
a $500,000 match from the Community Improvement Commission (CIC) authorized by Resolution
No. 13515 dated August 7, 2002, $1.175 million from the 2003 Merged Area Bond, $380,000 from
Alameda Power & Telecom funds, $300,000 from Urban Runoff Fee, and $30,000 from Sewer User
Fee. The proposed amendment does not affect the General Fund. There are sufficient funds within the
existing project authorization to fund the proposed amendment.
MUNICIPAL CODE/POLICY DOCUMENT CROSS REFERENCE
The requested action does not affect the Municipal Code. The Park Street Streetscape and Town
Center Project is consistent with the Economic Development Strategic Plan.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council, by motion, amend the Construction Contract with Ghilotti
Brothers Inc. for the Park Street Streetscape and Town Center Project, No. P.W. 10- 02 -13, to
increase the contingency amount by $120,000.
Respectily submitted,
Matthew T. Naclerio
Public Works Director
MTN:gc
Attachment
cc: Sally Kueh, Finance
G: \pubworks \pwadmin\ COUNCIL \2005\092005\parkstreet.doc
Dedicated to Excellence, Committed to Service
Willi/
ri.
at
.
1 .
_ 1� tea,
, r
rilialaill' .
tft
CITY OF ALAMEDA
Memorandum
To: Honorable Mayor and
Councilmembers
From: Debra Kurita
City Manager
Date: September 7, 2005
Re: Recommendation to Enter Into a Subdivision Improvement Agreement with
FOCIL -BP, L.L.C. and Resolution Approving the Final Map and Accepting
certain Dedications and Offers of Dedications and Easement Vacations for
Tract 7512 (Bayport Blocks F & G 133 - Individual Lots)
BACKGROUND
The Bayport residential development, now under construction, is being developed through
a Limited Liability Corporation by and between FOCIL -BP, LLC. and Warmington Alameda
Associates, L.P. The Bayport Project is situated on a total of 115 gross acres at the former
East Housing / FISC Annex property which is bordered by Main Street to the west, Tinker
Avenue to the north, the proposed extension of Fifth Street to the east (adjacent to the
College of Alameda), and Atlantic Avenue to the south. The Master Plan for the build -out
of the Bayport Project includes 485 detached and attached single - family homes and four
1A -acre mini -parks interspersed throughout the neighborhood. The new neighborhood
subdivision will also include 62 -units of affordable housing, the development of a joint -use
four -acre community park and a seven -acre K -8 school.
The CIC is obligated to convey residential land based on terms and conditions set forth in
the Disposition and Development Agreement (DDA). As referenced in this agreement, the
CIC must convey property in phases consisting of three Residential Conveyance Parcels
for a total of 485 lots (See attached Bayport Residential Conveyance Parcel Map).
Residential Conveyance Parcel 1 included Blocks A, B & C (197 lots), and Residential
Conveyance Parcel 2 included Blocks D & E (155 lots). These parcels totaling 352 lots
were previously conveyed. The last remaining conveyance is Residential Conveyance
Parcel 3, which includes Blocks F & G (133 lots). In order to convey Residential
Conveyance Parcel 3, the City Council must approve the Subdivision Improvement
Agreement and Final Map for Tract 7512.
Report and Reso 4 -G
9 -20 -05
Honorable Mayor and September 7, 2005
Councilmembers Page 2 of 4
DISCUSSION
Approval of the Subdivision Improvement Agreement
The City, in accordance with Section 30 -85 of the City's Subdivision Ordinance, has
developed a Subdivision Improvement Agreement ( "SIA ") that requires the Developer to
construct all necessary in -tract improvements and to complete all outstanding Tentative
Map conditions. A copy of the Agreement is available in the City Clerk's office. The SIA
includes bonding, insurance and warranty requirements for in -tract infrastructure
improvements. The key outstanding approvals include: payment of mitigation fees on a
per -unit basis at time of building permit issuance; approval of revised Conditional Letter of
Map Revision from FEMA and certification of pads prior to issuance of occupancy permit;
completion of Phase 2 Backbone Infrastructure; and a requirement to mitigate impacts at
the 4 -acre Neighborhood Park Site associated with grade differentials between approved
Tentative Map and infrastructure. Exhibit B of the SIA contains a list of all outstanding
Tentative Map Conditions.
Bonding Requirement
The Subdivision Improvement Agreement requires the posting of labor, material and
performance bonds for the proposed improvements, a five -year maintenance bond for
infrastructure improvements and two -year maintenance bond for landscaping and irrigation.
The Engineer's estimate for the required public and private in -tract improvements is
$6,463,500. The Engineer's estimate for landscaping and irrigation improvements is
$1,313,000. All of the required bonds have been submitted to the City, have been deemed
acceptable by the Risk Manager and are on file with the City Clerk. In -tract infrastructure
improvements include storm drains, sanitary sewers, pavement, sidewalks, utilities,
landscaping, irrigation, grading, joint utility trench, traffic signing and striping, and
streetlights.
Final Map
The Final Map for Tract 7512 (on file with the City Clerk) provides for the development of
Residential Phase 3 of the Amended Tentative Map. Final Tract Map 7512 creates 133
legal lots, private and public streets, lanes and common areas within Blocks F and G. In
addition, Amended Tentative Map 7179 Conditions of Approval will remain on this parcel
and will be removed with the filing of a Final Map at some time in the future. The
recordation of Final Map for Tract 7512 will not occur until all conditions precedent to
recordation identified in the SIA are satisfied.
Dedicated to Excellence, Committed to Service
Honorable Mayor and September 7, 2005
Councilmembers Page 3 of 4
Establishment and Acceptance of Easements
Easements within the Final Map property that are required to serve the residential lots
include emergency vehicle, public access and public utility easements. Easements
required to serve the project that are outside of the Final Map area, and that still need to be
acted upon include the vacation and relocation of existing storm water easements. No
certificates of occupancy will be issued until all the required easements have been
secured.
Approval of the In -Tract Backbone Infrastructure Improvement Plans
In -tract Improvement Plans for grading, storm drain, sewer, water, electrical, gas and
streets have been submitted to the City, reviewed by the Departments of Development
Services, Planning, Public Works, Recreation and Parks, Police, Fire, and AP &T and have
been found to be consistent with the DDA, City standards, the Master Plan and the Master
Demolition, Infrastructure and Grading Plan, unless specifically denoted on Improvement
Plan documents as design exceptions which were approved by the City Engineer. The City
Engineer has found the in -tract infrastructure improvement plans to be substantially
complete. Excavation permits will not be issued until all outstanding in -tract improvement
conditions listed in the Subdivision Improvement Agreement are incorporated to the
satisfaction of the City Engineer and City Building Official.
Performance Schedule
Approval of this action will satisfy the major remaining conditions required for the
conveyance of Residential Phase 3 Property (Blocks F & G). In the interim, staff is working
with the Developer to complete other pre- conveyance conditions, which include the
completion and acceptance of Phase 2 Backbone Improvement Plans and the sign -off of
all required mitigation and monitoring programs. Backbone infrastructure improvements
that support the entire development are scheduled to be complete by early 2006. The 62-
unit "Breakers" affordable housing development is scheduled to be complete by the end of
2005. The new seven -acre K -8 school and four -acre community park are scheduled to
open September 2006. Final build -out of the entire residential development will be
complete in FY 2007/08. As of July 31, 2005, the Homebuilder (Warmington Homes) has
pulled 202 building permits and 106 homes have been sold.
BUDGET CONSIDERATION /FINANCIAL IMPACT
As directed, no general fund monies will be used for implementation of the project. All
project costs related to demolition and the construction of public infrastructure including
applicable traffic mitigation costs are being funded from revenues generated from the
project. Project revenues consist of land sale proceeds, CIC profit participation and
redevelopment tax increment revenues.
Dedicated to Excellence, Committed to Service
Honorable Mayor and September 7, 2005
Councilmembers Page 4 of 4
MUNICIPAL CODE /POLICY DOCUMENT CROSS REFERENCE
The subject actions conform to the General Plan, Catellus Master Plan, Development
Agreement and Disposition and Development Agreement. These actions also conform to
City Council Resolution No. 13643 Establishing a Policy of Fiscal Neutrality Regarding
Development at the Fleet Industrial Supply Center /East Housing and Alameda Point.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The requested actions do not require CEQA review.
RECOMMENDATION
1) Authorize the City Manager to execute the Subdivision Improvement Agreement
and accept Bonds based on Engineer's estimates in the amount of $6,463,500 for
in -tract infrastructure improvements and $1,313,000 for in -tract landscape
improvements.
2) Adopt the attached Resolution approving Final Map and accepting certain
Dedications and Offers of Dedications and Easement Vacations for Tract 7512
(Bayport Blocks F & G 133 Individual Lots).
LAL /DC:dc
Attachments:
1. Bayport Residential Conveyance Parcel Map
2. Subdivision Improvement Agreement and Bonds (on file with the City Clerk)
3. Final Map for Tract 7512 (on file with the City Clerk)
4. In -Tract Backbone Infrastructure Improvement Plans (on file with the City Clerk)
Respe f submitted,
L
Development Services Director
uglas Col
Redevelopment Manager
G :1ComdevlBase Reuse& Redevp1DougColel3rd ConveyancelTract No. 7512 (Blocks F &G)ICC Staff Report SIA & FM Tract 7512
Sepetmber 20 2005.doc
Dedicated to Excellence, Committed to Service
CITY OF ALAMEDA RESOLUTION NO.
APPROVING FINAL MAP AND
ACCEPTING CERTAIN DEDICATIONS AND OFFERS OF DEDICATION AND
EASEMENT VACATIONS FOR TRACT 7512
E
�i >- WHEREAS, an application was made on October 26, 1999 by the Catellus
,,j Development Corporation requesting approval for a General Plan Amendment, Master
o z Plan, Rezoning, Development Agreement and Tentative Map relating to the development
-I-. o of a residential area, including sites for parks, public open space, a school, and a
co E._ commercial /business park area on a 215- acre site encompassing the Alameda Naval Air
Station (NAS) East Housing, the Alameda Fleet and Industrial Supply Center and Annex.
w -°l The project would be completed in phases over a multi -year period, depending on market
conditions. The project would include associated parking, landscaping and public shoreline
access; and
WHEREAS, the proposal for a Master Plan, General Plan Amendment, Rezoning,
Development Agreement, Tentative Map, Parcel (Disposition) Map, City Council Resolution
13216 (certifying the Final EIR for the Catellus Mixed Use Development) and City Council
Resolution 13217 (making findings concerning mitigation measures and alternatives, and
adoption of a Statement of Overriding Considerations and a MMRP) were approved by the
City Council on May 31, 2000; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolution No. 13423, the City Council approved Tentative
Map Amendment TMA01 -002 to Tentative Map, TM -7179 on December 18, 2001; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Chapter 30, Article VI, Title 30 -81, Final Map, of the
Alameda Municipal Code ( "AMC "), the City of Alameda, CIC (Owner) and Developer
(Subdivider), have prepared and presented to this Council the Final Map of the Subdivision
known as Tract 7512; and
WHEREAS, Tract 7512 establishes 133 legal lots, private and public streets, lanes
and common areas;
WHEREAS, said Final Map delineates thereon for dedication to the City of Alameda
public streets, easements for public utilities and rights for public safety vehicles and
emergency equipment easements for private facilities, utilities and access; and
WHEREAS, said Final Map delineates thereon vacation and abandonment of
appropriate existing public easements; and
WHEREAS, Subdivider desires to enter into a Subdivision Improvement Agreement
( "Agreement ") to construct and complete the improvements in said subdivision, has
submitted the Final Map therefore for approval at this time, and has posted its bond
guaranteeing full and faithful performance of said work which has been approved by City,
all in accordance with AMC Section 30 -85; and
WHEREAS, it will be to the advantage and benefit of the City to have said work
performed in accordance with said Agreement.
Resolution #4 -G
09 -20 -05
BE IT RESOLVED that the Final Map of Tract 7512 be, and hereby is, approved:
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that certain easements dedicated to the public and
rights of access are hereby accepted, on behalf of the public and the City, for use in
conformity with the terms of the dedication;
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that said public easements designated for
abandonment are hereby vacated;
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that other said easements offered for dedication but
for which improvements have not yet been constructed will be accepted at a later date
upon completion of those improvements;
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the agreement for construction and completion of
the public improvements in said subdivision pursuant to the Agreement, and all its terms
and conditions be, and hereby are, approved and the City Manager and the City Clerk are
authorized and directed to execute and attest to, respectively, said Agreement on behalf of
the City of Alameda; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Bonds in the total sum of $7,776,500
guaranteeing full and faithful performance of said public improvements, labor and materials
are hereby approved as sufficient in amount.
I, the undersigned, hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and
regularly adopted and passed by the Council of the City of Alameda in a regular
meeting assembled on the
day of , 2005, by the following vote to wit:
AYES
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTENTIONS:
IN WITNESS, WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of said
City this
day of , 2005.
Lara Weisiger, City Clerk
City of Alameda
CITY OF ALAMEDA
MEMORANDUM
Date: September 12, 2005
To: Honorable Mayor and
Councilmembers
From: Debra Kurita
City Manager
Re: Recommendation to Adopt a Resolution Approving Parcel Map No. 8725 and Accepting
Dedication of Easements (Bridgeside Shopping Center)
BACKGROUND
On December 3, 2003, the Community Improvement Commission (CIC) entered into a Disposition
and Development Agreement (DDA) with Regency Realty Group, Inc. for the redevelopment of the
Bridgeside Shopping Center. On June 27, 2005, the Planning Board adopted Resolution No. PB -05-
25 approving Parcel Map No. 8725, creating four parcels for the shopping center.
DISCUSSION
The parcel map has been reviewed and determined to be technically correct and in substantial
conformance with the approved parcel map and conditions of approval. Public access easements are
provided along the east and west perimeter of the shopping center to provide access to the Estuary
from Blanding Avenue and Tilden Way. The subdivider is also required to provide a public access
easement along the shoreline prior to occupancy of the first building, subject to the approval of the
Bay Conservation and Development Commission and the City Engineer. Easements for AP &T
transformers and appurtenances will be granted by separate instrument upon development of the
parcels. The separate easements will be subject to review and approval by the City Engineer and
AP &T and recorded in accordance with Resolution No. 5328, which authorizes the Mayor or Vice -
Mayor to accept deeds and grants of real property or easements.
The property is also subject to declaration of easements, similar to covenants, conditions and
restrictions, which will be recorded concurrently with the parcel map. The declaration of easements
will provide for reciprocal private easements for ingress, egress, parking, drainage, utilities,
landscaping, lighting, and the maintenance and repair of common areas.
Public improvements include reconstruction of existing sidewalk, curb and gutter, driveways, storm
drain, striping, railroad track removal along Blanding Avenue and replacement with street pavement,
and repairing existing public storm drain lines within the site. Shoreline improvement, landscape
and irrigation plans for both on -site and off -site construction will be reviewed by the Public Works
Department in conjunction with the building permit application process.
Dedicated to Excellence, Committed to Service
Re: Reso 4 -H
9 -20 -05
Honorable Mayor and Page 2
Councilmembers September 12, 2005
The subdivider has posted a cash deposit of $300 to guarantee delivery of a mylar copy of the
recorded parcel map and has provided a deposit for staff review costs. The parcel map is on file in
the City Clerk's office.
BUDGET CONSIDERATION/FINANCIAL IMPACT
The property owner will be responsible for maintenance of the public access areas, including the
sidewalk frontage.
MUNICIPAL CODE /POLICY DOCUMENT CROSS REFERENCE
This action does not affect the Municipal Code.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council adopt a resolution approving Parcel Map No. 8725 and
accepting dedication of easements (Bridgeside Shopping Center).
Respect
submitted,
Matthew T. Naclerio
Public Works Director
Ed Sommerauer
Associate Civil Engineer
MTN:ES:gc
Attachment
G:\ pubworks\ pwadmin \COUNCTL\2005 \092005\pm8725.doc
Dedicated to Excellence, Committed to Service
r
E
0
0
0
1
CITY OF ALAMEDA RESOLUTION NO.
APPROVING PARCEL MAP AND ACCEPTING
DEDICATION OF EASEMENTS FOR PARCEL MAP NO. 8725
WHEREAS, Parcel Map No. 8725 was approved by the Planning Board per
Resolution No. PB05 -25 on June 27, 2005; and
z WHEREAS, Parcel Map 8725 was found in compliance with the California
cc Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) that an Initial Study was prepared for the Disposition
i-- and Development Agreement for this site, and a Mitigated Negative Declaration finding
Q no significant impact with adoption of mitigation measures, which was adopted in
December 2003, fulfills CEQA for this project. No significant changes are proposed that
1... will require revisions to the Mitigated Negative Declaration; and
WHEREAS, the Public Works Department has reviewed Parcel Map 8725 and
has proposed a number of Conditions which have been incorporated as Conditions in
City Planning Board Resolution No. PB- 05 -25; and
WHEREAS, said Parcel Map delineates thereon dedication to the City of
Alameda easements for public access; and
WHEREAS, subdivider and City having entered into an agreement "Disposition
and Development Agreement by and between the Community Improvement
Commission of the City of Alameda and Regency Realty Group, Inc." on December
3,2003 to construct and complete public improvements with the City right -of -way; and
WHEREAS, it will be to the advantage and benefit of the City to have said work
in accordance with said agreement.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Alameda that Parcel Map No. 8725 be, and hereby is, approved; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that said easements dedicated to the public for
rights of access to the City of Alameda are hereby accepted, on behalf of the public and
the City, for use in conformity with the terms of offers of dedication.
Resolution #4 -H
09 -20 -05
I, the undersigned, hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and
regularly adopted and passed by the Council of the City of Alameda in a regular
meeting assembled on the 20th day of September, 2005, by the following vote to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSENTIONS:
IN WITNESS, WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of
said City this 20th day of September, 2005.
Lara Weisiger, City Clerk
City of Alameda
CITY OF ALAMEDA
Memorandum
TO: Honorable Mayor and
Councilmembers
FROM: Debra Kurita
City Manager
DATE: September 20, 2005
RE: Resolution amending the Management and Confidential Employees Association
Salary Schedule by establishing the salary range for the position of Sales and
Service Supervisor and amending the salary range for the position of Information
Systems Network Analyst
BACKGROUND
The Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) for the Management and Confidential Employees
Association (MCEA) was adopted in 2002 and covers the period September 9, 2002 through
December 31, 2004. This MOU establishes the salary ranges for positions represented by the
MCEA bargaining unit.
DISCUSSION
The Marketing and Customer Services Division of Alameda Power & Telecom (AP &T) requires
a new classification to adequately meet the sales and subscription - related goals and objectives of
the department's telecommunication business plan. The proposed Sales and Service Supervisor
will transform the existing Customer Service section by shifting its focus to sales and retention
of customers in addition to providing excellent customer service. The term "sales and service"
in the position's title also reflects modern competitive business nomenclature. The new Sales
and Service Supervisor position will provide the following:
• Promote an environment that views sales as a way of helping customers receive the best
value for their money, while appropriately offering products and services that align the
customers' needs and wants.
• Supervise and monitor calls to ensure assigned staff are providing excellent customer
service in order to satisfy customers through single call resolution.
• Direct sales and service activities including but not limited to office and field customer
service, credit and collection services related to data collection, and rate - making
activities.
The proposed bi- weekly salary schedule for the Sales and Service Supervisor position is $2903-
$3048- $3200 - $3360- $3528. This salary range appropriately reflects the change in business
focus and the supervisorial duties over Customer Service Representative employees who provide
electric and telecom business line services.
Re: Reso 4 -1
9 -20 -05
"Dedicated to Excellence, Committed to Service"
Honorable Mayor and Page 2
Councilmembers September 20, 2005
On August 16, 2005, City Council approved an amendment to the MCEA salary schedule, which
established the salary range for the classification of Information Systems Network Analyst. In
order to make the bi- weekly salary range listed in the resolution consistent with the salary range
approved by the Public Utilities Board, the new biweekly salary range for this classification is
$2632 - $2764 - $2902 - $3047- $3199.
BUDGET CONSIDERATION/FINANCIAL IMPACT
The AP &T Enterprise Fund will pay the funds required to cover the recommended salary ranges
of the Sales and Service Supervisor and Information Systems Network Analyst classifications.
Funding has been authorized by the Public Utilities Board for these positions and there is no
increase in the total number of employees. There is no financial impact to the General Fund.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council, by motion, approve the amendment to the Management
and Confidential Employees Association salary schedule for the classifications of Sales and
Service Supervisor and Information Systems Network Analyst.
Respectfull submitted,
Karen Willis
Human Resources Director
"Dedicated to Excellence, Committed to Service"
CITY OF ALAMEDA RESOLUTION NO..
AMENDING THE MANAGEMENT AND CONFIDENTIAL EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION
(MCEA) SALARY SCHEDULE BY ESTABLISHING THE SALARY RANGE FOR THE
POSITION OF SALES AND SERVICE SUPERVISOR AND AMENDING THE SALARY
RANGE FOR THE POSITION OF INFORMATION SYSTEMS NETWORK ANALYST
BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Alameda that the salary
resolution of Management and Confidential Employees Association (MCEA) is hereby
amended by establishing the salary rates, salary ranges, salary steps and benefits for
the positions of Sales and Service Supervisor and Information Systems Network
Analyst, designating those as applicable to these classifications in the service of the
City of Alameda.
CITY OF ALAMEDA
MANAGEMENT AND CONFIDENTIAL EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION
Effective September 21, 2005
Code
Classification
EXEMPT .
BI- WEEKLY
Step
1
Step
2
Step
3
Step
4
Step
5
7054*
Sales and Service
Supervisor
$2903
$3048
$3200
$3360
$3528
7316*
Information Systems
Network Analyst
$2632
$2764
$2902
$3047
$3199
*Indicates classification within thirty -seven and one -half (37 1/2) hour original work week.
Resolution #4 -I
09 -20 -05
I, the undersigned, hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and
regularly adopted and passed by the Council of the City of Alameda in a regular
meeting assembled on the
day of , 2005, by the following vote to wit:
AYES
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTENTIONS:
IN WITNESS, WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of said City
this day of , 2005.
Lara Weisiger, City Clerk
City of Alameda
f
CITY OF ALAMEDA RESOLUTION NO.
ACKNOWLEDGING ACTING CITY MANAGER
WILLIAM C. NORTON
FOR HIS CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE CITY OF ALAMEDA
E
L
�i w THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ALAMEDA records its appreciation for the
o z extraordinary service faithfully rendered by WILLIAM C. NORTON to the City of Alameda;
°C and
1--
a
WHEREAS, BILL NORTON was first hired by the City in June, 1981 as Public
Works Director, was appointed City Manager in August, 1988; and retired from the City of
I- the Alameda in October, 1996; and
WHEREAS, BILL NORTON most recently served as Acting City Manager
from January, 2005 through July, 2005; and
WHEREAS, BILL NORTON made significant contributions to the City of
Alameda in his most recent tenure, among those being:
• Bill guided the City through a challenging budget season which included
making difficult choices while balancing budget needs; and
• Bill was instrumental in ensuring the progress of the New Main Library
project by negotiating an agreement with PG &E to move its utilities out of
the way of building construction and in working with City staff to ensure
the timely relocation of electric facilities; and
• Under Bill's leadership, substantial progress was made on important
redevelopment and infrastructure projects; and
• Also under Bill's leadership, a new home was located for the Alameda
County Health Services thereby enabling the Alameda Recreation and
Parks Department to relocate in the former County Health building on
Santa Clara Avenue. This new location has improved the working
environment for dozens of City employees and allows these employees
to better serve Alamedans; and
• Bill successfully negotiated an agreement with the Metropolitan
Transportation Commission to allow the Harbor Bay Ferry service to
continue operations; and
Resolution #5 -A
09 -20 -05
WHEREAS, on July 31, 2005 BILL NORTON successfully completed his
assignment as Acting City Manager for the City of Alameda.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Council of the City of
Alameda does hereby congratulate WILLIAM C. NORTON for his service to the citizens of
Alameda and extends its deepest gratitude to him for his many labors on behalf of the City.
Mayor Beverly Johnson
Vice Mayor Marie Gilmore Councilmember Tony Daysog
Councilmember Doug deHaan Councilmember Frank Matarrese
I, the undersigned, hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and
regularly adopted and passed by the Council of the City of Alameda in a regular
meeting assembled on the
day of , 2005, by the following vote to wit:
AYES
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTENTIONS:
IN WITNESS, WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of said
City this
day of , 2005.
Lara Weisiger, City Clerk
City of Alameda
CITY OF ALAMEDA RESOLUTION NO.
REAPPOINTING KAREN LEE AS A MEMBER OF THE
CITY PUBLIC ART COMMISSION
BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Alameda that pursuant to Section
30 -65.7 of the Alameda Municipal Code and Resolution No. 13573, and upon nomination
i2 W of the Mayor, KAREN LEE is hereby reappointed to the office of member of the Public Art
Commission of the City of Alameda for the term commencing on October
I, LUVU d1U r Y o
e expiring on September 30, 2009, and to serve until her successor is appointed and
F. qualified.
v
I, the undersigned, hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and
regularly adopted and passed by the Council of the City of Alameda in regular meeting
assembled on the day of , 2005, by the following vote to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTENTIONS:
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of said
City this day of , 2005.
Lara Weisiger
City Clerk
Resolutions #5 -B
09 -20 -05
E
® _ > 30 -65.7 of the Alameda Municipal Code and Resolution No. 13573, and upon nomination
W
cc of the Mayor, K.C. ROSENBERG is hereby reappointed to the office of member of the
0
Public Art Commission of the City of Alameda for the term commencing on October 1,
CITY OF ALAMEDA RESOLUTION NO.
REAPPOINTING K.C. ROSENBERG AS A MEMBER OF THE
CITY PUBLIC ART COMMISSION
BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Alameda that pursuant to Section
2005 and expiring on September 30, 2009, and to serve until her successor is appointed
and qualified.
I, the undersigned, hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and
regularly adopted and passed by the Council of the City of Alameda in regular meeting
assembled on the day of , 2005, by the following vote to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTENTIONS:
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of said
City this day of , 2005.
Lara Weisiger
City Clerk
E
0
L
0
cn
co
0 - - --
0
CITY OF ALAMEDA RESOLUTION NO.
APPOINTING TERRI BERTERO OGDEN AS A MEMBER OF THE
CITY RECREATION AND PARK COMMISSION
BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Alameda that pursuant to Section 2-
7.1 of the Alameda Municipal Code, and upon nomination of the Mayor, TERRI BERTERO
w OGDEN is hereby appointed to the office of member of the Recreation and Park
z
cc Commission of the City of Alameda commencing October 1, 2005 and expiring on
September 30, 2009, and to serve until her successor is appointed and is qualified.
1-
I, the undersigned hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly
adopted and passed by the Council of the City of Alameda in regular meeting assembled on
the day of , 2005 by the following vote to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTENTIONS:
IN WITNESS, WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of said
City this day of , 2005.
Lara Weisiger, City Clerk
City of Alameda
CITY OF ALAMEDA ORDINANCE NO.
New Series
AMENDING THE ALAMEDA MUNICIPAL CODE BY
AMENDING CHAPTER XIII (BUILDING AND HOUSING) BY
7e. REPEALING ARTICLE I SECTION 13.4 (ALAMEDA
0 >. ELECTRICAL CODE) IN ITS ENTIRETY AND ADDING A NEW
00 ▪ 01 ARTICLE I SECTION 13.4 ( ALAMEDA ELECTRICAL CODE) TO
cc ADOPT THE 2004 EDITION OF THE CALIFORNIA
® ELECTRICAL CODE, AND APPROVING CERTAIN
a-
t— AMENDMENTS THERETO.
> >. BE IT ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of Alameda that:
Section 1. The Alameda Municipal Code is amended by repealing Article I
Section 13.4 of Chapter XIII in its entirety.
Section 2. The Alameda Municipal Code is amended by adding a new Article I
Section 13.4 to Chapter XIII of the Alameda Municipal Code which shall read as follows:
ARTICLE I. UNIFORM CODES RELATING TO BUILDING, HOUSING AND
TECHNICAL CODES
13.4 ALAMEDA ELECTRICAL CODE
13 -4.1 Adoption of California Electrical Code.
Except as hereinafter provided, the California Electrical Code, 2004 Edition, published by the
National Fire Protection Association is adopted by reference and made a part hereof as if fully set
forth herein at length, and shall be know as the Alameda Electrical Code. (Ord. No. 2788 N.S. § 2)
13 -4.2 Modifications, Amendments and Deletions to the California Electrical
Code.
a. Article 230 -8, Raceway Seal, of the California Electrical Code, 2001 Edition, is
amended by adding the following:
Raceways or ducts within the underground box shall also be sealed.
b. Article 230 -26, Point of Attachment, of the California Electrical Code, 2004 Edition, is
amended to read as follows:
Unless special permission is granted in advance to do otherwise, the location of the point of
service drop support or attachment on a building shall be at that portion of the building
Resolution #5 -C
09 -20 -05
facing and nearest to the street, alley, easement, or public way on which is located the utility's
pole having facilities for rendering service of the type required to fit the needs of the
particular installation involved.
The point of attachment shall be the portion of the service conduit adjacent to the service
head. The service conduit shall be securely fastened to structure served and space provided
for attachment of a service drop strain clamp by the serving utility.
The outer or upper end of the overhead service conduit shall not overhang or project
horizontally more than eighteen inches (18 ") beyond the last point at which the conduit is
supported and fastened.
In cases where it is necessary to obtain the required height for support of the service drops by
extending the service conduit above the roof of the building, only rigid metallic and
intermediate metal conduit shall be used for this purpose and shall not be smaller than one
and one - quarter inches (1 1/4") trade size, not to extend more than thirty inches (30 ") beyond
the last support for periscope service without brace. If nonferrous metal conduit is used, it
shall not be smaller than two inches (2 ").
c. Article 230 -30, Insulation, of the California Electrical Code, 2004 Edition, is amended
by deleting the exceptions and adding the following:
Service entrance conductors entering buildings or other structures shall be insulated.
Conductors installed in underground raceways shall have XHHW, THW or other suitable
insulation as listed in 75 ° C column of Table 310 -16 of the National Electrical Code.
d. Article 230 -8, Insulation of Service Entrance Conductors, of the California Electrical
Code, 2004 Edition, is amended by adding the following:
Ends of service conductors in underground boxes shall be sealed to prevent entrance of
moisture.
e. Article 230 -43, Wiring Methods for 600 Volts, Nominal, or Less, of the California
Electrical Code, 2004 Edition, is amended by deleting items 1, 2, 5, 6, 7, 12, 13,14,15 & 16 and by
adding the following:
Except when installed as busways or cablebus, all service entrance conductors in or on
buildings shall be installed in rigid metal conduit or intermediate metal conduit
Service entrance conduits installed to supply single and duplex family units shall not be
smaller than one and one - quarter inch (1 1/4 ") trade size.
f. Article 230 -49, Protection Against Physical Damage - Underground, of the California
Electrical Code, 2004 Edition, is amended by adding the following:
Underground service entrance conductors shall be installed in rigid metal conduit or rigid
non - metallic conduit sized not smaller than two inches (2 "). On utility poles conduit risers
shall be rigid non - metallic up to a height above grade of eight feet (8').
g. Article 230 -54, Connections at Service Head, of the California Electrical Code, 2004
Edition, is amended by adding the following:
The service head shall be located on that portion of the building served which is facing the
serving line. The service head shall be located at that height which will allow for the proper
clearance of the service drop over street, curb, and sidewalk. This will require that the service
head for residential occupancies be not less than twelve feet, six inches (12'6 ") above the
driveway where the drops may cross a private driveway, and not less than ten feet, six inches
(10'6 ") above the ground where persons may walk, other than a public walk, which requires a
clearance of sixteen feet (16') above the curb.
If the height of the building involved is such that these clearance heights cannot be
maintained, then a periscope -type service or some other auxiliary structure shall be resorted
to. In the event that a periscope -type service is used, it may be placed on the side of the
building served not more than eighteen inches (18 ") back of the wall which is facing the
serving line.
h. Article 230 -70, General, (a) Location, of the California Electrical Code, 2004 Edition, is
amended to read as follows:
The service disconnecting means shall be located at a readily accessible point nearest to the
entrance of the service conductors, and in residential property shall be accessible from the
exterior, except where a meter room is provided. Such service disconnecting means shall not
be installed under show windows, or in the cases of multiple occupancies, in any location not
readily accessible to all parties concerned. Service disconnecting means shall not be installed
in bathrooms.
i. Article 230 -71, Maximum Number of Disconnects, of the California Electrical Code,
2004 Edition, is amended to read as follows:
A separate service disconnecting means shall be provided for each separately metered
subdivision of the service conductors. Switches or circuit breakers accessible from the
exterior of the building shall be limited to one for each meter; in new construction however,
exceptions will be granted in cases involving provisions for the installation of major
household appliances, provided that the over current devices are contained within a single
panel board assembly approved for the purpose, in which case the number of circuits shall be
limited to six (6). More than six (6) disconnects will require a main disconnect. The service
disconnecting means shall have provisions for locking each subservice disconnect in the
"Off' position with a utility -type seal.
j. Article 240 -24, Location in or on Premises, (b) Occupant to Have Ready Access, of the
California Electrical Code, 2004 Edition, is amended by adding the following:
In new installations, not more than two feeder or branch - circuit over current devices shall be
installed on the load side of any meter in any meter cabinet opening to the exterior of a
building. For a larger number of over current devices, a distribution center shall be provided
at a suitable location within the building. Exceptions to this rule will be granted in cases
involving provision for the installation of major household appliances, provided that the over
current devices are contained within a single panel board assembly approved for the purpose.
In apartment houses and other buildings of multiple occupancy, branch circuit over current
devices which are located in an apartment or portion of the building intended to be separately
occupied by a tenant will not be considered as being readily accessible if they protect circuits
supplying any outlets or equipment not for this exclusive use of this tenant.
The over current device may be located in a commonly accessible location, but all circuits
supplying individual apartments in multifamily dwellings shall be confined to each
individual apartment served.
k. Article 250 -50, Grounding Electrode System, of the California Electrical Code, 2004
Edition, is amended by adding the following:
The concrete encased electrode described in 250 -52 A (3) shall be installed during the
construction of all new buildings as the primary ground and when new foundations are
constructed for existing buildings: A ground rod electrode shall be installed at the service
entrance location at time of alteration or installation of service to existing buildings as a
primary grounding means.
1. Article 250 -104 B, Bonding of Piping Systems, of the California Electrical Code, 2004
Edition, is amended by adding the following:
General. Interior and exterior hot and cold water system shall be bonded to the neutral buss
and the interior gas piping. Such connection shall not be located in under- the -floor crawl
spaces, except by permission of the Building Official.
m. Article 300 -3, Conductors, (c) Conductors of Different Systems, of the California
Electrical Code, 2004 Edition, is amended by adding the following:
Conductors Supplied by Individual Disconnecting Means in Two or More Occupancy
Buildings. Conductors or circuits derived from a sub - service disconnecting means for an
occupancy shall not occupy the same wiring enclosure, cable, or raceway with conductors for
other occupancies.
Exception 1. Emergency circuit wiring
Exception 2. Group - mounted service boards in single enclosures and auxiliary
gutters at service switchboard location.
n. Article 334.10, Uses Permitted, of the California Electrical Code, 2004 Edition, is
amended by adding the following:
Nonmetallic- sheathed cable may be used in the hollow spaces of walls and ceilings of wood
frame construction and must be concealed by the permanent finish of the building. It is
limited to use on circuits not exceeding 300 volts between conductors or 150 volts to ground.
o. Article 334- 15(c), In Unfinished Basements, of the California Electrical Code, 2004
Edition, is amended by adding the following:
In wood frame construction where cable is not exposed to physical damage, the cable shall
either be run through bored holes in joists, parallel to joist, or on girders or running boards
and shall closely follow the vertical surface of such members.
Where cable is exposed to physical damage, a metal -clad system of wiring shall be used in
the unfinished area of the building.
p. Article 338.10, Uses Permitted as Service- Entrance Conductors, of the California
Electrical Code, 2004 Edition, is deleted.
q. Article 358.16, Use, of the California Electrical Code, 2004 Edition, is amended by
adding r the following:
Electrical metallic tubing shall not be used in the ground floor slab or in any location where it
would be in contact with the ground.
n. Article 394 of the California Electrical Code, 2004 Edition, is deleted. (Ord. No.
2898 N.S. § 2)
13 -4.3 Findings.
Subdivisions (a) through (r) of Section 13 -4.2 are based upon the following findings:
Pursuant to Sections 17958.5 and 17958.7 of the California Health and Safety Code, the City
Council finds that the modifications of the California Electric Code, 2004 Edition, contained in
subdivisions (a) through (r) of Section 13 -4.2, are reasonably necessary because of certain local
climatic, geographical and topographical conditions existing in the City of Alameda which are more
specifically described as follows:
a. The City of Alameda is an island community with access dependent upon bridges and
underwater tubes and, in the event of a disaster, could be completely isolated from outside assistance.
b. The City of Alameda is adjacent to several earthquake faults, which make buildings and
structures susceptible to structural ruptures and fires.
c. The entire municipal water supply for the City of Alameda is transported via three
aqueducts, which are vulnerable to earthquake and tidal flooding.
d. Alameda is a low -lying island community with soil and groundwater conditions, which
are corrosive to metals.
e. Alameda has very fine, sandy soil conditions.
f. The City of Alameda lies in the path of two (2) airport landing and takeoff zones.
g. Electrical power in the City of Alameda is provided by Alameda Power and Telecom, a
City owned and operated municipal utility, which has the authority to regulate acceptable materials,
arrangement, location and type of service equipment. (Ord. No. 2898 N.S. § 2)
13 -4.4 Copy of California Electrical Code with Planning and Building
Department.
A copy of the California Electrical Code, 2004 Edition, has been deposited in the Office of
the Planning and Building Depai tment of the City and shall be maintained by the Building Official
for use and examination by the public. (Ord. No. 2898 N.S. § 2)
Section 5. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance
is, for any reason, held invalid or unconstitutional, such decision shall not affect the validity or
constitutionality of the remaining portions of this ordinance. The City Council of the City of
Alameda herby declares that it would have passed this ordinance, and each section, subsection,
sentence, clause or phrase hereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections,
sentences, clauses or phrases be declared unconstitutional.
Section 6. All former ordinances or parts thereof conflicting or inconsistent with
the provisions of this ordinance hereby adopted, to the extent of such conflict only, are hereby
repealed.
Section 7. The City Clerk of the City of Alameda is hereby directed to cause this
ordinance to be published in the Official Newspaper of the City of Alameda
Section 8. This ordinance and the rules, regulations, provisions, requirements,
orders and matters established and adopted hereby shall take effect and be in full force and effect 30
days after the date of its final passage and adoption.
Presiding Officer of the Council
Attest:
Lara Weisiger, City Clerk
I, the undersigned, hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance was duly and regularly adopted
and passed by Council of the City of Alameda in regular meeting assembled on the
day of , 2005, by the following vote to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTENTIONS:
IN WITNESS, WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of said City
this day of , 2005.
Lara Weisiger, City Clerk
City of Alameda
CITY OF ALAMEDA
Memorandum
To: Honorable Mayor and
Councilmembers
From: Debra Kurita
City Manager
Date: September 7, 2005
Re: Authorize the Submission of an Application with the California Film Commission
to enable City Participation in the Film Liaisons in California, Statewide (FLICS)
Program and Adopt a Resolution Determining an Alameda Film Commission as
the City's Official FLICS Designee
BACKGROUND
In May, an off - agenda report apprised Council that Development Services staff were
evaluating the costs and benefits of activity recruiting the film industry to Alameda. Staff
visited both the Cities of San Francisco and Oakland's film commission offices and
researched how Bay Area film commissions work and the impact of their efforts on their
communities. It was determined that more active participation in film attraction and
increasing the visibility of the City's filming interest could be highly beneficial to the local
economy.
DISCUSSION
Alameda's scenic setting in the San Francisco Bay has long attracted filmmakers. A
partial list of well -known films staged in Alameda includes:
• Treasure Island (1934) with Wallace Beery and Jackie Cooper
• Thirty Seconds Over Tokyo (1944) with Spencer Tracy, Robert Mitchum and Van
Johnson (base scenes filmed at the former Alameda Naval Air Station)
• Yours, Mine and Ours (1968) with Henry Fonda and Lucille Ball
• The Candidate (1972) with Robert Redford (portions filmed at the old drive -in site
in West Alameda)
• The Net (1995) with Sandra Bullock
• The Rain Maker (1997) with Matt Damon and Danny Devito
• What Dreams May Come (1998), Bicentennial Man (1999) with Bay Area
resident Robin Williams
Report and Reso 5 -D
9 -20 -05
Dedicated to Excellence, Committed to Service
Honorable Mayor and September 14, 2005
Councilmembers Page 2 of 6
• The Matrix (1999) with Keanu Reeves (extensive use of the Posey Tube)
• Valley of the Hearts Desire (2005) currently being filmed in and about Alameda
Upon base closure, the availability of the large -scale airplane hangars attracted several
moviemakers to film in Alameda. Although demand for small commercial or minor serial
filming has been active recently, research has demonstrated that active, concerted
marketing of the City's attributes to the film industry is necessary to create ongoing
interest.
Benefits of a local Film Commission
The entertainment industry is one of California's leading employment and tax revenue
generating industries. Recent statistics released by the Motion Picture Association of
America (MPAA) suggest it is a $34.3 billion industry employing 250,000 people directly
and another 511,000 indirectly. Of the $34.3 billion dollars, $17.2 billion comes from
payroll expenditures and $17.1 from vendor expenditures. The total personal income
and sales taxes paid by the entertainment industry in California in 2002 were $1.5
billion. The industry provides high -wage sector jobs, with average salaries 70% higher
than salaries in other businesses statewide.
The local impact of filming can be significant. When a feature film goes on location
requiring overnight stays, the cast and crew will often remain in that location anywhere
from two to six weeks. Expenditures for companies filming on location average $30,000
per day. The average feature film involves a crew of 90 and a cast of typically ten
principal actors, requiring 100 rooms. Additionally, a company may bring only key
crewmembers and hire qualified technicians and other support staff locally. Further,
businesses such as local lumberyards, hardware stores and financial institutions may
experience a positive economic impact.
How Film Commissions Are Established
The California Film Commission (CFC) was established in 1984 by the legislature in
recognition of the vital role the entertainment industry plays in the California economy.
The CFC works within a network known as FLICS (Film Liaisons In California,
Statewide) to promote the film industry in California. There are over 75 FLICS
designees found within municipal and county governments, chambers of commerce,
and tourism bureaus.
FLICS designees receive benefits from their designations and in return, bear certain
responsibilities. Benefits include:
Provided by the California Film Commission.
Dedicated to Excellence, Committed to Service
H: \Council Meetings \9 -20-05 Council Meeting\recommend Film Comm rev2.doc
F: ED /Film Industry - 2005
Honorable Mayor and September 14, 2005
Councilmembers Page 3 of 6
• Receipt of location requests from filmmakers worldwide directly to all FLICS
Designees simultaneously via fax from the CFC.
• Inclusion within the joint marketing efforts conducted by the CFC to promote
filming in California.
• Networking opportunities with other FLICS Designees in which permitting issues
and general economic development strategies can be discussed.
• Access to CFC news updates, CFC- sponsored events, film development
education and training, and use of CinemaScout®, a web -based location finder
for California properties.
• Placement of materials in the CFC's Location Resource Center.
In return, FLICS designees agree to:
• Provide core services such as location scouting assistance, liaison to and among
the community, production companies and government.
• Provide service and support to each production company from the initial contact
to the close of the production, including problem solving on film - related matters.
• Create a Film Commission of qualified individuals that can help set policy and
guide film liaison activities.
• Balance the needs of the production company with the concerns of local
government and the local community.
• Provide additional incentives such as:
o Free local available crew lists and city maps
o Provide a local resources database (for example, lodging, restaurants,
hardware stores, etc.)
o Photo library
o Production guides.
In order to achieve official designation, the following must occur:
• First, a Resolution requesting official designation from the CFC and authorizing
an agency to act as the official FLICS designee must be passed.
• Secondly, the current City ordinance adopted in 1991, Section 5 -30, Filming
Activities, would be updated to reflect the FLICS designation and staff
responsibilities.
• Finally, a formal application, along with the Resolution and updated ordinance is
filed with the CFC, which then confers FLICS designee status.
Dedicated to Excellence, Committed to Service
H: \Council Meetings \9 -20-05 Council Meeting\recommend Film Comm rev2.doc
F: ED /Film Industry - 2005
Honorable Mayor and September 14, 2005
Councilmembers Page 4 of 6
After the designation, Council would appoint the Film Commission membership
discussed more fully below. Its establishment could be included in an updated
ordinance.
Establishing and Staffing a Film Commission in Alameda
The primary role of a Film Commission would be to work with staff to increase the film
and video industry activity in Alameda. Additionally, the Commission could undertake
the role of assuring that these activities do not unduly interrupt the quality of life for our
residents. The Alameda Film Commission could be constituted similar to other City
commissions whereby the Council would appoint the seven members to one four -year
term with a two term limit. Given the guidelines of the California Film Commission, it is
recommended that membership consist of:
• One representative each from the Park Street Business Association and the
West Alameda Business Association
• One representative from the Alameda Chamber of Commerce with a film industry
background
• Four members with prior or current film /video background
The responsibility to support the Alameda Film Commission staff will be assigned to the
Development Services Department. The Department staff member currently acting as
liaison to the downtown Business Associations will serve as support to the AFC and
liaison to the film and video industry.
An interdepartmental team, with representatives from Fire, Police, Public Works, and
Planning and Building, has been established to assist in timely permitting for film /video
activity. The AFC liaison will interface with this team on any issues prior to and during
any film making in the city.
BUDGET CONSIDERATION /FINANCIAL IMPACT
While existing personnel can absorb staffing a Film Commission, there are some initial
marketing - related costs associated with establishing a film commission. A
professionally prepared photographic inventory of Alameda's best film - related assets
will be essential. Preliminary photographs of a number of these sites have been taken.
A complete marketing package would also include an Alameda - related directory of
production resources and a web site. The web site is of particular importance as a
significant number of initial filming inquiries are processed through this medium. The
web site will exhibit film -worthy sites in Alameda, explain the permit process, and
Dedicated to Excellence, Committed to Service
H: \Council Meetings \9 -20 -05 Council Meeting\recommend Film Comm rev2.doc
F: ED /Film Industry - 2005
Honorable Mayor and September 14, 2005
Councilmembers Page 5 of 6
provide general information on filming in the City. The estimated cost of developing the
initial marketing materials for the AFC is $9,000. Funding for this project will be
provided from the Commercial Revitalization Fund.
MUNICIPAL CODE /POLICY DOCUMENT CROSS REFERENCE
This program is consistent with:
• AMC Chapter Five, Licenses and Permits, Section 5 -30 Filming Activities
• 2000 Economic Development Strategic Plan (EDSP) sets forth strategies for
building a strong and diverse local economy. Strategy One of the EDSP stresses
the desirability of attracting clean industry to Alameda and references "motion
picture /television programming" as one of several primary business targets.
RECOMMENDATION
Authorize submission of an application with the California Film Commission to enable
City participation in the Film Liaisons in California, Statewide (FLICS) Program and
adopt a Resolution determining an Alameda Film Commission as the City's Official
FLICS Designee
RespeE ully submitted,
L- slie A. Little
Development Services Director
By: Dorene E. Soto
Manager, Business Development
Division
DK/LAUDES /SGR:
cc: Economic Development Commission
Alameda Chamber of Commerce
Park Street Business Association
West Alameda Business Association
ssell
Developme Coordinator
Dedicated to Excellence, Committed to Service
H: \Council Meetings \9 -20 -05 Council Meeting\recommend Film Comm rev2.doc
F: ED /Film Industry - 2005
Honorable Mayor and September 14, 2005
Councilmembers Page 6 of 6
Michael Kelly, Deputy Director, California Film Commission
Greg McFann, Building Official
Vivian Day, Building Services Manager
Dedicated to Excellence, Committed to Service
H: \Council Meetings \9 -20 -05 Council Meeting\recommend Film Comm rev2.doc
F: ED /Film Industry - 2005
CITY OF ALAMEDA RESOLUTION NO.
ESTABLISHING THE ALAMEDA FILM COMMISSION AND GRANTING IT THE
FORMAL DESIGNATION TO SERVE AS ITS FILM LIAISON IN CALIFORNIA,
STATEWIDE (FLICS) WITH THE CALIFORNIA FILM COMMISSION
WHEREAS, there is a growing recognition of the positive economic
›. benefits that accrue to both the business community and the labor force of the
▪ w City of Alameda from film and video production within the City; and
cc
.®
z
cn 0 WHEREAS, the Business Development Division of the Development
C13 Services Department is that City Department most actively pursuing economic
development within the City of Alameda; and,
v WHEREAS, the Division can provide staff support to a new entity to be
known as the "Alameda Film Commission" which can implement a
comprehensive program to both increase film and video production in Alameda
while simultaneously retaining the quality of life in Alameda; and,
WHEREAS, the Alameda Film Commission shall be comprised of seven
members as follows: three ex officio members representing the Park Street
Business Association, the West Alameda Business Association, and the
Chamber of Commerce and four members with either prior or current
employment experience with the film and video industry to serve up to two
consecutive four year terms; and,
WHEREAS, the Alameda Film Commission will work in a collaborative and
mutually beneficial way with both the California Film Commission and the Film
Liaisons in California, Statewide and will on an annual basis, provide Council with
a report on its prior year's activity.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Council designates the
Alameda Film Commission to act as its representative in the FLICS partnership
to the film industry in providing location services and promoting the City of
Alameda as a film location, with staffing to be provided by the Development
Services Department through the City Manager.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Manager, through the
Development Services Department, is authorized to submit an application to the
California Film Commission to grant the City of Alameda participation in the Film
Liaisons in California, Statewide (FLICS) Program.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this Resolution shall remain in full force
and effect until a resolution of the Council is adopted amending or rescinding this
resolution.
Resolution #5 -D
09 -20 -05
I, the undersigned, hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly
and regularly adopted and passed by the Council of the City of Alameda in
regular meeting assembled on the day of 2005, by the following vote to-
wit:
AYES:
NOES:.
ABSENT:
ABSTENTIONS:
IN WITNESS, WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official
seal of said City this day of , 2005.
Lara Weisiger, City Clerk
City of Alameda
CITY OF ALAMEDA
Memorandum
To: Honorable Mayor and
Councilmembers
From: Debra Kurita
City Manager
Date: September 20, 2005
Re: Transmittal of Task Force report concerning strategies to prevent mass
termination of tenancies from large apartment complexes and to create
additional affordable housing opportunities.
Background /Discussion
In April, 2005, a Task Force was established to discuss issues, develop
recommendations, and prepare a report regarding strategies for two main topics: the
prevention of future mass termination of tenancies, such as those that occurred at the
Harbor Island Apartment Complex; and the creation of additional affordable housing
opportunities. The report was prepared by the Task Force which was comprised of a
City Council member, an Alameda Unified School District Board member, a former
tenant of the Harbor Island Apartment Complex, a representative of a local housing
advocacy organization, an at -large tenant who resides in the City of Alameda, a
representative of a rental housing association, a realtor who represents Alameda rental
property owners, and an at -large rental property owner in the City of Alameda.
Recommendation
This report is transmitted for information and discussion purposes.
Attachment: Task Force report
Report 5 -E
9 -20 -05
Dedicated to Excellence, Committed to Service
CITY OF ALAMEDA
MEMORANDUM
To: The Honorable Mayor
and Members of the City Council
From: William C. Norton
Date: September 8, 2005
Re: Recommendations of Task Force Regarding Proposed Strategies to
Prevent Mass Evictions from Large Rental Housing Complexes, and to
Create More Affordable Housing
Background
On July 23, 2004, the City was notified that the Fifteen Group, owners of the
Harbor Island Apartment (HIA) complex, was sending out notices of
termination of tenancy to the 370 households remaining in this 615 -unit
complex. The terminations created hardships on the tenants, some of whom
were elderly, disabled, and low -to- moderate income families, caused some
financial impact to the Alameda Unified School District (AUSD) and put strain
on City programs and the community as a whole. The Harbor Island
Tenants' Association reports that the hardships continue to negatively
impact the lives of the former tenants.
Subsequently, the City Council discussed relocation assistance legislation
and a moratorium on new construction, condominium conversion and
demolition that was proposed by the Harbor Island Tenants' Association for
the "West End Atlantic Corridor Area." Following extensive public testimony,
on April 5, 2005, the Council directed the Interim City Manager to form a
Task Force that would meet on a regular basis and report back to the
Council within 90 days. The goals of the Task Force were to make
recommendations on strategies to prevent future mass evictions from rental
housing complexes in Alameda, and to make recommendations for
creation of more affordable housing.
The Task Force was appointed to represent and balance the interests of the
entire Alameda community and included a City Council member, an AUSD
Board member, a City staff member, a former tenant of HIA, a
representative of a local housing advocacy organization, an at -large tenant
The Honorable Mayor September 8, 2005
and Members of the City Council Page 2
who resides in Alameda, a representative of a rental housing association, a
realtor who represents Alameda rental property owners, and an at -large
rental property owner in the City of Alameda. The Task Force considered
several options to help prevent mass evictions in the future.
Discussion /Analysis
Based on a suggestion by the HIA Tenants' Association, the Task Force
focused its attention on complexes having forty or more rental units. The
Task Force considered a variety of strategies, including code compliance,
legislation, education and new initiatives to provide affordable housing.
Ultimately, discussion settled on Iwo specific areas, as described below in
the Task Force recommendations.
Heath and Safety Compliance and Code Enforcement
The frequency and nature of complaints regarding safety, habitability and
other physical conditions can be an indication of deteriorating and /or
mismanaged rental properties. Over time, deterioration and
mismanagement can lead to the property being removed from the housing
stock for rehabilitation or sale. As happened at the Harbor Island
Apartments, mass evictions can occur. Increased code compliance and
enforcement activities, such as annual inspections, improved reporting
procedures and coordinated complaint tracking would help identify
troubled properties so that timely regulatory enforcement activities could be
implemented. Following are suggested action items:
• Increased Code Compliance and Enforcement activities
should occur when series of confirmed code violations, as in
the case of the Harbor Island Apartment complex, are
documented. Proactive inspections of other units at the
complex should be undertaken. Fines and all administrative
costs associated with re- inspection and monitoring of a
problem property should be assessed. City ordinances
should be amended, if necessary, to amend the assessment
of fines on ownership of problem properties.
• Complaint procedures should be reviewed for user -
friendliness, including increased publicity, outreach and
availability, and forms and services for limited - English
speaking residents. Forms should be printed in the
The Honorable Mayor September 8, 2005
and Members of the City Council Page 3
appropriate language groups derived from the census data,
such as in Spanish, Vietnamese, Mandarin, and Cantonese,
as well as English. Mechanisms for keeping tenants and
owners informed of complaints and actions taken could be
strengthened, including an on -line tracking system similar to
the permit tracking system, unless responses are requested to
be in writing.
• If a complainant requests direct contact in -lieu of on -line
tracking, they should receive return phone calls, visits as
necessary and follow -up letters explaining the status of their
complaint on a regular basis, until resolved.
• The City of Alameda AMC Subsection 13 -11 -3 Boarded
Building and Vacant Parcel Penalty needs to be changed to
include individual units. Fines should be per unit. The City of
Alameda needs to consider a Neighborhood Blight
Ordinance and implement sections from other cities'
ordinances which the Alameda Municipal Code does not
already cover.
• The City should also consistently utilize sections 17274 and
24436.5 of the California Revenue and Tax Code by reporting
to the Franchise Tax Board the addresses of the owners of
rental housing when the City has determined violations of
state or local laws governing health, safety, and /or building
codes. If certain conditions are not met, then the Franchise
Tax Board is enabled to disallow deductions such as
depreciation, interest, and insurance on the State income
tax return.
• When the Alameda Housing Authority, under Section 8, has
certified a unit and then decertifies this same unit, the
Alameda Housing Authority should send a letter
documenting this to the Planning and Building Department
for investigation by Code Compliance. A copy will be made
for the City Manager and Council.
• The state provisions for relocation benefits need to be
enforced, pursuant to California Health and Safety Section
17975.
Affordable Housing
• The City could investigate available funding sources for
making below- market rate rehabilitation loans for rental
The Honorable Mayor September 8, 2005
and Members of the City Council Page 4
property owners in exchange for rent limits and relocation
assistance on affected units.
• Utilize State Proposition 46 funds and Federal Housing funds,
where financially viable, to provide affordable housing
opportunities. The City should investigate joining with the
Housing Authority or a non - profit developer to determine if
acquisition of housing units at existing complexes, such as,
but not limited to, the Harbor Island Apartments, would be
economically feasible.
• Counseling for evicted tenants regarding opportunities for
affordable housing should be made available by the City.
This should be done through a contract with non - profit
entities such as Sentinal Fair Housing or Eden I & R.
• The City should provide education to both property owners
and tenants on existing discrimination laws. This should be
accomplished through property owner associations for
owners and through Sentinal Fair Housing, or Eden I & R, or
similar non - profits for tenants. There are existing remedies
under current State laws, and counseling and education will
help both owners and tenants exercise their rights.
• Condominium -style housing is the most affordable form of
ownership housing currently available on the market.
Increased availability of affordable condominium housing
could meet the needs of some lower- income families.
Currently, state and local laws make it economically
infeasible for owners to convert rental housing to
condominiums. However, revised condominium conversion
rules could lead to increased affordable housing
opportunities for all complexes, not only larger complexes,
while maintaining or enhancing the quality of Alameda's
housing stock. In addition, increasing home ownership is a
goal of the City. The 2000 Census determined home
ownership to be 48 %, while the goal is 60 %. In Alameda,
there is currently an oversupply of rental units and a shortage
of more affordably priced home ownership opportunities.
An easing of the City condominium conversion ordinance
would help solve this problem. For example, there was a
forty percent vacancy rate at Harbor Island when the
eviction notices were posted. The vacancy rate in Alameda
is at an historic high. Residents may make too much to
The Honorable Mayor September 8, 2005
and Members of the City Council Page 5
qualify for subsidies but not be able to afford the new houses
being built in Alameda.
• Current City rules require that rental housing being converted
to condominiums meet current building and zoning codes.
Revising the City's condominium conversion ordinance to
allow conversion, as long as the structure was legally
constructed and met codes in effect at the time, would
make conversion more economically feasible. The property
owner would still have to submit a plan for tenant relocation
assistance and could include provisions for helping low and
moderate income occupants purchase a converted unit at
an affordable price.
• To ensure that converted units would continue to provide an
affordable housing resource, the ordinance could also treat
the conversion as new residential development and require
affordable inclusionary units of 15% to 25 %, similar to the
existing city -wide and redevelopment inclusionary
requirements where financially feasible. First right of refusal
would be offered to in -place tenants, who could also be
assisted through additional owner incentives and existing
homeownership programs. Former tenants of the Harbor
Island Apartments, if qualified, should be given first right of
refusal if this building is converted to condominiums within
the next year.
Municipal Code /Policy Document Cross Reference
As noted above, these alternatives might necessitate modifications to
existing Alameda Municipal Code (AMC) and policy documents in the areas
of code enforcement, abatement procedures, and inclusionary housing
and condominium conversions. Modifications would be undertaken
separately as the various alternatives are identified and presented for
Council consideration.
Fiscal Impact
Expansion and enhancement of the code compliance /enforcement
function would entail additional code compliance staff, as well as costs for
systems development, software upgrades and legal fees for enforcement
activities. A more detailed study would be necessary to determine the
The Honorable Mayor September 8, 2005
and Members of the City Council Page 6
exact needs and costs of an upgraded code compliance division.
Estimates of costs covered by penalty revenue range from 50% to 100 %.
Revising the condominium conversion ordinance could be handled by
existing City staff over an extended period of time. Similarly, administration
and oversight of condominium conversion applications could be absorbed
within the current organizational structure and supported by permit
application fees.
Recommendation
It is recommended that the City Council consider the recommendations of
the Task Force and direct the City Manager to pursue strengthening
proactive code compliance, investigate the use of state and federal
funding for affordable housing opportunities, and modify the condominium
conversion ordinance to encourage development of affordable for -sale
units.
Respectfully submitted,
445^45
William C. Norton
WCN:cb
cc: Housing Task Force Members
City Manager
Building Official
City Attorney
Development Services Director
comments_092005
AGENDA ITEM 5 -E
TASK FORCE REPORT
05CEPI5 NI2 :�,
ASTRIBUTEH.
The following comments refer to the numbered paragraphs in the attach�ed--report---fr..om
Bill Norton dated September 7, 2005. --` - --- __.____
#1 The representative from AUSD has clarified the actual impact on a few west
End Schools caused by the evictions at Harbor Island.
#5 we are happy to see that the term "mandatory annual inspections" has been
removed form the report. The context of the term "annual inspections ", which still
appears, is unclear. Do these apply only to troubled properties, or is the annual
inspection of all properties still a goal of the task force?
The periodic inspections by the Housing Authority of the Section 8 units at Harbor
Island revealed to the city the problems at that complex, however, it was the
failure of the city to enforce state laws which led to the continued deterioration.
So follow -up at known troubled properties is the solution, not massive annual
inspections.
Fees for inspections should only be charged to rental property owners who have
failed to correct problems.
#7 The language in which business is done and contracts are enforced are
governed by California Civil code 1632. It states in paragraph (3) of that code
that the top five languages spoken in California other than English are Spanish,
Chinese, Tagalog, Vietnamese, and Korean.
However owners who negotiate in English with a tenant who supplies his or her own
interpreter are not bound by the requirements of Civil code
Section 1632. (section 1632 (3) (h)) This is important because a prudent landlord
will use the same paperwork with all tenants. An activist organization would be
quick to claim that the non - English rental contracts were not as favorable as the
English contracts even if that were not the case. So if a tenant wants to
constructively notify a landlord of a problem, it needs to be done in a language
which the landlord understands, the same language in which the rental contract is
written. If the city council wants to keep records in several languages, that is
their policy to decide, but it cannot be binding on the landlord.
Owners cannot be held accountable for problems about which they have not been
informed. The city forms should have a line to be checked that asks if the tenant
has notified the property owner /manager of the problem.
#14 The City should stay out of acquiring property for ownership opportunities.
The city has failed at the condominium conversion at 460 Buena vista, at estimating
the costs for ownership units within the 62 units to be built at FISC, and the
Alameda Housing Corporation has failed at the project in the 600 block at 460 Buena
vista. As for entering into agreements with other non - profit organizations, the
proforma submitted by the East Bay Asian Land use coalition for development of low
cost housing at FISC was too low by over forty million dollars. Let the private
sector take the risks.
#15 sentinel Fair Housing has been a disappointment. The record has been
dismal. They have spent their energy on establishing picket lines, actions against
the City of Alameda, and other activities which are not useful to tenants. Alameda
needs to give the Block Grant funding to a person /organization which will help
educate and genuinely counsel tenants.
Legal Aid has been no help at all in the problems at Harbor Island. There has been
free legal counseling at the library once a month. The county also has free
Page 1
Re: Agenda Item #5 -E
9 -20 -05
comments_092005
counseling available: advice to seniors, and seminars on filing claims in small
claims court.
#19 inclusionary housing requirements would kill all or almost all condominium
conversions. inclusionary Housing Requirements would eliminate all but the most
high - priced conversions where there might be enough money to subsidize a few units.
It is up to the city Council to determine which income groups(s) they wish to help
into ownership opportunities by easing the condominium conversion ordinance. If the
council wishes to target the average income worker, then the lower priced
conversions are the ones to be encouraged. However, inclusionary requirements would
prevent such conversions from ever happening.
Low income ownership should be accomplished by completing the conversion of 460
Buena vista. It would be fiscally possible under an eased condominium conversion
ordinance. In addition, if the Housing authority were to sell these units, then the
proceeds would help fill the fiscal hole which was created by bailing out from the
over leasing problem.
#xx The report does not include the responsibilities and privileges of tenants.
They have standing, unavailable to the city, to pursue the legal actions against
landlords. There are two parties which sign rental contracts. One of those parties
is the tenant.
Sincerely,
Barbara Kerr
Page 2
CURRENT APPLICATIONS
CIVIL SERVICE BOARD
ONE (1) VACANCY
Lydia L. Chan
Karen Green
Linda M. McHugh
Avonnet M. Peeler
Michael E. Soderberg
Re: Agenda Item #7 -A
09 -20 -05
CURRENT APPLICATIONS
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
TWO VACANCIES
ONE COMMUNITY -AT -LARGE SEAT
ONE REAL ESTATE /LAND DEVELOPMENT SEAT
Community -at -large Real Estate /Land Development
Arshad A. Ahmed X
Robert A. Bonta X
Michael R. Fassler X X
Claire C. Fitzgerald X X
Frederick R. Hollister X X
Jay L. Ingram X
Janet W. Iverson X X
Kirk H. Knight X
Carrolyn M. Kubota X
Diane C. Lichtenstein X
Christopher D. Lundeen X
James A. Nations X
James A. Price X
Stephanie L. Prothero X
Valerie Ruma X
William C. Russell X
Brad C. Shook X X
Karen M. Stefonek X
Jay G. Townley X X
Morris H. Trevithick X X
Randy K. Watkins X
Re: Agenda Item #7 -A
09 -20 -05
CURRENT APPLICATIONS
HISTORICAL ADVISORY BOARD
ONE (1) VACANCY
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT /ARCHITECT/DESIGN BUILD SEAT
Hanson D. Hom
Janet W. Iverson
Greg J. Klein
Re: Agenda Item #7 -A
09 -20 -05
CURRENT APPLICATIONS
HOUSING AND BUILDING CODE HEARING AND APPEALS BOARD
ONE (1) VACANCY
Jacob M. Chapman
James A. Price
David A. Solis
Re: Agenda Item #7 -A
09 -20 -05
Kathryn F. Boyle
Michael Cosentino
John F. Curliano
James R. Currier
Lauren R. Eisele
Linda Gilchrist
Harry L. Hartman
Lee A. Kaplan
Geoffrey M. Lee
Jessica Lindsey
Tim Man
Scott A. McKay
Lissa V. Merit
Jessica S. Niland
Donald E. Oransky
Cookie Robles -Wong
Rueben Tilos
Gail A. Wetzork
CURRENT APPLICATIONS
RECREATION AND PARKS COMMISSION
ONE VACANCY
Re: Agenda Item #7 -A
09 -20 -05