Loading...
1997-02-04 MinutesMINUTES OF THE SPECIAL MEETING OF THE ALAMEDA CITY COUNCIL FEBRUARY 4, 1997 The Meeting was convened at 6:35 p.m. with President Appezzato presiding. ROLL CALL: PRESENT: Councilmembers Daysog, Kerr, Lucas, Vice Mayor DeWitt, and President Appezzato - 5. ABSENT: None. Adjourned to Closed Session to consider: (97 -60) PUBLIC EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION (54957) Title: City Manager (97 -61) CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - ANTICIPATED LITIGATION Initiation of litigation pursuant to subdivision (c) of Section 54956.9. Number of Cases: Two (97 -62) CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - ANTICIPATED LITIGATION Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 54956.9. Number of Cases: One President Appezzato reconvened the Special Council Meeting and made the following announcement. Announcement of Action Taken in Closed Session. President Appezzato stated that the City Council discussed Employee Evaluation of City Manager; discussed Significant Exposure to Litigation regarding the hardball facility [College of Alameda], directed the (Interim ) City Manager to obtain an independent expert opinion and appraisal on the conditions of the hardball facility and determine cost of repairs and City exposure; and reported that Council discussed Initiation of Litigation regarding two cases and gave direction to the City Attorney. Special Meeting City Council Closed Session February 4, 1997 ADJOURNMENT There being no further business before the City Council, President Appezzato adjourned the Special Meeting. Respectfully submitted, DIANE B. FELSCH, CMC City Clerk The Agenda for this meeting was posted in advance in accordance with the Brown Act. Special Meeting City Council Closed Session February 4, 1997 MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL MEETING OF THE ALAMEDA CITY COUNCIL FEBRUARY 4, 1997 The meeting was convened with President Appezzato presiding. ROLL CALL: PRESENT: Councilmembers Daysog, Kerr, Lucas, Vice Mayor Dewitt, and President Appezzato - 5. ABSENT: None. Adjourned to Closed Session to consider: (97-63) PERSONNEL MATTERS - PUBLIC EMPLOYEE APPOINTMENT (Pursuant to Section 54957 of the Brown Act) Title: City Manager President Appezzato reconvened the Special Council Meeting and made the following announcement. Announcement of Action Taken in Closed Session. President Appezzato announced that the City Council discussed appointment of a New City Manager. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business before the City Council, President Appezzato adjourned the Special Meeting. Respectfully submitted, DIANE B. FELSCH, CMC City Clerk The Agenda for this meeting was posted in advance in accordance with the Brown Act. Special Meeting City Council February 4, 1997, 7:10 p.m. MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL MEETING OF THE ALAMEDA CITY COUNCIL FEBRUARY 4, ` 1997 President Appezzato convened the meeting at 7:35 p.m. Councilmember Daysog led the Pledge of Allegiance. Reverend Lois "Suji" Fox, Home of Truth, gave the Invocation. ROLL CALL: AGENDA PRESENT: Councilmembers Daysog, Kerr, Lucas, Vice Mayor Dewitt, and President Appezzato - 5. ABSENT: None. (97 -64) Report from Personnel Director regarding the Appointment of a City Manager, Effective April, 1997. Mayor Appezzato stated that the City Council unanimously selected Mr. James. M. Flint as City Manager. Councilmember Lucas moved approval of Agreement between the City of Alameda and Mr. James M. Flint. Councilmember Kerr seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. President Appezzato reported that the City Council met with three finalists on January 31, 1997, and that no agreement could be announced until a signed agreement was received. ADJOURNMENT President Appezzato adjourned the Special Meeting at 7:41 p.m. Respectfully submitted, D E B. FELSCH, CMC City Clerk The Agenda for this meeting was posted in advance in accordance with the Brown Act. Special Meeting City Council February 4, 1997 7:29 p.m. REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 4, 1997 President Appezzato convened the Council Meeting at 8:45 p.m. The Invocation was given by Reverend Lois Suji Fox, Home of Truth. Roll Call: Present: Councilmembers Daysog, Kerr, Lucas, Vice Mayor DeWitt and President Appezzato - 5. Absent: None. Mayor Appezzato announced that the Report from Public Works Director recommending that Council conditionally accept the work of Gonsalves & Stronck for the Hardball Facility at College of Alameda, Project No. P.W. 02-95-04 has been pulled and will come back to the Council after the independent appraiser/negotiator completes his/her work. PROCLAMATIONS AND SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY (97-65) Bill Garvine, President, Alameda Chamber of Commerce stated that the Council, particularly the Mayor and the Vice Mayor, and City and Bureau of Electricity staff should be commended for their efforts on the Silicon Island Career Expo. President Appezzato responded that the matter would be agendized for next Council Meeting. CONSENT CALENDAR President Appezzato announced that the reports regarding Quarterly Financial and Midyear Adjustments, Underground Utility Districts Projects, Operation and Maintenance of the Estuary Bridges, and the Affidavit of Interim City Manager and Chief of Police have been withdrawn from the Consent Calendar for discussion. Councilmember Lucas moved approval of the remainder of the Consent Calendar. Councilmember Kerr seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk. (*97-66) Minutes of the Special City Council Meeting held on January 10, 1997 and the Regular City Council Meeting of January 21, 1997. Approved. Minutes of the Regular City Council Meeting held on February 4, 1997 A. (97-67) Report from Finance Director transmitting Quarterly Financial Report for Period Ending December 31, 1996, including Midyear Adjustments. Accepted. Gerhard Degemann, Alameda, requested a brief oral report on the Quarterly Financial Report. The Interim City Manager stated that the Report indicates the City received $18,800,000 in revenues through December 31, 1996; that there was a drop off in Sales Tax; other taxes are late; the City fully expects to be at 50 percent; the same is true of expenditures. President Appezzato stated that faced with permanent cutbacks in federal and state assistance, the City has been forced to become fiscally self-reliant while maximizing the value of services to the citizens at the least cost; and he suggests the City become proactive by finding areas in which to generate revenues that will be necessary to make the City self-reliant. Vice Mayor DeWitt moved acceptance of the recommendation. Councilmember Lucas seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote -5. (97-68) Status Report from Public Works Director on Underground Utility Districts Projects and Programs. (Councilmember Kerr) Accepted. Councilmember Kerr inquired about the timeframe for underground utility projects in low-income areas. The Public Works Director responded that the previous Council approved the future underground utility projects [in the staff report]; that a public hearing was held on the matter; that the program is expected to take three [or more] years, and it depends a little upon the Bureau of Electricity's income. Councilmember Kerr stated that a year ago the Council discussed funding of underground utilities in low-income areas, e.g. CDBG funds; and inquired whether that discussion has continued and if WESEP funds were given consideration. The Public Works Director responded that Community Development Block Grant funds were not eligible for underground utilities projects, however, he believes tax increment monies could be used. Minutes of the Regular City Council Meeting held on February 4, 1997 President Appezzato stated that the Community Development Director should report back on the matter. Councilmember Lucas moved acceptance of the report. Councilmember Kerr seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. (97-69) Status Report from Public Works Director on the Agreement between the City of Alameda, City of Oakland and Alameda County for operation and maintenance of the Estuary Bridges. (Mayor Appezzato) Accepted. Earl Peacock, Alameda, stated that Alameda County is responsible for the maintenance, operation, retrofit, rebuilding of, and replacement of the estuary bridges; that the County is responsible for holding and saving all of their Agencies free of any damage claims, including third-party claims; that he learned from Interim City Manager that $48,000 of the $1,050,000 loan to the County is to retrofit the approaches to the bridges, and that he would like to know whether the approaches are Alameda or Alameda and Oakland approaches; and that he has a problem with the $3000,000 portion of the loan being interest free. Councilmember Lucas moved acceptance of the report. Vice Mayor DeWitt seconded the motion. Under discussion, President Appezzato stated that the County Board of Supervisors approved a plan to retrofit and maintain the Park Street Bridge; it will be a two-year process; half of the project will be done this year, and half next year; that all of the funding will be provided by the County; that the County will provide funding for education on the closure also; that an Agreement has been reached to retrofit the Bridge; it will be a multi-million dollar project; that the [Posey] tube is next and mandated by Caltrans; the City is working to ensure both [the Park Street Bridge and Posey Tube] are not closed at the same time; and that Caltrans, the County, and City are working very closely on coordinating the projects. On the call for the question, the motion carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. (97-70) Affidavit of Interim City Manager and Chief of Police, pursuant to Section 17-11 of the Charter of the City of Alameda. (Police Secret Fund) Accepted. Minutes of the Regular City Council Meeting held on February 4, 1997 Don Roberts, Alameda, stated that the public should be informed on the amount of money in the Police Secret Fund; he questioned if there had been an independent audit, and stated that the City Auditor should be involved to assure that the money is being spent for the purposes designated by Council. The City Attorney stated that an annual Affidavit is required by the City Charter. In response to President Appezzato, the Finance Director stated that the Secret Fund is audited by Mason and Associates, who are independent auditors; and the audit is part of the City's General Comprehensive Audit Report. Don Roberts stated that the question was Secret Fund every year. President Appezzato commented that he has that information. how much money is in the no problem with releasing Neil Patrick Sweeney, Alameda, stated that he supports the Police and Fire Departments. Vice Mayor DeWitt moved acceptance of the Affidavit [approval for filing]. Under discussion, Councilmember Kerr inquired whether Council could discuss the purpose of the Secret Police Fund. The Interim City Manager responded that the money is used to assist the Police Department in carrying out its operations. President Appezzato stated that Councilmember Kerr could request a Closed Session on the matter. Councilmember Kerr commented that as a new Councilmember she would appreciate information on the matter. Councilmember Lucas seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. ( *97 -71) Ratification of Bills. Ratified bills in the amount of $1,838,845.09 Minutes of the Regular City Council Meeting held on February 4, 1997 REGULAR AGENDA (97 -72) Resolution No. 12853 "Appointing Pattianne N. Parker as a Member of the City Economic Development Commission." (Community - At -Large Representative) Councilmember Lucas moved adoption of the Resolution. Vice Mayor DeWitt seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. The Deputy City Clerk administered the Oath of Office. (97 -73) Oral Report on Planning Process as it relates to the City, Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority, and Alameda Naval Air Station. (Mayor Appezzato) President Appezzato stated that it is important that Council assure the community that the planning process has been followed; that the Council relies heavily on staff to lead the Council and the Boards and Commissions on the proper path; that the Base Reuse Advisory Group has done a very good job; that he is process oriented, and for the two years he has served as Mayor, he does not believe the Charter or process has been violated; and that this report will begin the informative process as to where the Council, ARRA, and Planning Board are in the process. The Interim City Manager stated that he would like to set the foundation for the discussion by describing, both historically and chronologically, how the planning process evolved; in June 1993, the federal BRAC process made a decision to close the Naval Air Station; the decision was ratified by the Congress in October of 1993; in response to those decisions, on July 14, 1993 the City Council took action to establish the Base Reuse Advisory Group (BRAG); BRAG was composed entirely of interested Alameda residents, and it was assigned responsibility for advising the City Council on all matters associated with base conversion; BRAG is composed of a chairperson and ten members who are the chairs of various topical committees; the vice chairs are nominated by a number of agencies in this community; nominations come from City Council, School Board, Board of Realtors, Recreation Commission, Public Utilities Board, Naval Aviation Depot, and Economic Development Commission; the subcommittees developed mission statements and by -laws; the BRAG sponsored nine Town Meetings to gather public information on community reuse, and to keep the public informed about reuse and redevelopment activities; in December, 1993 the City Council approved a Joint Powers Agreement with Alameda County and the cities of Oakland and San Leandro to create the nine - member Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority (ARRA), which is composed of five Minutes of the Regular City Council Meeting held on February 4, 1997 members of the City Council, the Mayors of Oakland and San Leandro, and the Supervisor and Congressman from this District; ARRA requires a minimum of three Alameda City Councilmembers voting on the prevailing side for major critical issues; for instance, the adoption of any Plan or Land Use Proposals in contradiction to the City's Land Use Plan, Redevelopment Plan or Rezoning Plan requires at least three affirmative votes from the City Council, as well as two additional ARRA votes; in January, 1996 the ARRA approved the Reuse Plan which went through a five -phase process; and that all of these phases had citizen input and agreement in terms of the process that would be followed. President Appezzato stated that handouts were available on the evaluation of the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority, the special purpose governing bodies, what they are, and how they interact with the community; that the evaluation of the Base Reuse Advisory Group, and the role of the Alameda City Boards and Commissions in the reuse and redevelopment of NAS are imperative for education; and that City Council is following the process using the Boards and Commissions appropriately, especially the Planning Board. The Planning Director explained the interactions between the ARRA and the City Council, the ARRA interim lease program, and the Boards and Commissions involvement within the Base process. In response to President Appezzato's inquiry, the Planning Director stated the Planning Board has held fifteen public hearings. President Appezzato stated that the Planning Board is in the process of dealing with issues prior to them going before Council. William Smith, Chair, Sierra Club East Bay Military Conversion Task Force, stated that it is important all groups work together on the issues of land use; too many of the people in the environmental groups believe that the Planning Board is a rubber stamp, and that decisions are made before things have gone to the Planning Board; and that we need to make sure that all the groups, the BRAG in particular, keep the public involved and provide adequate public notice. In response to Councilmember Kerr, Mr. Smith stated that he and numerous others have tried, unsuccessfully, to obtain minutes from the BRAG. Eve Roberson, Alameda, stated she supports bringing the Navy Base issues back to the City Planning Board and to the City Council, where they belong; she would like to thank the Republican Women's Club for holding the recent public forum on housing at which three important issues became clear: 1) that Alamedans want the chance to Minutes of the Regular City Council Meeting held on February 4, 1997 have their say at open public hearings before the Planning Board and the City Council; 2) that Alamedans do not want the 500 plus units of the Navy Base East Housing turned into temporary low - quality rentals instead of permanent high - quality homeownership opportunities; and 3) that the 1,000 or so beds that the City is providing for the homeless next to the East Housing are new, long- term Section 8 housing, which count toward the Clayton Guyton lawsuit; that she hopes the City will now be able to finally protect Alameda historic neighborhoods from overcrowding with low - quality infill apartment buildings on already built -out lots; and that she urges Council to use the Navy Base property for its highest and best use; i.e., quality computer businesses and quality homeownership opportunities. President Appezzato stated that although this (agenda item] was not to be issue - oriented, those issues will be addressed on future agendas at Planning Board -, ARRA -, and City Council Meetings. Alice Challen, Alameda, stated that she concurred with the two prior speakers; she is glad that the City is taking the issues regarding the Naval Air Station and its reuse to City Boards and Commissions. Neil Patrick Sweeney, Alameda, stated that the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority meetings should be televised. Councilmember Kerr stated that the ARRA will be addressing the cable televising of its meetings. President Appezzato stated that the refurbished City Hall will have state -of- the -art equipment for televising, and if funds are available, Boards and Commissions meetings will be televised. Bill Garvine, Alameda Chamber of Commerce, stated that there is no rubber stamping at the Planning Board level; that the BRAG has done a wonderful job; ARRA acts very responsibly; and Council has done a wonderful job of setting the tone for the City and creating some movement for legitimate reuse of the Navy Base property, and allowing all citizens to have a voice in the process. President Appezzato stated that he concurs with Mr. Garvine that the Planning Board is not a rubber stamp; that the Planning Board is advisory and makes recommendations to the Council; and he will request the Executive Director of ARRA and the BRAG Chair to come back with an update at the next Council Meeting. Councilmember Kerr stated that she is concerned about the BRAG process; she does not see BRAG as having the same status as an elected body; and she would like the Planning Board to agendize what its role is in the Base planning process. Minutes of the Regular City Council Meeting held on February 4, 1997 Councilmember Daysog stated that everyone is responsible for what goes on; that ultimately the final decision rests with the City Council; that nothing is going to happen in the City without the input of local citizens. President Appezzato stated that the BRAG has no vested interest, other than to help the community; that the BRAG was established by a previous Council; that the City owes the BRAG a deep thank you for the work it has done; and that Board and Commission Members should address concerns to the Council. Vice Mayor DeWitt stated that the BRAG was created to help Council develop the Reuse Plan; the Reuse Plan having been developed, the BRAG could be streamlined or reorganized; he would like BRAG and the Planning Board to come back with recommendations in regards to the reorganization of the Group; that the BRAG was not formed to take the place of any Board or Commission, but rather to help the community come up with proper uses for the Navy Base. The Interim City Manager stated that Councilmember DeWitt's request would be addressed. Councilmember Kerr stated that she concurred with Vice Mayor DeWitt's remarks. President Appezzato noted that the matter of reorganization of the BRAG would come before Council for approval. * ** Council recessed at 9:04 p.m. and reconvened at 9:25 p.m. * ** (97 -74) Report from President, Public Utilities Board, recommending proposed City Charter revisions. Ken Hansen, President, Public Utilities Board (PUB), stated that the City is faced with unique situations: 1) the closure of the Alameda Naval Air Station and 2) deregulation; that the Bureau of Electricity should enter into a competitive business enterprise mode if it is to survive; that PUB hired a consultant; several PUB members and staff participated in a strategic planning session to develop a plan that establishes an effective working relationship between the Bureau of Electricity and the City to explore and facilitate plans for new money- making ventures in an expeditious manner; past PUB President Mark Hanna appointed past President Tony Shomon and Vice President Lance Russum to review the City Charter and make recommendations; that the City cannot afford to live in the past, but must move forward; and that he does not believe an alternate choice of having Referendums would be in the best interest of the citizens. Minutes of the Regular City Council Meeting held on February 4, 1997 Mark Hanna, Public Utilities Board Member, stated that the purpose for the suggested Charter change is to develop flexibility, to serve the community and to provide better revenues; that the federal government last September preempted Alameda's Charter by stating that every electrical distribution agency could go into the elecommunications business; that there are many electrical industries that have brokers standing by to offer services if the Bureau of Electricity cannot do it; and he would like to point out that the suggested revision to the Charter reads: "For the Bureau to control and manage any other City-owned public utilities or business enterprises, the control and management of which, shall have been delegated to the Board by the Council or the people." William M. McCall, former Mayor and President of the Public Utilities Board, stated that the City Charter reads: "Neither the City nor the Board shall engage in any public utility business in which the City or the Board is not now engaged, except with the consent of the people expressed by two thirds vote." We [voters] just passed Proposition 218 in the State of California; you cannot create assessments or parcel tax without a two-thirds vote; and that a new City Manager is arriving who should be given the opportunity to recommend to Council whether the Bureau should be entering into other businesses. President Appezzato stated that one of the major discussions with the new City Manager [Mr. James Flint] was economic development and his ability to accomplish that. Don Roberts, Alameda, stated that he believes the federal law preempts the Charter; the Charter does not prevent the Bureau of Electricity from going into other businesses, it merely provides the mechanism that the Bureau get approval of the owners--voters; that in February, 1996 the City Attorney's Office issued a Legal Opinion indicating that federal law preempts the Charter; that he disagrees with the City Attorney's Opinion; that the City Attorney's Opinion also recommended that the Opinion be validated by a Judge before the Bureau spent any money going into another business which might be against the Charter requirement; that the Bureau ignored the recommendation from the City Attorney, and has spent money installing fiber optic cables in Marina Village and the Harbor Bay Business Park, the Bureau should not have done that until the City Attorney's Legal Opinion was validated by a Judge; and that he suggests that Council not take action on this item, or approve the changes recommended by the Bureau. Minutes of the Regular City Council Meeting held on February 4, 1997 President Appezzato stated the Public Utilities Board is requesting Council to approve the proposed Charter revisions going to the voters. Anthony Shomon, Public Utilities Board, stated that he is a member of the Committee that reviewed the Charter; the key concerns that has been addressed is the idea of going into another business presently requires a two thirds approval by the voters; the Navy was leaving the Naval Air Station and the PUB was asked to consider going into the gas business, we were told we couldn't because of having to go through the City and requiring a vote; and that the next election that the PUB is considering for the Charter revisions is November, 1998 election. In response to Councilmember Lucas, Mr. Shomon responded that the Public Utilities Board vote was unanimous in support of the suggested revisions. Councilmember Lucas stated that she encourages the Bureau to get into appropriate businesses; that the School Board is going to have an election for a parcel tax this summer and inquired about the cost. President Appezzato stated that he is not sure that the PUB is ready for that. The Interim City Manager stated that the cost would be the purview of the City Clerk; that a special election would cost approximately $36,000; and he would have to come back with the cost on consolidation. Councilmember Daysog stated that he concurred with Councilmember Lucas's comment on encouraging the Bureau to get into whatever businesses it finds appropriate, and particularly the high speed data transmissions; that the City is entering into a new environment due to deregulation; that we have to be able to respond quickly, otherwise its not just the Bureau of Electricity that is going to be hurt, but the City of Alameda; that Council has to act quickly and adapt to whatever opportunities that exist; and that he is also confident that Council will do so responsibly. Councilmember Kerr stated concern regarding undergrounding fiber optics, when certain medias are moving heavily into satellite; that a professional opinion should be sought; and that she thinks Council should send the best possible material to the voters. Minutes of the Regular City Council Meeting held on February 4, 1997 In response to President Appezzato, Mr. Shomon stated that a consultant from Stanford Research Institute provided an analysis of the competition, and that satellites were an option. Councilmember Daysog stated that the City should look at it in three ways: 1) as a benefit to the real estate, 2) as an economic tool, and 3) as a quality of life tool. Mr. Shomon stated that the Public Utilities Board is not planning to go into detailed software at this time. In response to Councilmember Kerr, Mr. Shomon stated that the PUB discussed the impact of satellites, however, there is a band width problem. President Appezzato stated that Council is not here to discuss whether to implement land lines or fiber optics, but to discuss whether this matter should be taken to a vote of the people. Vice Mayor DeWitt stated that Council should look toward the future; and that what the Bureau is going to do will come before the PUB and the Council in the years to come. Councilmember Lucas stated that Council needs to determine the differences in cost between a June, '97 and a General Municipal Election [November, 1998]. President Appezzato requested a cost comparison. Councilmember Lucas moved acceptance of the PUB recommendation that Council adopt proposed revision to the City Charter section dealing with the Bureau and recommended language changes providing for the Bureau to become involved in other enterprises not specifically authorized presently. Councilmember Daysog seconded the motion. Councilmember Kerr moved a counter motion that Section 12.5 of the City Charter not be deleted as proposed. Councilmember Kerr's counter motion FAILED for lack of a second. Under discussion, President Appezzato stated that he is supporting Councilmember Lucas's motion; that the City should be creative and discover new ways to generate revenue; federal government has deregulated the industry and the City needs to prepare for the twenty first century; and that he questions that the City must spend thousands of dollars every time an action is needed by putting it on the ballot; and that he sees nothing wrong with putting this proposal on the ballot. Minutes of the Regular City Council Meeting held on February 4, 1997 On the call for the question, the motion carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Councilmembers Daysog, Lucas, Vice Mayor DeWitt, President Appezzato - 4. Noes: Councilmember Kerr - 1. * * * Vice Mayor DeWitt moved approval of the recommendation that the Public Utilities Board decline oversight of the Cable Television Committee. Councilmember Lucas seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5 * * * In response to President Appezzato, the City Attorney stated that in order to make the June, 1997 ballot, final ballot measures would be required at the beginning of March. President Appezzato stated that the Council could hold a Special Council Meeting and go forward, if needed. In response to President Appezzato, PUB President Shomon stated that in the interest of saving dollars, the Public Utilities Board could wait until [General Municipal Election] November, 1998. Councilmember Lucas stated that it should be done in the least expensive way, which is the November, 1998 election. The Interim City Manager stated that he would verify the cost and report back at the next meeting. President Appezzato directed the City Attorney to come back with a report addressing Councilmember Kerr's question whether the Bureau of Electricity could continue to wire for fiber optics, without an opinion of a Judge. (97-75) Report from Chair, Alameda Citizens' Recycling Committee, recommending a new Residential Recycling Program and Service Provider. President Appezzato thanked the five Committee Members for volunteering. Minutes of the Regular City Council Meeting held on February 4, 1997 Ruth Abbe, Chair, Recycling Committee, introduced the five Committee Members in the audience; she stated that the committee toured the facility sites, conducted face -to -face interviews with all proposers, and met bi- monthly to come forward with the recommendation; the recommendation is a comprehensive recycling program of all the traditional recyclable materials, including yard waste; the charge of the committee was to be fair, and objective in their evaluation; they took public comment from meetings to assist in defining the system that was preferred, taking into consideration citizens with special needs; they evaluated three final proposals from very highly qualified contractors; San Leandro Recycling is the preferred contractor and represented the best value, low cost, superb customer and service reputation; encouraged by the possibility that San Leandro Recycling can put us on the leading edge for recycling; they have committed to become Alameda oriented; if selected will change their name to Alameda Recycling, or any other name that we would like them to assume, so the citizens of Alameda are not confused by the San Leandro name; they will also be a union shop, and pay prevailing wages; and that there is a requirement in the contract that they give preference to displaced workers. Gerhard Wen, President, San Leandro Recycling, introduced Teri Chalmers, General Manager, and stated that he is pleased to be selected by the Citizens Committee, and hopes Council approves the recommendation to authorize the City staff to begin negotiations; wheeled carts would be used for both yard waste and recyclable materials; all proposers bid on the exact same program, thus there should not be any confusion in comparing prices in the most recent proposals; when the rates for both single - family and multi- family are combined, San Leandro Recycling offers the lowest overall price for the community; the committee concluded their analysis and ranked each proposer on a variety of criteria, including customer satisfaction, operations, equipment, financial stability, public educations and costs; the committee voted overwhelming in favor of San Leandro Recycling; and urges Council to approve the Committee's recommendation. William McCall, Alameda, inquired if provisions were made in the proposed contract for citizens whose gardeners dispose of yard waste. At the request of President Appezzato, Ms, Abbe responded that provisions for exemptions for citizens who have gardeners have been made; and that gardeners who take yard material for composting and recycling can be certified. Charles Thoss, Alameda, stated he is against San Leandro Recycling, and that his daughter has had problems with them. Minutes of the Regular City Council Meeting held on February 4, 1997 In response to Vice Mayor DeWitt, Mr. Thoss stated that he was not a member of the pilot program; his daughter lives in San Leandro; and if problems exist in the City of San Leandro, they [San Leandro Recycling] are not going to perform better here. At the request of Vice Mayor DeWitt, Mr. Wen responded that the City of San Leandro has two service providers for recycling, and Mr. Thoss's daughter lives in a different area other than San Leandro Recycling's service area President Appezzato thanked Mr. Wen for the clarification. Dave MacDonald, Executive Vice President, Waste Management of Alameda County, stated that he was making a last minute proposal with added features; believes the proposal warrants Council's serious consideration; and he requested that Council delay decision on the recommendation before Council. In response to President Appezzato, Mr. MacDonald stated that Waste Management's proposal had not been before the Citizens Committee; that during the on -site tour a one -pass system was discussed; and proposal is another option. In response to Councilmember Lucas, Mr. MacDonald stated the proposal is for curbside service for all garbage. Don Roberts, Alameda, stated that he served as a charter member of the original Recycling Committee and also served as the chair; Council should go with the Citizens Committee's recommendation; the Committee negotiated contracting and held public sessions so there could be input from the public on changes to the contract language; and that Council should attempt to change federal and State laws so that anyone that dumps from outside of Alameda County into the San Leandro site fully pay for the costs of recycling within Alameda. Marty Frates, Business Representative, Teamsters Local 70, stated that the Teamsters Local 70 is at an impasse in negotiations with San Leandro Disposal and Recycling; and in the event that Council selects San Leandro Disposal and Recycling, the Teamsters would respectfully request that a final agreement not be concluded until Local 70 has been able to resolve its contractual issues with the Company. Robert Wood, Vice - Chair, Alameda Citizens' Recycling Committee, stated that he would like to speak in favor of the recommendation; Committee met at least twelve times, which represents over thirty hours of public meetings; the process was fair and objective; and he believes the recommendation of the Committee should be approved by Council. Minutes of the Regular City Council Meeting held on February 4, 1997 Fred Wetherill, Alameda, read a letter written by his wife and endorsed by himself; "We are sure your citizens recycling committee has worked hard to come to the conclusions that they have reached. However, we can say that under their proposal our monthly bill will almost double, there must be other households who have also curtailed their waste who would be likewise penalized. When the recycling program went into effect we found we could work with only a twenty gallon container whenever there has been extra yard debris we have used one of the waste management bags, which they sell. As for junk mail there are phone numbers to call if you want your volume discontinued or curtailed. Be creative in recycling magazines, share with nursing homes, hospitals, schools for class room projects, and even your churches for mission projects. The city now provides a annual pick up to collect our overflow from garages, attics, and cellars. If there were sufficient demand the frequency could be increased to twice or three times a year For a small increase in the base amount for all to share. Perhaps for green waste, a community compose pile could be established somewhere on base property. Such a program would also help to enhance the soil there. Our current bill of 7.20 per month for a 20 gal container would increase to 13.95 a month is it fair to penalize those who have already made a good faith effort to conserve and cut waste. Please reconsider your figures. Respectfully submitted Fred A. and Virginia Wetherill." Diane Coler -Dark, Alameda, stated that consideration should be given to less frequent [seasonally] green waste pickups. Harold Smith, Attorney representing California Waste Solutions (CWS), stated that there is a fundamental unfairness in the whole process; last August there was concern that the different proposals were comparing apples to oranges; there was an attempt by the City to have the different proposals be similar; they chose CWF's proposal; but what it did, in effect, was tell everyone what our [CWS] price was, and competitors could come in at just a little lower; we were led to believe that we would be treated fairly in that regard, and we do not believe we were; and that the RFP process cannot be shifted around to settle the shifting sands; process should be based on a concrete principle of fairness and equality; that he does not think that occurred; and that changing the process in the middle was done in a way that was simply not fair to our client. Minutes of the Regular City Council Meeting held on February 4, 1997 Paul Rottenberg, California Waste Solution, stated that some of the other proposers do not have the physical plant capabilities to do what they propose to do, nor offer to do as much as CWS, and that CWS is offering to do it for less. Gerhard Degemann, Alameda, stated that it is unfair for them [Waste Management] to make an eleventh hour presentation. Teri Chalmers, San Leandro Recycling, stated that she agrees there is an unfair eleventh-hour attempt by Waste Management; if the City wants to pursue garbage curbside collection with Waste Management in order to obtain some cost savings, then she encourages negotiating separately for curbside collection of garbage; that throughout the process they were presented three different proposals; they did not see California Waste Solution's bid before they presented their final proposal; and that she urges Council to support the Committee's decision and authorize staff to begin negotiations. Michael Lynn, San Leandro Recycling [SLR], stated that he is a consultant on Labor Relations; that there have been no unusual labor issues at San Leandro Recycling; that SLR simply continued to bargain and to pay the rates that have been negotiated with the garbage-side of the industry. Larry Dias, Business Representative, Teamsters Local 70, stated that he disagrees with Mr. Lynn; and that if Council should have any questions of Mr. Lynn, that he, too, be given the opportunity to answer them. In response to Councilmember Kerr, Ms. Abbe stated that multi- family units are defined as centralized garbage service, having a dumpster that is shared by multiple units in one location, where the garbage truck picks it up, moves it, and puts it in the vehicle; and that if you have, for example, an eight-unit condominium complex with eight different garbage cans, it would be considered single-family service. In response to Councilmember Kerr, Ms. Abbe stated that the residents who, for physical reasons, are unable to move their recycling or green waste containers to the curb may contact the contractor and make alternative arrangements, perhaps through the City; that it would not be automatic at age 64; multi-units are not required to take the container to the curb; and the garbage contract allows stoppage of service for vacant units. Minutes of the Regular City Council Meeting held on February 4, 1997 Councilmember Kerr stated that everyone is supporting the Union or prevailing wages; that Council had a long meeting with the Social Service Human Relations Board and they are clamoring for start up jobs for new immigrants; City is not only getting pressure from the Union people, but also from the other end of the spectrum to provide entry jobs. In response to Councilmember Kerr, Ms. Abbe explained that material should not be disposed of; material should be recycled; company is prohibited from selling to a market instead of recycling material; and that the Committee and staff participated in negotiations. Ms. Abbe stated that the Committee did look at frequency issues, as previously requested by Ms. Coler -Dark; the Committee could not justify the concept of weekly recycling of green waste. President Appezzato stated that part of the recommendation submitted by the Committee is for the Committee and City staff to continue negotiations with whomever is selected. Councilmember Lucas stated that she is ready to make a decision tonight; she is surprised that Waste Management would present a totally new proposal when they had previously bid on this project; and she is very impressed with the hard work by the Committee. Councilmember Lucas moved approval of the report and recommendation. Councilmember Daysog seconded the motion. Under discussion, Vice Mayor DeWitt stated that he would like to change the language in the contract by not requiring a gardener to be a City Licensed Landscape Contractor - -it is too restrictive. In response to Councilmember Kerr, Ms. Abbe stated that it is not a contractor's license, but a City business license. Councilmember Lucas stated that a City License is required of anyone doing business in the City; exempting people from the business license requirements goes against the principle of a democratic government; and she would not like to change that part of the recommendation. Vice Mayor DeWitt stated that having the requirement is going further than the recycling request that Council asked the Committee to do; and that it is going to create problems by asking the people to be City licensed. Minutes of the Regular City Council Meeting held on February 4, 1997 Mr. John Piziali, Member, Citizens Recycling Committee, stated that it is required that people who conduct business in Alameda have a City Business License. Vice Mayor DeWitt stated that he wanted the representatives from the Union to know that the City does authorize the prevailing wage. President Appezzato stated that the Council selected five members of the community and gave them the charge to provide a recommendation; Committee has worked very diligently; and he will support the recommendation. President Appezzato thanked the Committee Members for their efforts. On the call for the question, the motion carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. (97-76) Report from the Interim City Manager on the revocation of the Class E Airspace over Naval Air Station, Alameda. (Councilmember Daysog). Councilmember Daysog stated that it seems more planes are flying overhead in Alameda's airspace, not just from the Oakland, but also San Francisco Airport; it is not just a noise but safety issue; and Council will closely monitor the airport expansion and take appropriate action if necessary. President Appezzato stated that the City has responded to the EIR/EIS submitted by the Oakland Airport, and returned a ninety page document with City's concerns. Sherri Watson, Alameda, stated that she lives on the west end of town; a lot of airplanes are from San Francisco, not just Oakland; she sees an increase in flights at night; and suggests more in depth charts to show the times and where the planes are coming from. Jon Rodgers, Alameda, stated he would like clarification on what type of airspace the City would like to see in lieu of the Class E airspace. In response to President Appezzato, the Interim City Manager stated that this is an informational report that indicates that the Class D and E designations have been abandoned, and there is now a Class G. Mr. Rodgers stated that it is necessary to go through the public hearing process to restrict airspace. Minutes of the Regular City Council Meeting held on February 4, 1997 James Sweeney, Alameda, stated that he lives a quarter of a block north of Encinal High School; he is alarmed at how low some aircraft are; there has been an increase in noise and cutting early; if aircraft went out a little farther and cut down near the Estuary, it would be a better operation; and the problem is not one of only noise, but safety. Councilmember Kerr stated that she lives on the north side, near Webster Street; her neighborhood is complaining about San Francisco aircraft during stormy weather; the landing pattern is right over their houses and it travels to direct line over Ballena Bay; planes are now low enough to read the logo with an ordinary pair of binoculars; they lower their landing gear halfway across the Bay going into San Francisco; something has changed in the landing pattern into San Francisco in bad weather; and that for her the issue is not closed. Mayor Appezzato stated that the issue is not closed, and the City is waiting for the response to the EIR/EIS. Councilmember Lucas stated that she would like staff to address the question raised by Mr. Sweeney regarding the aircraft taking off from Oakland Airport and making turns closer toward the Island; and she inquired whether it would be safer if the planes went out farther on the Bay. The Interim City Manager stated that there are takeoff patterns that differ at night; there is a plan to send aircraft off runway 29 to turn left out into the Bay as it climbs; that could be one of the differentials: during the day time, the planes go out straight, then once they reach 3,000 feet, they are allowed to turn and head over the City of Alameda; and he will check if the Port of Oakland will respond to that issue. President Appezzato stated that the EIR/EIS is under consideration; that the possibility of lawsuits exist down the road; and perhaps the Port of Oakland will come and discuss the issues stated tonight. Councilmember Kerr stated that the sound contours in the EIR indicate that there might be a bearing left from runway 29 as planes take off; it is not a straight ellipse out from the end of the runway; and if they are going straight now, it might indicate there is a change. The City Attorney stated that this matter could be brought back, and that one option is to refer it to the Airport Operations Committee. Minutes of the Regular City Council Meeting held on February 4, 1997 0 President Appezzato stated that the Airport Operations Committee can come and speak, however, he would like the Director of Airport Operations, the Port, to respond to issues raised; and that they may not want to because the EIR/EIS is being reviewed. In response to Councilmember Daysog, the Interim City Manager stated that he would contact a San Francisco Airport representative. Councilmember Daysog moved acceptance the report. Councilmember Kerr seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. (97-77) Report from Public Works Director recommending that Council conditionally accept the work of Gonsalves & Stronck for the Hardball Facility at College of Alameda, Project No. P.W. 02- 95-04. President Appezzato announced that this item was pulled from Agenda and would be brought back at a later date. (97-78) Introduction of Ordinance Amending the Alameda Municipal Code by Amending Subsection ww.1000.3 (Administrative Provisions of the National Electrical Code: Permits, General Provisions Concerning) of Section 13-3 (Alameda Electrical Code), Chapter XIII (Building and Housing) Thereof, and Repealing Subsection 13-1.2 (a) Pertaining to Expiration of Building Permits. Andrew P. McCormack, Alameda, stated that some people might take more than a year to complete a project; there is a State Uniform Building Code; and that the City has inspectors. Susan M. McCormack, Alameda, agreed with Mr. McCormack's statements. Diane Coler-Dark, Alameda, stated that the reason for limitations is to ensure adequate property maintenance standards and preserve Alameda's neighborhoods; permits can be renewed; and the time limit helps keep the project before staff. Len Grzanka, Alameda, stated that restrictions such as the lapsing of the building permit within a one year time and requiring reapplication, discourages people from applying for permits; it is a bad public policy; and he encourages Council to pass this measure. Minutes of the Regular City Council Meeting held on February 4, 1997 Councilmember Lucas stated that she is not going to support the proposal; she concurs with Ms. Coler -Dark; she wants to discourage eyesores to neighborhoods by uncompleted projects; and that permits can be renewed for good reasons. President Appezzato stated that the City has time frames to ensure control and protecting neighborhoods from open -ended permits; and if there is a problem, the City should change the extension procedure, not remove the controls altogether. Councilmember Kerr stated that she is concerned about construction and temporary construction shacks and other related matters in frontyards and backyards; that neighbors have to be considered as well as the people doing the work; and she agrees that the City should look at the extension procedure, but does not see any reason to change the time limit. In response to Councilmember Daysog, the Public Works Director stated that after a year a new building permit fee is required, and it is higher. President Appezzato stated that he would like it to know how many complaints have been received; that he will look at making it easier at the end of the year, but must maintain the control; and he will be happy to look at the fee issue as well. Councilmember Lucas stated that she is not sure the City will want to decrease the fee substantially; that having to pay the fee again is another discouragement of just slowing down on the job; and she thinks that needs to be considered. President Appezzato stated that this is a major ordinance change, and he is not sure that it is warranted. In response to Vice Mayor DeWitt, the Public discussed certain permit requirements. In response to Councilmember Kerr, the Public Works that the older permits were being grandfathered. In response to President Appezzato, the Public Works Director stated that there is an opportunity to look at extensions and fees. President Appezzato stated that it is better to look at the extension, or exception, process; and that he would not support open -ended permits. Works Director Director stated Minutes of the Regular City Council Meeting held on February 4, 1997 In response to Councilmember Lucas, the Public Works Director stated that the new limitation does not apply to any previously issued building permits; and that those taking out permits are informed of the one-year limit, as well as the renewal fees. Councilmember Daysog stated that he concurred with the Mayor; that the City cannot change the rules; the permits cannot be open- ended. In response to Vice Mayor DeWitt, the Public Works Director stated that under previous requirements, the Inspector could terminate a permit if a reasonable amount of progress had not occurred within a six-month period; and that he did not know of any other city that had a one year limit. Councilmember Lucas moved that staff come back with a recommendation on how to address the extension problem for the permits and a possible fee reduction; and also that Council be informed on the number of complaints. Councilmember Daysog seconded the vote, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5 ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (Public Comment) (97-79) Allen Derr, Alameda, stated that the selection of Recycling Committee Members was excellent, and that perhaps a similar approach should be taken when it is time to renew the garbage contract. [Committee approach]. (97-80 ) Neil Patrick Sweeney, Alameda, stated that the Community Development's list of buildings for rent and/or sale should be advertised on the Internet. (97-81) Don Roberts, Alameda, stated that the Federal Communications Commission has a requirement that cable companies provide 30-day notice before changing channel line-ups; TCI Cablevision, nationwide, may have violated FCC rules; and questioned Interim City Manager if any action was being taken by the City. Interim City Manager stated that it had not been brought to his attention until now; if there is a violation, he will look into it. (97-82) Susan McCormack, Alameda, stated that the one-year building permit discourages homeowners from getting a permit, and that not one extension has been granted; that she was trying to advise Council of an upcoming problem relating to a one-year limitation. Minutes of the Regular City Council Meeting held on February 4, 1997 President Appezzato stated that staff will be looking into the matter. (97-83) Earl Peacock, Alameda, stated that he wanted to compliment Rob Wonder for his outstanding job as Interim City Manager; that he (Peacock) is waiting to assist with corrections to the Hardball Facility; and that one-year building permits get buildings on the tax rolls, and exceptions to that rule should be carefully looked at. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS (Communications from Council) (97-84) Mayor Appezzato inquired which zoning district 2519 Clement Avenue is located in; he stated that if a variance or waiver was issued, he would like to know whether it was for a business or a single-family home. (97-85) Mayor Appezzato requested staff to consider an amnesty program for older homes that may have had construction done without a permit. (97-86) Mayor Appezzato, on behalf of the City Council, thanked Heather McLaughlin, Assistant City Attorney, for her services, and wished her well in her new position as City Attorney for the City of Benicia. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business before the City Council, President Appezzato adjourned the meeting at 12:19 a.m. Respectfully submittedj ) DIANE B. FELSCH, CMC City Clerk The Agenda for this meeting was posted in advance in accordance with the Brown Act. Minutes of the Regular City Council Meeting held on February 4, 1997