1997-01-07 Regular CC MinutesMINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING
OF THE ALAMEDA CITY COUNCIL
JANUARY 7, 1997
President Appezzato convened the meeting at 8 :04 p.m.
ROLL CALL:
PRESENT: CouncilmembersDaysog, Kerr, Lucas,
Vice Mayor DeWitt, and President
Appezzato - 5.
ABSENT: None.
Reverend Dan Weller, Alameda Community Church, gave the Invocation.
Councilmember Daysog led the Pledge of Allegiance.
PROCLAMATIONS AND SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY
None.
CONSENT CALENDAR
President Appezzato announced that certain agenda items were
withdrawn from the Consent Calendar for discussion.
Councilmember Lucas moved approval of the remainder of the Consent
Calendar. Vice Mayor DeWitt seconded the motion, which carried by
unanimous voice vote - 5.
Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk.
(97 -01) Minutes of the Regular City Council Meeting of December
17, 1996. Revised and Approved.
The Minutes were approved in their entirety, except that Paragraph
96 -675 regarding HOME Funding for California Co- Housing Corporation
was revised at the request of Councilmember Kerr.
Councilmember Kerr commented that the Minutes state that Ms.
Burnett of California Co- Housing Corporation said, in part,
that ". . .every property owner on Elm Street was given written
notification. . . ", and that, in fact, written material was left on
porches or whatever, and that notification was given to residents,
and not necessarily to property owners.
Minutes Regular
City Council Meeting
January 7, 1997
Councilmember Lucas moved approval of the Minutes [and inclusion of
Councilmember Kerr's comments). Vice Mayor DeWitt seconded the
motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.
(97-02) Report from General Manager, Chuck Corica Golf Complex,
recommending adoption of Plans and Specifications and Calling for
Bids for purchase or lease of 50 electric golf carts. Accepted.
Neil Patrick Sweeney, Alameda, stated that if the Golf Commission
took a certain amount of money every year and created a Living
Trust, the Commission would be self-supporting.
Councilmember Lucas moved approval of the report and
recommendation. Vice Mayor DeWitt seconded the motion, which
carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.
(97-03) Status Report from Community Development Director on the
Windows on Art Program. (Vice Mayor DeWitt) Accepted.
Vice Mayor DeWitt requested the Community Development Director to
give an oral report on the item.
The Community Development Director stated that the Windows on Art
Program is based on a very small amount of initial seed funding to
encourage partnerships between the business community and the art
community in Alameda, that the first initiative will be to create
window galleries along Park and Webster Streets while store fronts
are in the process of being rented; right now, there is a committee
that has been formed with the nucleus from the Economic Development
Commission, members from the various merchant associations and
representatives of the art community; the initial focus is to
determine whether the Alameda Arts Association will be the master
association who will hire the curator to pick the art to be
displayed, and to professionally mount the art in the windows; the
merchants' associations will talk with property owners to get
permission to display the art; and the notion is that the committee
will continue to meet to expand the ways in which the artists and
the business community can continue to work together.
Vice Mayor DeWitt moved acceptance of the report. Councilmember
Lucas seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote -
5.
(97-04) Report from Public Works Director recommending the
adoption of the Final Revenue Program for the Infiltration and
Inflow Sanitary Sewer Replacement Project. Accepted.
Minutes Regular
City Council Meeting
January 7, 1997
Councilmember Kerr stated that she is going to vote against the
recommendation because it is a dwelling unit tax; the actual sewer
replacement is not the laterals to the building, or anything like
that; it is the number of feet of the frontage on the street, and
replacing the length of pipe under the street; she has been
speaking against this particular tax for three years now, and she
is not going to stop; fees are up to $9.00 /month per apartment and
only $10 /month per house, and commercial /industrial /institutional
is $37.17 per month.
In response to Councilmember Daysog, the Public Works Director
stated that staff looked at: 1) programs needing replacement, and
2) operations and maintenance; that staff predicted costs over a
twenty -year period and determined if a 10% rate could be gotten in
the first three years, they could continue with the Consumer Price
Index [for the San Francisco Bay Area].
The Public Works Director further stated that the City went over
five years with no increase in the sewer rate.
Councilmember Daysog stated that the City is really lowering the
tax.
At the request of Mayor Appezzato, the Public Works Director
explained that in 1994, the City adopted a master fee resolution
which modified the sewer revenue; a new sewer replacement program
was being started, in addition to sewer maintenance and operations
costs; a consultant helped predict, costs over the twenty -year
period and set rates; the City took a State loan out to do
construction work while costs were fairly low; and that the State
wants a continued guarantee as to what the City's revenue program
will be.
The Public Works Director further stated that the State Regional
Water Control Board put a Cease and Desist Order on about 8 cities
in the area several years ago; those cities got together and came
up with a program; in Alameda's case, a $20 Million program for
replacement of lines over a period of 20 years; that unless the
City continues with that Program, the Cease and Desist Order could
be placed again, and the City could not issue building permits for
anything that generated sewage; and most cities pay [back the loan]
with fee revenues.
Councilmember Kerr stated that she is not objecting to repairing
the sewers and paying for them; she is objecting to the
distribution of the taxation among dwelling units.
Minutes Regular
City Council Meeting
January 7, 1997
Councilmember Lucas stated that no one likes to levy these charges,
however, the program needs to be taken care of; and that the staff
offers the most reasonable approach.
Councilmember Lucas moved approval of the report and
recommendation.
Councilmember Daysog seconded the motion.
Under discussion, Councilmember Daysog stated that he reads it as
a tax cut; historically, the fee has been rising perhaps at 10%
from year to year; now, it is being indexed to a CPI that is
typically about 4 %, and the burden is being reduced.
Councilmember Kerr responded that it is a possible cut in the tax
increases, but the taxes will go up.
On the call for the question, the motion carried by the following
voice vote: Ayes: Councilmembers Daysog, DeWitt, Lucas and
President Appezzato - 4. Noes: Councilmember Kerr - 1. Absent:
None. Abstentions - None.
(97 -05) Report from Public Works Director on design for flagpole at
City Hall. Accepted.
Reverend Wilfred Hodgkin, Alameda, stated that he would like to
speak in opposition to the design on several grounds; first, the
City is not a yacht club, it is a government building; he would
like to make an alternate suggestion to recognize Alameda as a City
which has ` had a long maritime history, and still is one of the
largest concentrations of private yachts in the bay area and
northern California, and certainly should be somehow noticed and
incorporated into the City Hall; and he would like to suggest that
instead of changing the flagpole for $15,000, that the entrance
hall foyer of the City Hall have pictures and history of Alameda's
nautical life.
President Appezzato stated that having served with Rev. Hodgkin on
the Planning Board, he values his judgment, and he is beginning to
rethink the idea.
In response to Councilmember Lucas, Reverend Hodgkin stated that
his preference is that the City keep the current flagpole and use
the interior of the building to give the whole history of the City
back to the Alaskan Packers.
Minutes Regular
City Council Meeting
January 7, 1997
Susan McCormack, Alameda, stated that she thinks that the flagpole
we have now is fine; we could save that money and do something else
with it; and she agrees with Rev. Hodgkin that the interior of the
City Hall could be used to display the nautical reference to the
City.
President Appezzato stated that the City Hall may be ready in July.
Dave Plummer, Alameda, stated that whoever suggested the yardarm-
type flagpole should be commended; it is a good idea in that it is
a reminder of our history; the Alaskan Packers were, in fact,
square-rigger sailing ships which used yardarms to support their
sails; it is definitely a reminder of some of Alameda's past; as
far as displaying maritime memorabilia in City Hall, it is his
recollection that Marina Village was establishing a maritime
museum; taking the existing flagpole mast and converting it seems
to be an efficient way to display three flags; and a single
flagpole display would more than offset the cost of doing a
landscape plan.
Councilmember Lucas stated that a yardarm design is overpowering;
she is concerned that we may be spending money on something that
there really is not a consensus in the community on; and she would
like to leave the current flagpole as is and not spend the money;
and moved that Council leave the current flagpole and not spend any
money.
Councilmember Kerr stated that the Council originally started out
[on design for a flagpole] because someone proposed three flagpoles
which is the most expensive [design]; a yardarm is less expensive,
if you want to separate the flags; and the existing flagpole is, of
course, the cheapest; she does not want to spend between $12,000
and $15,000 to prepare another City Hall site development plan,
which would be necessary if Council went with the three flagpole
plan; she does see why a site development plan would be necessary
if Council went with the yardarm or with the single flagpole; and
even though the City has the money in the City Hall project
landscaping budget, she cannot see spending it on a flagpole issue.
In response to Councilmember Daysog's inquiry regarding the
necessity for a site development plan, the Public Works Director
explained that the Contractor will pay for the grass ruined during
construction; that the City would like to change some of the
hardscape; e.g., a design other than the square concrete; that a
site plan for around all of City Hall would be for a project done
over the years and could cost as much as $100,000; and that it
would be nice to have a plan to work toward.
Minutes Regular
City Council Meeting
January 7, 1997
Councilmember Kerr inquired whether Councilmember Lucas's motion
includes the $12,000 to $15,000 expenditure for a site development
plan.
Councilmember Lucas responded that the motion does not include said
expenditure for site plan.
The Public Works Director noted that the City could do minimal work
in the front of City Hall to put it back in shape.
President Appezzato noted that the motion is to retain the status
quo.
Vice Mayor DeWitt seconded Councilmember Lucas's motion that
Council leave the current flagpole and not spend any money.
Under discussion, Vice Mayor DeWitt stated that former Councilman
Arnerich believed there should be three flagpoles to separate the
flags; he [DeWitt] thought the community believed that it would be
a good thing to do, however, it appears that the community is not
really fascinated with the issue.
On the call for the question, the motion carried by unanimous voice
vote - 5.
(*97-06) Ratification of Bills. Ratified bills in the amount of
$1,902,973.67.
REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS
(97-07) Public Hearing to consider Housing and Community
Development Performance and Needs in Alameda, and Request for
Proposals for projects designed to address these needs.
Mayor Appezzato opened the public portion of the Hearing.
Proponents
Renee DuBois, Site Director, Four Bridges Creative Living Center
Peggy Finnegan, Four Bridges
Cammie Spanjer, Four Bridges
Chris Novosel, Four Bridges
Neil Patrick Sweeney, Alameda.
Opponents
None.
Minutes Regular
City Council Meeting
January 7, 1997
Mayor Appezzato closed the public portion of the Hearing.
Councilmember Daysog inquired whether there is any early indication
of more demand for limited CDBG funds, given the amount of cuts a
lot of programs have been facing.
The Community Development Director responded that is what people
predict; proposals are due on the 14th, of January, and Community
Development will have a much more accurate sense by then; and, in
general, requests for funding are double or triple the money
available.
In response to Councilmember Kerr's inquiry, the Community
Development Director stated that Sentinel Fair Housing is listed as
Housing Counseling under Public Services.
Councilmember Kerr inquired why Parrot Village is not low - income
housing on the census map.
The Community Development Director responded that the U.S. Census
Bureau divided Parrot Village in half, and included each half in a
different census tract; that it is against federal regulations to
change a census tract boundary to move low- income housing from one
tract to another for HUD funding purposes; that individual people
can benefit from the program, but the census tracts themselves are
disadvantaged because they split Parrot; that staff must go to a
higher level for a remedy; and that half of Parrot Village falls
into Marina Village, Census- Bureau wise.
Vice Mayor DeWitt moved approval of the recommendation [that
Council hold the public hearing and following the public portion of
the hearing, identify additional needs not noted].
Councilmember Daysog seconded the motion.
Under discussion, Councilmember Kerr announced that written
comments through January 13th will be used to prepare the proposed
1997 -98 action plan.
On the call for the question, the motion carried by unanimous voice
vote - 5.
* **
Council recessed at 8 :47 p.m. and reconvened at 9 :07 p.m.
* * *
Minutes Regular
City Council Meeting
January 7, 1997
(97-08) Report from Community Development Director recommending
HOME funding for California Co-Housing Corporation.
Mayor Appezzato announced that the item was pulled from the Agenda
at the request of the proposing agency.
(97-09) Report from Fire Chief and Police Chief regarding
authority for the City to submit a Proposal to the Navy which
would authorize the Navy to fund City Caretaker Police and Fire
Services at the Alameda Naval Air Station.
Mayor Appezzato announced that the item was pulled from the Agenda
as a result of information received late in the afternoon from the
Navy.
(97-10) Report from Public Works Director recommending that
Council take certain actions regarding seismic retrofit work on the
Webster Street/Posey Tubes. (Held over from 12-17-96 Council
Meeting).
Don Roberts, Alameda, stated that the proposal by Caltrans is not
for the highest level of seismic retrofit work for the Tubes; that
he agrees with the proposal by the staff that the City should go on
record as demanding that Caltrans go to what is called as
"serviceable immediately," rather than the reduced system that
Caltrans has proposed; the other safety issue relates to the main
item that deals with the proposals for how to do the work on the
Tube; that he has driven in the Tube in the days when there was
only one Tube and it was two-way traffic, and that is extremely
hazardous; those lanes are very narrow and it would not take much
to have a head-on collision; he is in favor of the approach of
closing both Tubes at night and doing the work at night; and to
accommodate the business areas, the City should attempt to get
Caltrans to arrange for the construction work to be done from
either 9:00 p.m. or 10:00 p.m., until 6:00 a.m.
President Appezzato requested that the Public Works Director take
under advisement the first comment when dealing with Caltrans.
The Public Works Director noted that it will probably be difficult
to convince Caltrans, because it would add about $34 Million to a
$30 Million Project.
President Appezzato stated that on December 23rd Caltrans,
merchants, the property manager for Marina Village, and Mr. Dosen
from South Shore all met at City Hall and had a major discussion;
the County was invited also to be part of the discussion because of
the Park Street Bridge; there was discussion on the Bridge and the
Minutes Regular
City Council Meeting
January 7, 1997
Tube, and agreement that closure should not be done at the same
time; there will be additional meetings on the subject; County is
funding the majority of the Park Street Bridge through federal
government funds; but there are major discussions to mitigate the
affects of the closure--the bridge closure and the Tube closure.
Councilmember Daysog stated that he would like to encourage the
shuttle service--if there is one--extend down Webster Street; that
a shuttle may also be a way to get Marina Village employees to
frequent Webster Street more often; and that we may want to think
of a shuttle service as a long term economic development
opportunity, and use Caltrans funds in the short term.
Councilmember Kerr stated she knows that making it fully seismic
safe after a seismic event doubles the cost, and the amount of
money is large; on the other hand, if we have a serious earthquake
and end up with something where people can crawl or walk out
without losing their lives, but it is not useable for vehicular
traffic, Caltrans would spend another $30 Million redoing it and
realize they should have spent the $64 Million in the first place;
and she would like staff to emphasize that it may not be the
cheapest solution to make it just partially safe, and convey that
to Caltrans.
Vice Mayor DeWitt stated that the staff report indicates the City,
merchants and various groups are still working on various
alternatives; therefore, he would like to have some updated
information as to what alternatives the community has come up with;
that it appears Council this evening is not going to choose
Alternative one or two, but rather recommend to Caltrans that they
consider the various options.
President Appezzato stated that the final decision is Caltrans',
and the City is trying to influence Caltrans to do the work the way
in which the City would like it done.
The Public Works Director stated that a committee has been
appointed of the people most greatly affected; it plans to have
several meetings with staff and Caltrans; it is pursuing mitigation
for some of the main things they want; he does not know of any new
plans or alternatives; the two alternatives in the staff report are
the only ones so far deemed feasible by Caltrans.
President Appezzato stated that two-way traffic, as stated by Mr.
Roberts, is extremely dangerous; on the second day, people will
forget that there is two-way traffic, and an accident closes the
Tube for one whole day; closing one at a time or at night, trying
Monday thru Friday, Tuesday thru Saturday, twenty hours of work,
two ten-hour shifts, and night time closure are being looked at;
Minutes Regular
City Council Meeting
January 7, 1997
all the options are being looked at; merchants and residents will
be involved in coming up with a closure that is best suited; Park
Street Bridge is a little more difficult because they are talking
full closure and partial closure; with partial closure, there would
be 39 days of full closure; there is discussion of one leaf up, and
the other leaf being worked on; the County is responsible for the
bridges; and meetings have been heavily attended by a lot of people
to try to mitigate the effects of both the closures.
Vice Mayor DeWitt stated that he noticed from the staff
recommendation that the City is merely communicating in writing to
Caltrans the areas indicated in the recommendation.
The Public Works Director stated that staff would like Council's
support for the direction indicated in the report.
Vice Mayor DeWitt moved that Council urge Caltrans to continue
working with the City; that Caltrans review additional alternatives
in the recommendation; that Council oppose having the retrofit work
conflict with other construction work; and that Council direct the
Public Works Director to correspond with Caltrans directly
regarding these issues, and immediately transmit our preferences in
writing.
Councilmember Lucas seconded the motion.
Under discussion and in response to President Appezzato'S inquiry
regarding public notice, the City Attorney stated that discussions
on the matter should be given notice.
Vice Mayor DeWitt stated that the Council should also go on record
that it wants the Tubes retrofit at the highest level.
Councilmember Daysog stated that he would like to amend the motion
to include that the Public Works Director look into the matter of
extending shuttle service down Webster Street.
Vice Mayor DeWitt and Councilmember Lucas agreed to amend said
motion accordingly.
On the call for the question, the motion carried by unanimous voice
vote - 5.
(97-11) 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.
Minutes Regular
City Council Meeting
January 7, 1997
Pat Bail, Alameda Babe Ruth Hardball Committee, stated that she has
concerns that Council needs to address before accepting the Field,
even provisionally; we did not pay for "adequate" drainage, we paid
for superior; this Field has been fraught with difficulty from the
beginning; there are still issues that she believes are important;
she has asked numerous times whether the Field can be rolled,
because the Field is lumpy; there are problems with the footing on
the fence, and they tell her the fence is now guaranteed for two
years; she has met with staff and gotten inadequate answers; she
believes Council needs to ask staff some hard questions; the
specifications were not adequate to the task; there are many
mistakes on this Field; why would we consider paying this gentleman
the money we owe him, when the City is considering litigation
against him; her recommendation is this money not be paid to the
contractor, and if he sues the City for non - payment, we need to sue
very big time for not performing' his job adequately.
The Interim City Manager stated that this was a very complicated
project, involving a number of public agencies; besides the City,
the Peralta Community College District, and the State of
California; additionally, we have some very passionate baseball
committee members who worked with staff to make this project come
about; he believes there are some differences of opinion really
between the Peralta College District and City staff in terms of
whether or not the Field is acceptable at this point; he has
communicated with the Public Works Director and asked specifically
questions that were raised by Peralta Colleges, and he is satisfied
with the answers that he has provided that the Field is as it ought
to be and according to Specification; he also spoke to Pat Bail
this evening and one of her questions to him was withholding
$10,000 from final payment is really nothing, and he indicted that
it would not be inappropriate to increase the amount of dollars
that are withheld from the Contractor up to $50,000 to show good
faith to the various parties to this effort, but, as far as the
City staff is concerned, this project is to the point where it
needs to be accepted with the retention either recommended or
increased as he proposed.
In response to President Appezzato's inquiry, the Public Works
Director stated that the conditional acceptance allows the City to
pay the retention monies; there is about $100,000 owed, and if the
Contractor has completed the work, he can demand the City to pay.
The Contractor has at least one item that has been determined to
cost about $10,000; holding back the $10,000 was intended if he did
not finish that, and the City could finish itself.
Minutes Regular
City Council Meeting
January 7, 1997
In response to President Appezzato, the Public Works Director
stated that staff has inspected and found only the one flaw with a
few items still left on a punch list; if there are some items on
the punch list, it might make him do those faster; fixing the lawn
probably would not be done this time of year, but at an appropriate
time when you can replant; the only thing that might be faster
would be if there were some things on the punch list that he truly
has not done yet, and he does not believe there are many of those;
and staff has a difference of opinion with Ms. Bail's.
President Appezzato inquired where the State Architect is on the
matter.
The Public Works Director stated that the City is dealing with its
Architect and the State Architect; the City's Architect is
obligated to get the State to sign off; he believes that the City's
Architect is almost there; the City has potential litigation
against its Architect; and he does not believe the City has any
potential litigation against the Contractor.
President Appezzato inquired whether the problems were the
responsibility of the Architect, and not the Contractor.
The Public Works Director stated that is his understanding; the
City is going from a legal standpoint.
The City Attorney stated that the Contract obligates progress
payments for work completed; to retain money, there must be a
rational basis; for example, if there is a punch list where there
are unfinished items or items with specific problems; she
understands that staff has done an evaluation and came up with
$10,000 and that is a rational basis; City Manager indicates that
there may be a rational basis to withhold up to $50,000; what needs
to be done if it is to be increased beyond that, is to come up with
a rational basis for withholding more money; and the only thing
that the City has agreed is that it would look to the Architect for
discovery process to find out who caused all of the other problems;
while the initial opinion from the experts is that the Architect
caused the problems by design defect, there is a lot of "he did
this, he did that, he did the other thing" still going on, so she
would not preclude litigation against the Contractor for things
other than soils; however, at this point, the opinion is that the
problems were caused by the Architect.
President Appezzato stated that Ms. Bail indicates that she does
not find the Field suitable; and he inquired how that matter would
be addressed. He further stated that there are people who are
actually playing on the Field, or looking at the Field, and see
problems.
Minutes Regular
City Council Meeting
January 7, 1997
The Interim City Manager stated that Ms. Bail began by saying that
the field was suppose to be a Class A Hardball Field; that was how
the field was originally intended; when the project was put out to
bid, the cost was much higher than the money available; with the
assistance of the baseball community, we negotiated a number of
parts of the project out of the contract; including the bleachers,
dressing rooms, and a number of things; so the project is
incomplete, in the sense that it is not what was originally
envisioned; there is a Phase 2, Phase 3 and Phase 4, which will be
brought back for financing remaining issues; so, in that sense, it
is not what the baseball community expected; in terms of the
playing field, it is playable; field has had tournament play on it;
now, it is a simple matter of opinion as to what level of
expectation people had for the playing field; just as in the Golf
Course, some people like the greens fast, and some people like them
slow; and he believes this matter is a difference of opinion.
In response to Mayor Appezzato, the Public Works Director stated
that both the Contractor and Architect are, bonded.
The City Attorney stated that the City Council acted in Closed
Session to authorize the pursuit of litigation against the
Architect, and evaluation of litigation against the contractor.
Councilmember Daysog inquired whether there is a standard, by which
playing fields are classified - -a higher authority that designates
a standard; and absent that, could we not compare our baseball
field with what the baseball community believes are Class A
facilities in the Bay Area; and thereby judge whether it is a Class
A facility.
The Public Works Director stated that the answer has to be two-
fold; we gave directions to the Architect to design a Class A
Field; we then reduced some of those, because the prices were so
high; the Contractor basically was obligated to do the work as
called for in the plans and specifications; and our staff and the
Architect believe that he has done that, with the minor exceptions
of the punch list items; so if there is a- problem as to whether it
is Class A field or not, his guess is it would be more the
Architect's problem, than the Contractor's problem.
Councilmember Daysog inquired whether a Class A field stil
be worked toward.
could
The Public Works Director stated that he is sure it was the desire
and the expectations all the way through; at this point in time,
the Architect who designed it and the staff who did final
inspections on it, believe that the Contractor has met the
specifications.
Minutes Regular
City Council Meeting
January 7, 1997
Councilmember Daysog stated that if we move into some kind of legal
action, we should at least research whether there is a standard by
which different baseball fields are measured.
Councilmember Lucas stated that to her the standard is determined
by someone like Ms. Bail, who is the authority on baseball in the
City; if Ms. Bail states the field is lumpy, she takes her word for
it; she believes it would cost over $10,000 to remedy the lumps, so
withholding $10,000 is not enough; and she cannot take the staff's
opinion on this matter.
The Interim City Manager stated that the way you cure the
undulations in the field, is by rolling the field and applying sand
to it; and then the grass grows through the sand.
The Public Works Director stated, responding to the City Manager's
comment, that is normally a maintenance procedure, due to irregular
settlements; and it would be expected to be done through the years
to keep the field in good shape.
Ms. Bail stated that this matter has been an issue since the
original grass was torn up and the second drainage system put in;
throughout the World Tournament, she had asked staff and the
maintenance people at the College if they could roll the ` field;
they stated the field had been rolled twice with a five-hundred-
pound roller; and that they were not going to do anymore because
the lumps were not lumpy enough, and rolling of the field would not
solve the problem, and that part of the problem was that bay mud
retains water and moisture. Ms. Bail further stated that there is
no maintenance agreement on the field between the College and the
City; the field is not being maintained properly; there are a lot
of issues; and as far as the contractor meeting the plans and
specifications, that would have to left open to a very broad
interpretation of what his job was, that there are things on the
punch list which need addressing, such as: drains were not done
right in the dugouts where the drinking fountains are located; and
there are several issues that have been on the punch -list for
months. The field is a Class A facility and beautiful; the whole
point from the baseball community's viewpoint was that we were
going to spend the money, put the drainage in right, put the
playing surface in right, because you cannot go back and fix it
later; the sprinkler heads are not right; the Contractor was
responsible for doing that, and making sure it was right.
The Mayor inquired whether Peralta College would accept a
maintenance agreement, if the City accepts the work.
Minutes Regular
City Council Meeting
January 7, 1997
The City Attorney responded that acceptance would not effect the
agreement; the June, 1991 agreement states that the College is
obligated to maintain the field by qualified district personnel;
what is in dispute, is the share for payment of the cost; she
understands their position is that they do not have an obligation
to maintain until the field is accepted.
Councilmember Lucas suggested that the staff work with Ms. Bail and
come to some resolution; she cannot authorize payment at this
point.
Councilmember Kerr stated that there is nothing more irritating
than trying to play high level ball of any kind, and not have a
surface on which you can judge which way the ball is going to
bounce, which can seriously effect the results of the competition;
and a generous estimate should be made on how much it might cost to
pay for this [situation], and have that as a hold back.
Earl Peacock, Alameda, stated that he wants to support Ms. Bail; he
went out to the field when it first failed, and there were ponds
all over it; they made the Contractor dig trenches and put in drain
pipes; it was a third rate job; the Contractor left the field lumpy
and every dime should be held until he finishes the job.
Gerhard Degemann, Alameda, stated that $10,000 is not enough to
correct the situation.
The Interim City Manager stated that maybe the Council could delay
action for a couple of weeks to allow staff to meet with Mrs. Bail
to review conditions at the field and to reach some agreement; and
the matter brought back to Council.
Councilmember Lucas moved that Council accept the report, and staff
bring the matter back to Council.
Vice Mayor DeWitt seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous
voice vote - 5.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON- AGENDA (Public Comment)
(97 -12) Mimi Fruehan, SAPID - Alameda Unified School District,
stated that the District has been involved in the school -age
parenting program for twenty years; that the missing link in the
program is housing; when the cooperative living program first
started six months ago, they realized it would be a solution to the
housing problem; and that the District is in support of the
program, and hope that Council will honor this request.
Minutes Regular
City Council Meeting
January 7, 1997
6
(97-13) Jon Schiller, Xanthos, stated that every time Xanthos has
moved, there have been petitions by neighbors with the idea that
Xanthos houses heroin addicts, provides detox services--all sorts
of various rumors; that the proposal to house six young women and
their kids, who are committed to living an independent life and do
not want to live off the government the rest of their lives, is
good; folks need to sit down and talk with each other and really
understand the facts; and he urges Council, neighbors, residents
and those helping to support the program, to work the matter out;
it is an excellent program.
(97-14) Sue Field, Alameda, stated that the neighbors° concerns
regarding the Elm Street Project are: it is a residential
neighborhood, congestion on the street is quite bad, and Elm Street
has very little parking available.
(97-15) Sally Rudloff, Alameda, read a letter written by Diane
Alexander, Alameda, SAPID Board Member, which stated support for
the cooperative living program.
(97-16) Tina Kreitz, Alameda Unified School District/SAPID,
stated that the cooperative living program could limit the number
of cars allowed its residents; and strong restrictions would be
placed on the residents.
(97-17) Cynthia Burnett, President, California Co-Housing
Corporation, stated that the neighbors should contact her and Jan
Hanson, Coordinator for the project, with concerns; the citizens
want the students to be taken care of and provided with this
opportunity; and much of the information circulating in the
neighborhood is erroneous.
(97-18) Jane Hanson, Coordinator of the Elm Street Project,
stated that she is sure at some point in the near future they will
be able to come to the City Council with a successful project.
(97-19) Karen Guthrie, Alameda, stated that she helped with
writing and funding the program twenty years ago under former
Governor Reagan; that the SAPID Program is one of the model
programs in the State; and that everyone should be excited that
this is a step forward to help out students to be productive
citizens.
(97-20) Larry Schulz, Alameda, Chair, Advisory Committee of the
School Age Parenting and Infant Development Program, stated that
the program provides assistance and a bit of help; the proposal is
just another way to assist people who are trying to better their
lives, the lives of their children and the lives of the community
in the future.
Minutes Regular
City Council Meeting
January 7, 1997
7
(97-21) Gary McAfee, Alameda, stated that it has been his intent
to offer Alamedans a low-cost sprinkler installation; the City
charges $75 for a single pipe to be put in a front yard; in
consideration of a user friendly system, an exterior timer seemed
to be the preferable thing; he developed an exterior box to connect
next to the service panel of the house; it is easy for gardeners
and others to get to; inside the box is a separate electric plug
for an extension cord for mowers, blowers, etc.; the cost of
installation is between $100 and $125; the box is $65.00; and that
he is asking for consideration to do something about the front yard
sprinkler situation, and that the system become a standard for all
sprinkler installers.
(97-22) Allen Derr, Alameda, stated that at the December 3, 1996
Council Meeting, the Council directed that a committee get together
to check on the Mastick Senior Center (lease matter]; that, to his
knowledge, it has died and should be resurrected.
The Mayor stated that Frank McCormack was to meet with the Interim
City Manager.
(97-23) Earl Peacock, Alameda, stated that he is willing to
extend his knowledge and talent as a pro-bono representative of the
Council in any further correction to the Hardball Facility.
(97-24) Earl Peacock, Alameda, stated that Alameda should not
have any financial responsibility for the $48,000 retrofit work on
the Park Street Bridge; that the County does not state how it will
pay back the loan; that there is no signed loan document from
Oakland; and Alameda should go after the money and get it back.
President Appezzato requested the Interim City Manager to provide
a report on the matter in due course.
(97-25) Susan McCormack, Alameda, stated that Ordinance No. 2714,
N.S., Section 13-1.2, changed the Uniform Building Code of the
State of California to limit the life of a building permit to 365
days; a building project cannot always be completed within a one
year timeframe; the 20th of January will be end of the first year
of the Ordinance; the Building Department will need to begin
sending out letters to all the building permit holders that fall
under this realm; the Uniform Building Code still reads that if
work starts within 180 days of the issuance of a building permit,
and you do not stop for a period of longer than six months, the
permit continues in force; the Ordinance reads that the building
permit dies at the end of one year after being issued; the
situation does not encourage historic preservation in our town; it
does encourage fast and sloppy work; and she requests that the
Council agendize the item for review, and possibly repealing it.
Minutes Regular
City Council Meeting
January 7, 1997
(97-26) Neil P. Sweeney, Alameda, announced upcoming local
events, including Chamber of Commerce Mixer.
(97-27) Gerhard Degemann, Alameda, stated that ABC's Nightline
aired a television program on the computer crash in the year 2000;
that because computers are only programmed to the year 1999, it is
believed the crash will occur because the United States and cities
are not preparing by reprogramming computers; and he wonders what
kind of precautionary measure City staff has taken.
President Appezzato inquired whether staff will report back to
Council on the matter.
The Interim City Manager responded in the affirmative.
COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS (Communications from Council)
(97-28) Consideration of Mayor's nomination for appointment to
the Housing and Building Code Hearing and Appeals Board.
Mayor Appezzato nominated Gabriel Longoria.
(97-29) President Appezzato announced the following appointments
to regional agencies:
Alameda County Lead Abatement Joint Powers Authority Board
Vice Mayor DeWitt and Councilmember Kerr
Alameda County Waste Management Authority
Mayor Appezzato and Councilmember Daysog
Assn. of Bay Area Governments
Councilmember Lucas
League of California Cities
Councilmember Lucas
Alameda County Congestion Management Agency
Vice Mayor DeWitt and Mayor Appezzato
Alameda County Board of Supervisors Transportation Planning
Committee
Councilmember Kerr
The Private Industry Council for Alameda County
Councilmember Daysog
The Alameda County Airport Land Use Commission
Mayor Appezzato
Minutes Regular
City Council Meeting
January 7, 1997
The Bay Area Air Quality Control Board
Vice Mayor DeWitt.
(97-30) Mayor Appezzato stated that staff should get back to the
Council on funding for the Harbor Bay Ferry by subsidy; there have
been a number of correspondence regarding the ferry; staff needs to
look at the Charter; the ferry is run by a private enterprise,
however, has some Alameda assistance until September 30th, when the
ferry will not be operative without funding; staff should report on
what is being done to solicit funding subsidies--County, State, and
federal dollars; the report should include the history of the
ferry, including how it originated with the Settlement Agreement
and that the responsibility was, in fact, the developer's; also how
the matter evolved and where we are now; staff may also need to
look at other options; e.g., a special assessment district; report
should include how the "gated" community in the future will be
affected--the portion that has limited access, and the affect on
the Cross Airport Roadway; transportation and access are necessary
for a ferry system; September 30th will be upon us and we need to
know what funds, if any, are available in the City of Alameda.
Councilmember Daysog stated that the federal government is going
through another revamping of its transportation bill; the previous
bill in 1992, is coming to an end in 1997; perhaps there could be
a policy discussion in terms of making sure that there is money
available for the ferry.
ADJOURNMENT
(97-31) There being no further business before the City Council,
President Appezzato adjourned the meeting in honor [and memory] of
Edwin A. Clancy, Esq., former volunteer attorney with the City
Attorney's Office.
Meeting was adjourned at 10:34 p.m.
* * *
Respectfully submitted
DIANE B. FELSCH, CMC
City Clerk
The agenda for this meeting was posted in advance in accordance
with the Brown Act.
Minutes Regular
City Council Meeting
January 7, 1997