1992-04-07 Regular CC MinutesREGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ALAMEDA
APRIL 7, 1992
The meeting convened at 7:41 p.m. (following the meeting of the
Housing Authority Board of Commissioners) with President Withrow
presiding. Councilmember Lucas led the Pledge of Allegiance and
Reverend Wilfred Hodgkin gave the invocation.
ROLL CALL - Present: Councilmembers Arnerich, Camicia, Lucas,
Roth, and President Withrow - 5.
Absent: None.
ANNOUNCEMENT OF CLOSED SESSION ACTION
92-216 Mayor Withrow announced that Council adjourned to Closed
Session at 7:05 p.m., to consider:
- Personnel Matters, Appointment, Employment and Evaluation of an
Appointed City Employee, pursuant to Government Code 54957 of the
Brown Act: Mayor Withrow stated no action was taken.
[Attendance: Councilmembers Arnerich, Camicia, Lucas, Roth and
Mayor Withrow - 5. Absent: None.]
PROCLAMATIONS AND SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY.
92-217 Presentation of Certificates of Appointment to Sally Ann
Talarico and Iris I. Watson, new Members of the Transportation
Advisory Committee.
Mayor Withrow presented Certificates of Appointment to Ms.
Talarico and Ms. Watson.
92-218 Presentation of Certificates of Recognition for Student
Participants in Alameda Youth in Government Day.
Mayor Withrow reviewed program for the Youth in Government Day and
recognized Carolyn Knudtson, Recreation Supervisor, who planned the
event. Ms. Knudtson further detailed the activities of the day,
and introduced the students, to whom Mayor Withrow presented
Certificates.
92-219 Proclamation Designating April 22, 1992, as "Save the Bay on
Earth Day."
Mayor Withrow proclaimed April 22, 1992, as the beginning of a
concerted effort to save the bay by stopping storm water pollution
which requires citizen support to promote proper use of storm
drains and preservation of resources.
CONSENT CALENDAR
*92-220 Minutes of the Regular Council Meeting of March 17, 1992.
Approved.
April 7, 1992
*92-221 Report from Assistant City Attorney recommending Adoption
of the Grievance Procedure as required by the Americans with
Disabilities Act. Accepted.
*92-222 Report from Public Works Director recommending acceptance
of work by Gateway Landscape Construction, Inc. for Landscape
Improvements for Mecartney Road/Aughinbaugh Way. Accepted.
*92-223 Report from Public Works Director recommending acceptance
of work by Gateway Landscape Construction, Inc. for Landscape
Improvements for Shoreline Park, Phase 3A. Accepted.
*92-224 Report from the Community Development Director regarding
Staggering of Terms for the Economic Development Commission.
Accepted.
*92-225 Report from the Community Development Director recommending
Creation of an Advisory Role for Cities within Alameda County's
Joint Training Partnership Act Program. Accepted.
*92-226 Report from Police Chief regarding number of dogs per
household. Accepted.
*92-227 Resolution No. 12222. "Endorsing a Revised Voting
Structure for Congestion Management Agency." (Mayor Withrow)
Adopted.
*92-228 Resolution No. 12223. "Authorizing Application to Office
of Criminal Justice Planning for a Community Crime Resistance
Program Grant Award, School Resource Officer Program." Adopted.
*92-229 Ordinance No. N.S. "Adopting the 1992 Edition of
the City of Alameda Municipal Code and Repealing Ordinance No.
535, New Series (Alameda Municipal Code Adopted April 4, 1935)."
Introduced.
*92-230 Ordinance No. , N.S. "Amending Exhibit "A" to
Ordinance No. 2578 Relating to Certain Fees and Charges for
Various City Services and Permits by Adding Fees for Sale of
Alameda Municipal Code and Yearly Municipal Code Supplement
Subscription." Introduced.
*92-231 Resolution No. 12224. "Amending Master Fee Resolution No.
12191 Establishing Fees for Various City Services Relating to Sale
of the City of Alameda Municipal Code and Yearly Supplement
Subscription to the City of Alameda Municipal Code." Adopted.
*92-232 Bills, certified by the City Manager to be true and correct
was ratified in the sum of $1,963,659.48.
AGENDA ITEMS
92-233 Public Hearing to consider Final Draft Source Reduction and
Recycling Element, and Household Hazardous Waste Element; and
Resolution No. 12225 "Adopting the City of Alameda Source
April 7, 1992
Reduction and Recycling Element and Household Hazardous Waste
Element." Adopted.
[Note: There were no public speakers on the issues.)
The Management
who noted the
requirements;
the final draft
Analyst introduced Larry Tyson, Brown & Caldwell,
report has been prepared in accordance with State
responses to State's comments are incorporated in
for the hearing.
In response to questions from Councilmember Lucas and President
Withrow, Mr. Tyson stated the report defines the program that
specifies activities for 1995 and for the year 2000; the program
will be looked at closely in 1995 to determine whether the City is
still on track to accomplish the 50% diversion requirement for the
year 2000; concerning implementation of educational program, the
Element calls for certain actions by the City as a participant in
the County's program.
In response to Councilmember Lucas, the Management Analyst stated
the County is in the process of attempting to obtain Use Permits
for a hazardous waste collection site near High Street and Highway
880.
Responding to President Withrow's request, the Management Analyst
noted the facility [High Street collection site] would collect
household hazardous waste, and would not be a dumpsite.
Replying to Councilman Arnerich, the Management Analyst stated
additional staff members noted in report would be funded from a
waste reduction surcharge on tax rates, and the report's Summary of
Program Costs stays constant because of a five-year contract.
Councilman Arnerich commented he has difficulty believing the costs
will be constant for four years.
In response to Councilmember Roth, Mr. Tyson explained conversion
factors are based on density of materials expected; density value
is used to calculate tonnage as charges are on a cubic yard basis.
Councilman Arnerich moved acceptance of the recommendation
included adoption of the resolution]. Councilmember
seconded the motion.
[which
Camicia
The motion was carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.
92-234 Public Hearing to consider Resolution approving Parcel Map
6188, located at 876 Oak Street, 878 Oak Street, 983 Park Street,
and 985 Park Street subject to Certain Conditions and Granting an
Exemption from Section 11-3118.1 of the Subdivision Ordinance
Requiring Undergrounding of Utilities; and Rezoning, R-91-23, to
change zoning of said parcel classified as R-4, Neighborhood
Residential District, to R-4-PD, Neighborhood Residential-Planned
Development District. Applicant: Gregory Bloom. [See 92-236 for
Council action.]
April 7, 1992
92-235 Resolution
876 Oak Street,
Street subject to
Section 11-3118
Undergrounding of
No. 12226 "Approving Parcel Map 6188, located at
878 Oak Street, 983 Park Street, and 985 Park
Certain Conditions and Granting an exemption from
.1 of the Subdivision Ordinance Requiring
Utilities. [See 92-236 for Council action.]
92-236 Ordinance No. N.S. Reclassifying and Rezoning
Certain Properties within the City of Alameda by Amending Zoning
Ordinance No. 1277 for that Property located at 876 Oak Street,
878 Oak Street, 983 Park Street and 985 Park Street. Introduced.
Linda Soulages, Alameda, noted the related ordinance should reflect
983, rather than 933, Park Street; she, the property owners and
Planning, Building and Fire Departments together worked out planned
unit development; and the homes under discussion qualify for new
program under Mortgage Credit Certificate (MCC) for first-time
homebuyers.
Councilmember Lucas commended Ms. Soulages and the property
owners; and stated this is the type of program she likes to see in
Alameda.
In response to President Withrow, Ms. Soulages stated the City has
been given $5,000,000 for the (MCC) program.
Councilmember Roth discussed sewer lines for the four houses with
Public Works Director who stated each house will have its own sewer
lines.
Councilmember Lucas moved approval of Parcel Map [Resolution No.
12226, 92-235]. Councilman Arnerich seconded the motion which was
carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.
Councilmember Lucas moved introduction of the related ordinance
with a change of street number from 933 to 983. Councilmember
Camicia seconded the motion which carried by unanimous voice vote -
5.
92-237 Report from Chair, Historical Advisory Board, (HAB)
requesting Council's guidance on establishing criteria for nominees
to the Official Naming List for City Facilities and Streets.
Councilman Arnerich stated the policy appears to be well outlined,
and is the direction in which to proceed, leaving [proposal of
names] in the department to be affected.
Councilmember Roth agreed the [policy] is quite good and he
not know why there is difficulty understanding the direction.
Councilmember Camicia stated Council recently renamed
facilities in town, and he believes HAB is conveying that
would like Council to follow the criteria; the message he
like to deliver to the HAB is that they should suggest names.
Councilmember Roth noted a street naming policy is referred to and
yet other Boards and Commissions can submit names.
April 7, 1992
does
many
they
would
The City Manager noted the HAB's role is to provide a pool of names
for selection by various Boards, Commissions, or groups outside
City Hall; the Board's concern is that names be taken from the
pool.
Councilmember Roth stated he would advise the Board to put any name
they wish on the list and provide it for Council's consideration.
To Councilmember Lucas, the City Manager replied the
provides for groups and individuals in the community
recommendations to Boards and Commissions.
Councilmember Camicia stated he believes the HAB would
names to go through channels.
Councilman Arnerich stated HAB would like names submitted to them
for inclusion in the pool, rather than bypassing the list by
suggesting and approving [names] at a [Council] meeting.
The City Manager added he believes HAB would also like criteria or
reasons why individuals should be selected, rather than researching
background.
President Withrow stated Council is not subordinate to any advisory
body; he does not see much of an issue.
Councilman Arnerich moved the recommendation [that Council guide
the Board on criteria and policy] and the policy for the naming of
City property. Councilmember Camicia seconded the motion which was
carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Arnerich, Camicia,
Lucas and President Withrow - 4. Noes: Councilmember Roth - 1.
Absent: None.
procedure
to make
like the
92-238 Report from Assistant City Manager recommending execution of
agreement with Simon Martin-Vegue Winkelstein Moris (SMWM) to
develop Cost Estimates and Conceptual Design for a Carnegie
Building Remodel/Addition.
Rose Ann White, Acting President, Library Board, urged Council to
go with first option [in report] to hire SMWM for a conceptual
design and cost estimates to remodel the Carnegie Building,
providing voters with information needed for advisory vote.
Nancy Lewis, Member, Library Board, stated if the Library site is
to be placed on the ballot, voters must have more facts; facts
comparable to those on Linoaks must be made available on
remodelling and expansion of Carnegie, and option one is best way
to obtain those figures.
David Plummer, Alameda, stated Permit Facilitator is a registered
and practicing architect who worked in Carnegie Library many years
and cost would be less than half of SMWM; noted San Francisco
library receiving funds from State was designed in-house;
suggested fact-finding library design committee comprised of two
Library Board members, two Committee to Retain Carnegie Library
April 7, 1992
members, and a Chair from neither group.
Judy Pollard, Alameda, protested using same architects (SMWM) who
worked on Linoaks for study of Carnegie expansion if there is
remotest possibility they will be influenced by findings on the
Linoaks; believes now is time to give choices to be weighed and
compared.
Christopher Buckley, Alameda, urged support for development of cost
estimates on conceptual design regarding Carnegie; whoever is
selected should have expertise, including structural engineering,
perhaps subcontractor to address seismic/structural problems, as
unnecessary design elements are often included which greatly
increase costs; should have public input, perhaps oversight
committee suggested earlier; State Historic Building Code and
codes for older buildings e.g., Uniform Code for Building
Conservation should be addressed in study.
Councilmember Lucas stated firm [SMWM] mentioned in option one has
inherent conflict of interest and would not be proper for this
project; she sees no reason in-house architect [City Permit
Facilitator] cannot be used, who would cost less and have
structural information available, and could work with committee
composed of five people, suggested in letter from Committee to
Retain Carnegie Library, and that would avoid problem of Linoaks
where criticism was voiced after plan was completed.
President Withrow stated whether real or perceived, there is no
question an issue exists that a perceived conflict of interest is
possible.
Councilmember Roth disagreed, and stated he believes there is no
conflict; questioned who will analyze parking structure; 60% of
Alameda voted for Library Bond, Prop 85, knowing Alameda was
planning to build new library and he sees no reason to change at
this time; at the last meeting Council agreed to wait for State's
action [regarding SB 1230] and now issue is back on agenda; any
motion made should state the issue cannot be brought back on an
agenda without agreement of three Councilmembers.
Councilmember Lucas noted people voted for Prop 85, however,
received no money from it; at this point the Linoaks does not
appear feasible and she believes an alternative should be offered;
seismic work on Carnegie must be done regardless of whether or not
the building will be used for a library.
Councilmember Camicia stated the intention [of the recommendation
before Council] is to present information parallel to information
on Linoaks; Council must provide information for voters by August
7 in order to go on November ballot and that is why the issue is on
the agenda; someone must be found to do an impartial analysis of
Carnegie so citizens can compare cost of rehabilitation with cost
and merits of Linoaks site.
Councilmember Lucas moved to authorize the City Manacar to proceed
with option 3 and develop cost for the Carnegie [remodel/addition].
April 7, 1992
Councilman Arnerich stated that, after years of deliberation,
Council made decision for a new library at Linoaks site and he will
wait for the outcome of SB 1230, and if that should fail, perhaps
wait another four years for the State to get some monies and by
then perhaps provide Carnegie alternative at that time, but for
now, he is commited toward proceeding with new library.
Councilmember Camicia stated if Council does nothing, it allows
proponents of the Carnegie [Library] to attempt to put an
initiative on the ballot; and he would like to find some way to
provide impartial information to citizens.
Councilmember Roth stated there is no way to please them
[proponents].
Following Council discussion, Councilmember Lucas stated her motion
was for Option 3 with use of City Permit Facilitator. MOTION
FAILED FOR LACK OF A SECOND.
President Withrow stated, hearing no second, he defers to another
motion.
Councilmember Roth moved to "let it go on through" and see what the
State is doing and, in the meantime, not allow this [issue] to come
back on Council agenda until Council hears from the State and three
Councilmembers agree to place the issue back on agenda.
Councilmember Lucas queried the City Attorney regarding the
legality of not being allowed to place the matter on a future
agenda as was suggested by Councilmember Roth. The City Attorney
stated Council majority could direct the City Manager to not place
an item on agenda; and stated the issue could be brought back
under New Business or Written Communications.
Councilmember Lucas noted she takes exception to the City
Attorney's opinion.
Councilman Arnerich seconded Councilmember Roth's motion.
Councilmember Camicia stated he does not agree with preventing a
Councilmember from placing items on the agenda.
Councilmember Lucas noted that she did not put the matter on the
evening's agenda.
Councilman Arnerich stated he agrees with the right [a
Councilmember has) to place the matter on the agenda; but
questions when the matter will be resolved as it has been discussed
for years.
Councilmember Camicia stated two polarized groups are present in
the situation and that is not a way to build a library.
Councilmember Lucas commented until [the City] has an adequate
library, a problem will exist in the community.
April 7, 1992
Councilmember Camicia stated Council should attempt to bring the
two groups together and see if some common ground, at least on the
ground rules of this issue, can be reached until the outcome in
Sacramento is determined.
Councilman Arnerich stated he does not like to see the issue come
back on [agenda] but would like to see the prerogative of Ms.
Lucas being able to place this [issue] on if she wishes to.
Councilmember Roth stated he would withdraw that [part of his
original motion]; he simply wanted to make the point that he is
tired of the issue coming back.
Councilmember Camicia stated he would support the motion if it
includes bringing people together and Council together and at least
work out some ground rules on how to operate; bring "these" people
together, appoint a sub-committee of the Council.
President Withrow stated he would take that for action.
Councilmember Roth stated the motion is to wait until the State
determines what it is doing with SB 1230 and that we form, you
[Mayor Withrow] form the committee to set ground rules on how we
behave.
The motion was carried by the following voice vote: Ayes:
Councilmembers Camicia, Roth and President Withrow - 3. Noes:
Councilmembers Arnerich and Lucas - 2. Absent: None.
President Withrow clarified that the portion of Councilmember
Roth's original motion regarding placement of the [Library] issue
on the agenda [in the future] was removed, and commented
preclusion, by having any agenda item controlled by the majority
indefinitely, is a dangerous precedent.
Councilmember Roth restated the motion that Council not take any of
these actions [in report], that Council postpone until after the
State determines what it is doing with SB 1230, and that the Mayor
appoint a Committee to set the ground rules on our behavior when we
do [return to the issue] again.
President Withrow called for a re-vote.
Councilmember Lucas stated she would like to point out that the
motion would result in being too late to put the Carnegie issue on
the ballot in time for an application under SB 1230; when SB 1230
is placed on the ballot, that will be too late to provide a viable
alternative to give citizens a choice between the Linoaks and the
Carnegie; her concern is that the effect will be that the City
will have the same library in the same condition.
The vote on the motion carried as follows: Ayes: Councilmembers
Arnerich, Camicia, Roth and President Withrow - 4. Noes:
Councilmember Lucas -1. Absent: None.
April 7, 1992
92-239 Report from Public Works Director recommending Approval of
Concept to revise Park Street Business District Parking Time Limit
Zones to be Two-Hour Signed Time Limit Zones and 30-Minute Metered
Zones.
Walt Smith, Alameda, stated he believes if all the meters are
removed, business will improve considerably in Alameda.
Ken Kaniye, Alameda, Owner, Bernardi Cleaners, requested he be
allowed to keep the two 30-minute green zones in front of his shop;
two-hour meters, or no meters, would ruin his business.
Frank Lopez, Owner, Silversword Jewelers, commented removal of
parking meters in Petaluma enhanced business; gave background of
efforts to remove meters and his participation; stated parking
citations are a deterrent to customers; he and committee
petitioned merchants and about 98% desire meters removed; urged
Council support.
Frank George, Pillow Park, stated 30-minute zones for businesses
that need them helps turnover; 2-hour free parking on Park Street,
and developed interest in parking lots would help [other]
businesses; he exhibited sturdy parking meter covers.
Darlene Banda, Alameda, stated parking meters are a symptom of a
bigger problem; she is concerned with employees who move from one
2-hour spot to another; also a better mix of businesses is needed.
Iva Burtleson, Alameda, stated meters were put in because there was
no place to park; if meters are taken out and time limits applied,
the time limits must be enforced.
Al Wright, President, Park Street Business Association, thanked
Council for consideration of matter and stated he is present to
answer questions.
Councilmember Camicia discussed the one-year trial with Mr. Wright
and meter-free Saturdays; and Mr. Wright stated there was no
2-hour time limit on meter-free Saturdays, otherwise the program is
similar.
Councilman Arnerich inquired if any figures show whether meter-free
Saturdays were financially beneficial to merchants. Mr. Wright
replied no figures are available and [obtaining figures] has not
yet been addressed by Park Street Parking Improvement Task Force.
President Withrow stated one year appears to be a reasonable trial
period, as changing behavior patterns takes time.
Councilmember Lucas inquired what will happen to the parking lots,
to which Mr. Wright stated it will depend upon how much parking is
available on the streets.
Councilmember Roth inquired what is the reason for the
and Mr. Wright replied the recession has made a differenc
April 7,
proposal;
e.
1992
Jan VanDusen, Alameda, stated City budget needs money so giving
away revenue is not feasible; inquired how much increase in sales
is necessary to make up City's loss of meter revenue; South Shore
businesses pay for parking; if merchants want meters removed, they
should reimburse City for revenue loss; employees would take free
parking spaces; Park Street needs a better business mix.
Councilman Arnerich and the City Manager discussed and produced
figures concerning loss of meter revenue.
Councilmember Roth stated the cost should consider City-wide meter
removal as other areas will want it.
Councilmember Camicia stated if the City goes to the 2-hour zones,
the citation level must be retained.
Bobby Adams, Ole's Waffle Shop, stated Saturday free meters
affected his shop very much; Park Street needs a boost and taking
meters off will help very much.
Doug Perry, Choices, stated he views the proposal as seriously
flawed; employees monopolize free parking spaces; meter
elimination in many places has been tried without success; the
attraction of a shopping center is a strong mix; consulting
experienced professionals before a decision is made may be
appropriate.
Responding to Councilmember Lucas's inquiry, Mr. Perry stated his
customers do not complain because he validates parking lot tickets.
Russell Chun, Alameda, stated Council should perhaps try bagging
meters for a year.
Bernard Rony, Alameda, stated meter parking lots are too far away
to be utilized; need to get employees into parking lots; would be
good to have 2-hour zone; also a 3-hour zone in underutilized
areas may bring in business.
Martha Beazley, Alameda, stated she is in favor of removing meters;
businesses need to be brought in; parking lots do not work; need
monthly parking and employees required to park in lots; urged
Council support removing meters.
Councilman Arnerich noted 96% of requests brought before Council in
the last four years by merchants have been met, and Council is not
anti-business.
James Stonehouse, representing Olga Adams Fashions; stated
meter-fee Saturday was a significant success; too many complaints
are received regarding meters which were placed to provide
turnover; customers are not comfortable coming into business
district and will not return.
Dolores Selby, Selby's Draperies, stated her business is greatly
affected by parking meters because a major purchase requires time;
favors 2-hour limit enforced; and employers have responsibility to
April 7, 1992
keep employees parking in appropriate area.
Diane Coler-Dark, Alameda, stated parking meters are not the
problem on Park Street; need to address parking lot usage; lots
have lost revenue; would like meters removed but not until
problems have been addressed; employers have responsibility to see
employees do not use parking spaces for customers who ultimately
pay the wages.
Ken Moffett, All-Right Parking, stated parking lots A and C have
been used; 125,170 cars have used Lots A and C in the last 17
months. Petaluma has a parking structure; in Spokane, merchants
requested in 6 months that meters be put back because of lack of
turnover; lots need more promotion; validation program is
available which helps.
Councilmember Lucas commented other communities have many signs for
parking lots; the Public Works Director noted more signs are being
placed.
Councilman Arnerich stated he believes there are problems:
Business District needs more mix, lots are working, employees park
on the street and rob the merchants and queried how that can be
corrected.
Councilmember Roth requested explanation of problems in enforcing
2-hour parking zones; and noted Council requested less-aggressive
ticketing but that appears to change with personnel.
The Police Chief stated ticketing zones are more labor intensive
because vehicles need to be marked then approached again for
ticketing; compared work involved in meter violation ticketing and
2-hour zoning; regarding aggressive ticketing, he noted some new
Parking Enforcement Technicians, but that management places
high-priority on establishing public relations in issuing
citations.
Councilmember Roth stated he wants to be sure Police continue to be
less-aggressive in citing, and inquired regarding permit parking.
The Police Chief responded permit parking is difficult to
administer; and has been looked into in the past.
Councilmember Roth suggested consideration of stickers [parking
permits] to allow people to park in areas where they live; and he
would like that to be on Council agenda in a month.
Councilmember Lucas stated customers become upset about [parking]
tickets which loses business; and inquired if less ticketing is
currently evident, to which the Police Chief replied that general
parking enforcement productivity is down about 20% throughout the
City.
President Withrow agreed removal of parking meters is not a panacea
but would help; bringing people back will take time; when they do
begin returning, more business will come in and improve the mix.
April 7. 1992
Councilmember Camicia stated he would like to move the
recommendation but would like more information when it comes back:
whether or not proposed concept helps business, what sales are in
the time period before this is instituted and at end of time
period, and regarding enforcement, how much more time necessary to
enforce, how many more technicians needed, whether six months or
year is necessary, and if whole City or [only] Park Street should
be considered.
President Withrow stated the motion as he hears it is to go ahead
[with the program] but to have the City Manager come back with a
system to monitor and provide reports to Council; a system that
would provide a reporting mechanism to reflect how the program is
working and recommendations to modify.
Councilmember Camicia stated he would like that to come back and,
it may be, that the starting point may not be July 1st or even
November 1st, but later.
Following brief Council discussion on timing involved, and the type
of report desired Councilmember Camicia stated he would like to see
the meters bagged and would like to make sure answers are
available.
Councilmember Lucas noted the recommendation is to begin July 1st;
she is willing to go with July 1 trial date but would like a
quarterly evaluation and not commit to one year at this time; she
is not sure the merchants and Park Street Business Association are
on the right track but would defer to them because they know Park
Street and their customers, and she is willing to try it.
Councilmember Roth inquired if she would agree to do Webster Street
and she replied, if West Alameda Business Association requests it,
she will.
Councilman Arnerich suggested acceptance of the recommendation,
with a starting date of September 1; a quarterly report be
provided; merchants work with City; and staff return to Council
within the next 60 days after working with the Park Street
Improvement Committee, and perhaps WABA.
Councilmember Lucas stated she cannot vote for that motion because
Webster Street is not represented and a motion should not be made
affecting Webster Street without their representatives here.
Councilmember Roth stated there is time by September 1 to return
with answers.
Councilmember Camicia stated perhaps he should withdraw his motion
and request staff come back in a month and address the comments
tonight and then a vote can be made from that information, and will
allow time to check with Webster Street.
Councilmember Lucas stated the merchants are asking for help now
and do not want this put over until September 1.
April 7, 1992
Councilman Arnerich inquired why they would not want to start it at
the time most advantageous for sales.
A response from the audience indicated they would like the program
started immediately.
Councilman Arnerich inquired if the program can be implemented on
July lst.
The Public Works Director stated staff noted in the report that the
intent between now and June was to continue working with the
Committee to come up with answers to most questions raised tonight;
the recommendation was to approve in concept and direct staff to
move ahead to develop a program for this, bring it back in June for
final approval with the hope of implementing it July lst and that
timetable can be met.
Councilman Arnerich moved the recommendation as submitted to
Council. Councilmember Lucas seconded the motion which was carried
by the following voice vote: Ayes: Councilmembers Arnerich,
Camicia, Lucas and President Withrow - 4. Noes: Councilmember
Roth - 1. Absent: None.
Council, by unanimous vote, moved to continue the meeting past
11:00 p.m.
92-240 Resolution No. 12227 "Urging Safeway Upon the Closure of
their Richmond, San Leandro and Fremont Warehouses to Allow their
Employees to follow their jobs to Tracy." (Councilmember Camicia)
Marty Frates, Business representative, Teamsters, Local 70,
representing Safeway drivers, Fremont Distribution Center,
requested Council to adopt the resolution so that employees are
afforded the opportunity to follow their jobs to Tracy.
In response to Councilman Arnerich, Mr. Frates stated Safeway has
given employees applications and selectively interviewed people for
jobs; some employees will be hired back, however, hundreds will
not.
Following Council discussion regarding the concern for older
tenured employees in particular, Councilman Arnerich moved to adopt
the resolution. Councilmember Camicia seconded the motion which
was carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.
92-241 Resolution No. 12228 "Objecting to the Housing Needs
Determination by the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) and
Requesting ABAG and the California Department of Housing and
Community Development (HCD) to Review and Modify the Methodology
used to Determine Regional Housing Allocations." (Councilmembers
Camicia and Lucas) Adopted.
Lawrence VanHook, Alameda, stated low- or moderate-income should be
April 7, 1992
represented, perhaps by Homeless Network, when such resolutions are
put together, to be sure correct wording and information is
included.
Clayton Guyton, Alameda, stated the resolution should not be
adopted because he questions whether the permanent assisted
residential units figure includes Navy housing; and raised other
questions concerning impaction and quotas.
Virginia Falconer, Alameda, stated over 10% of City's housing stock
consists of lower-income units, much higher than other communities,
understands ABAG methodology does not comply with the State,
supports resolution hoping methodology change would lead to greater
equalization of housing quotas among ABAG communities.
Ken Kovacs, Alameda, encouraged approval of the resolution.
Barbara Kerr, Alameda, addressed impaction, noting publicly owned
or assisted units in her neighborhood is 40% to 50%; construction
is needed that will result in property tax; people need to be
attracted who will pay increasing sales tax; average income level
in Alameda has been receding; and the City should promote
gentrification of older neighborhoods.
Councilmember Camicia stated the Government Code reflects that
availability of suitable sites must be taken into account; many
sites were reviewed in the past few months without finding suitable
sites; although 10% of City housing stock is dedicated to
low-income housing, ABAG still wants 1500 more units built in a
community with less than 30 vacant lots, which is virtually
impossible; the resolution must be passed and Council must see the
numbers are revisited.
Councilmember Lucas replied to Reverend VanHook that figures in the
resolution do not include temporary homeless shelters, only
permanent housing; and to Mr. Guyton that Navy housing is
included because it is assisted; the effect of low-household
income in our community is that when major projects come up, like
the Library, the City cannot fund them; there is a limit to what a
community can do if it wants to treat its residents fairly, and she
believes the limit has been reached; other communities need to
assume some of their fair share.
Councilman Arnerich stated Alameda has provided its fair share, and
that cannot be denied.
President Withrow stated Council must keep pressure on ABAG; the
City's views related to housing must be made known; at some point
council must address whether the City should continue to be a
dues-paying member of ABAG; it pays $8000 to $9000 a year;
support of other communities that have a like viewpoint should be
solicited.
Councilmember Camicia moved adoption of the resolution.
Councilmember Lucas seconded the motion which carried by unanimous
voice vote - 5.
April 7, 1992
92 -242 Ordinance No. 2591, N.S. "Reclassifying and rezoning
certain properties within the City of Alameda by amending Zoning
Ordinance No. 1277 for that property located at 3206, 3208, 3210,
3214, 3218 Encinal Avenue." Adopted.
Councilmember Roth moved adoption of the ordinance. Councilman
Arnerich seconded the motion which carried by unanimous voice vote
- 5.
92 -243 Ordinance No. 2592, N.S. "Reclassifying and rezoning
certain properties within the City of Alameda by amending Zoning
Ordinance No. 1277 for that property located at 826, 828, 831,
832, 842, 844, 908 Lincoln Avenue, 1545, 1544 -46, 1548, 1601 Ninth
Street, 1544 -46, 1545, 1547, 1549 Bay Street, 1547 Sherman Street,
1533 Lincoln Avenue, 1605, 1608, 1609 -11, 1610 Willow Street,
838 -840 Santa Clara Avenue, 1514, 1520, 1522, 1406, 1409 Ninth
Street, 911, 935, 937 -939, 1006 Central Avenue, 2011, 2015 Encinal
Avenue, 1114, 1116, 1120, 1205, 1209 Chestnut Street, and 1204,
1208 Lafayette Street." Adopted.
Councilmember Roth moved adoption of the ordinance.
President Withrow inquired if the Code allows passage of ordinances
without necessity of reading titles.
The City Attorney stated it can be done legally but believes the
Clerk's preference is to read [the titles] into the record, and
inquired if that is correct.
The City Clerk replied that is not a preference but believes
[reading titles] is mandated.
The City Attorney stated she would check into the matter and advise
Council by the next meeting.
Councilmember Lucas seconded the motion which was carried by
unanimous voice vote - 5.
92 -244 Ordinance No. 2593, N.S. "Reclassifying and rezoning
certain properties within the City of Alameda by amending Zoning
Ordinance No. 1277 for that property located at 1605, 1609, 1611
Ninth Street, 1610 Bay Street, 1611 Sherman Street, and 906, 910
Central Avenue." Adopted.
Councilmember Roth moved adoption. Councilman Arnerich seconded
the motion which was carried by unanimous voice vote- 5.
92 -245 Ordinance No. 2594, N.S. "Reclassifying and rezoning
certain properties within the City of Alameda by amending Zoning
Ordinance No. 1277 for that property located at 1528, 1530 Grand
Street, 2054 -6, 2059, 2111, 2113 Lincoln Avenue, 1522, 1523, 1524,
1527, 1532 Willow Street, 508 Westline Drive, and 89, 92 Maitland
Drive." Adopted.
Councilman Arnerich moved adoption. Councilmember Camicia seconded
April 7, 1992
the motion which was carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.
92-246 Ordinance No. 2595. N.S. "Reclassifying and rezoning
certain properties within the City of Alameda by amending Zoning
Ordinance No. 1277 for that property located at 512 Westline
Drive." Adopted.
Councilmember Roth moved adoption. Councilman Arnerich seconded
the motion which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.
92-247 Written Communication from Lois Hanna, Alameda, declining
the honor of having the main library named after her, suggesting
the name Alameda Free Library be retained, and the Children's
Library be named for her.
Councilmember Camicia so moved.
Councilmember Lucas noted that a related letter from the Board
[Friends of the Alameda Free Library, dated February 28th] suggests
rooms, rather than the Library, be named after persons.
Councilman Arnerich commented that the Friends of the Alameda Free
Library are saying that perhaps a wing or particular room could be
named after Lois Hanna; and it would be well worthwhile to take
under advisement, to accept the correspondence and send it back to
the Library Board.
Councilmember Camicia moved Councilman Arnerich's suggestion, and
to send it back to the Library Board and ask them to come up with a
recommendation. Councilman Arnerich seconded the motion which
carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.
NEW BUSINESS AND UNFINISHED BUSINESS
92-248 Reappointment of Arthur McKee to Finance Committee.
(Councilmember Camicia)
Mayor Withrow announced Councilmember Camicia's appointment of Mr.
McKee.
92-249 Reappointment of Gary Thomas to Finance Committee. (Mayor
Withrow)
Mayor Withrow announced his reappointment of Mr. Thomas.
Councilmember Camicia stated committee members' terms should be
concurrent with Councilmembers' terms by whom appointments have
been made.
Mayor Withrow requested the City Attorney to provide guidance at
the next Council Meeting on how to accomplish concurrent terms.
92-250 Vice Mayor Lucas inquired whether the Parking Lot at Webster
Street and Taylor Avenue will be completed by Neptune Beach Revival
Day, May 17th; the Public Works Director noted that the lot will
not ie completed for another two months.
April 7, 1992
92-251 Vice Mayor Lucas requested the Police Chief to prepare a
written report on a Commercial Neighborhood Watch Program at the
Shopping Center.
92-252 Vice Mayor Lucas inquired about the status of the sister
cities program. Mayor Withrow responded that his intent in
establishing sister cities is to have operating dialogues
interfacing in a number of areas throughout the City. Vice Mayor
Lucas stated she would like the community involved in selecting
sister cities, perhaps the Chamber of Commerce, School District,
and Service Clubs; suggested the press may wish to write on the
subject to solicit comments, and the issue could be agendized for
Council's consideration.
92-253 Councilman Arnerich requested resolution(s) on the next
agenda opposing the University of California's action regarding the
former President's retirement package, raising of tuition fees, and
expressed displeasure with nepotism in San Francisco Mayor Frank
Jordan's recent appointments.
92-254 Mayor Withrow announced that on April 18th, at the Naval Air
Station, a ceremony will be held in honor of General James
Doolittle.
ADJOURNMENT
President Withrow adjourned the meeting at 11:40 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
614d
DLANE B. FE SCH, CMC
City Clerk
The agenda for this meeting was posted 72 hours in advance.
April 7, 1992