1992-08-04 Regular CC MinutesMINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF THE ALAMEDA CITY COUNCIL
AUGUST 4, 1992
The meeting was convened at 7:55 p.m., with President Withrow
presiding. Councilmember Camicia led the Pledge of Allegiance.
ROLL CALL - Present: Councilmembers Arnerich, Camicia, Lucas,
Roth, and President Withrow - 5.
Absent: None.
ANNOUNCEMENT OF CLOSED SESSION ACTION.
Mayor Withrow announced Council met for a staff informational
meeting at 7:00 p.m., and convened in a Closed Session at 7:05 p.m.
to consider:
92-559 Significant Exposure to Litigation, pursuant to Subsection
(b) of Government Code Section 54956.9 of the Brown Act: Mayor
Withrow stated no action was taken.
PROCLAMATIONS AND SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY
92-560 Presentation of Certificates of Service to former Planning
Board Members Linda Larkin and Don Wolfe.
Mayor Withrow commended Mr. Wolfe and presented Certificate of
Service to him. Ms. Larkin was not present to receive her
Certificate.
92-561 Presentation of Certificate of Appointment to Ewart A.
Wetherill as Member of the Airport Operations Committee.
Mayor Withrow presented Certificate of Appointment to Mr.
Wetherill.
92-562 Presentation of Certificate of Appointment to Michael
Hellman as Member of the Mayor's Committee for the Disabled.
Mayor Withrow presented Certificate of Appointment to Mr. Hellman.
CONSENT CALENDAR
At the request of Councilman Arnerich, 92-570 report regarding
acceptance of work by M.F.Maher and 92-571 report regarding
acceptance of work by Mission Property Maintenance were removed
from the Consent Calendar for discussion.
Councilmember Camicia moved approval of the remainder of the
Consent Calendar. Councilmember Roth seconded the motion which was
carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.
Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk.
ALgusL 4, 1992
*92-563 Minutes of the Regular Council Meeting of July 21, 1992,
and the Special Council Meeting of June 25, 1992. Approved.
*92-564 Report from Public Works Director recommending acceptance
of work by Riley & Sons Construction for Minor Street Patching with
Asphalt Concrete for the Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 1992, No. P.W.
5-91-7. Accepted.
*92-565 Report from Public Works Director requesting additional
contingency appropriation for construction of Doolittle Drive
Widening, No. P.W. 6-90-10. Accepted.
*92-566 Resolution No. 12300 "Adopting a Drug Free Workplace
Policy. Adopted.
*92-567 Ordinance No. . N.S. "Amending the Alameda Municipal
Code by Amending Chapter II, Article 1, Section 2-1.7(d)
Authorizing the City Clerk to Summarize Ordinance Titles at City
Council Meetings." (Councilmember Roth) Introduced.
*92-568 Affidavit of City Manager and Chief of Police Pursuant to
Section 17-11 of the Charter of the City of Alameda for Filing.
Approved for filing.
*92-569 Ratified bills certified by the City Manager as true and
correct in the amount of $2,854,322.51.
92-570 Report from Public Works Director recommending acceptance of
work by M.F. Maher, Inc. for Repair of Portland Cement Concrete
Sidewalk, Curb, Gutter, and Driveway for the Fiscal Year Ending
June 30, 1992, No. P.W. 5-91-6. Accepted.
Councilman Arnerich stated the work orders and changes, although
necessary, constitute a large amount of overage from the original
bid amount.
The City Manager explained the amount per square foot did not
increase but new sections of sidewalk found to be hazardous, were
repaired.
The Public Works Director noted new project areas were completed at
very low prices.
Councilman Arnerich stated reports should include explanations for
Council.
Ron Hamlin, Alameda, commented about the quality of work of the
company, alleging damage was done adjacent to sidewalk work
accomplished by the company.
Councilmember Roth moved acceptance. Councilman Arnerich seconded
the motion which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.
92-571 Report from Public Works Director recommending acceptance of
August 4, 1992
work by Mission Property Maintenance for Landscape Maintenance of
Median Strips and Special Areas, No. P.W. 5-91-5.
Councilman Arnerich noted that Mission Property Maintenance has
been "put on notice," that their work is under close scrutiny.
The Public Works Director stated the company has been notified
clearly that it is being monitored closely.
Councilman Arnerich moved acceptance. Councilmember Camicia
seconded the motion which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.
AGENDA
92-572 Resolution No. 12301 "Appointing Katsuyuki (Kats) Sakamoto
as Member of the City Library Board." Adopted.
The City Clerk administered the Oath of Office.
Councilmember Lucas moved adoption of the resolution. Councilmember
Roth seconded the motion which was carried by unanimous voice vote
- 5.
92-573 Resolution No. 12302 "Proposing Amendments to the City
Charter of the City of Alameda, Upon Motion of the City Council,
Amending Section 17-17 of the Alameda Charter Regarding the Right
to Vote on Certain Financial Issues Caused by Binding Arbitration
and Repealing Article XXVII Regarding Compulsory Arbitration for
Fire Department Employee Disputes and Adopting a New Article XXVII
Regarding Prohibiting Firefighter Strikes and Requiring Binding
Arbitration of Disputes Over Salary and Directing the Proposals Be
Placed on the Ballot in the November General Election to be Held in
the City of Alameda on Tuesday, November 3, 1992." Adopted.
Vincent Maloney, Alameda Fire Department, representing Local 689,
International Association of Fire Fighters [IAFF], stated
Firefighters have two primary areas of disagreement with the City
that led to Impasse: concerns regarding the scope of arbitration,
as the City's measure is limited to wages only, Firefighters do not
have the right to strike and do not want to strike, but need a
balance to the City's unilateral powers; in Section 17, the
language is vague and definitions not specific; explained why the
lack of specificity on what unfair financial burden is, would
render binding arbitration advisory; and because definitions are
unclear, a potential for litigation is great and placement on the
ballot will not serve the City's interest.
Councilmember Camicia moved the recommendation [to adopt
resolution]. Councilmember Roth seconded the motion which was
carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. [See also 92-586 concerning
Ballot Argument.]
92-574 Resolution No. 12303 "Proposing to Hold an Advisory Election
in Consolidation with the November General Election in Order to
August 4, 1992
Allow the Voters of the City of Alameda to Voice their Opinion
Through an Advisory Vote Regarding Negotiating with the City's
Firefighters Union Regarding an Alternative Work Schedule and
Directing the Advisory Measure to be Placed on the Ballot in the
November General Election to be Held in the City of Alameda on
Tuesday, November 3, 1992." (Councilmember Camicia) Adopted.
Vincent Maloney, Captain, Alameda Fire Department, Local 689 IAFF
representative, stated the Association believes this ballot measure
is unnecessary, the City can meet and confer on a working schedule
at almost any time and particularly in January when contract
expires; the City does not need special approval or consent of
citizens as it already has the responsibility and duty to meet and
confer on all issues concerning wages, benefits and working
conditions; the ballot is already crowded, and $3000 is wasted by
placing initiative on the ballot.
Councilmember Camicia stated he believes the same could be true of
Firefighters original arbitration initiative; reasons to ask the
voters for their opinion is: asking voters the direction the City
should take is never a mistake; grievances and requests for
counseling have occurred because of evening emergency alarms and
Council should begin to consider shorter standard shifts instead of
traditional 24-hour shifts; and the public has a right to vote; and
moved the resolution.
Councilmember Lucas seconded the motion which carried by the
following voice vote: Ayes: Councilmembers Camicia, Lucas, Roth
and President Withrow - 4. Noes: Councilman Arnerich -1. Absent:
None. [See also 92-586 concerning Ballot Argument.]
92-575 Resolution No. "Proposing Amendments to the City
Charter of the City of Alameda, Upon Motion of the City Council,
Amending the Charter Requirements for the City Auditor and
Treasurer by Making the Positions Appointed Rather than Elected and
Eliminating Relevant Salary Requirements; Directing the Proposals
be Placed on the Ballot in the November General Election to be
Held in the City of Alameda on Tuesday, November 3, 1992." (Mayor
Withrow) Not adopted.
Charles Tillman, Alameda, stated [former] City Auditor Kevin Harper
did a marvelous job and produced much information the City did not
have in the past; believes citizens should have a choice in who
will handle their monies; and suggests leaving the positions as
they are.
Lewis Hurwitz, Alameda, City Treasurer, stated the position [of
Treasurer], has never been appointed since 1937, when the last
Charter was adopted; the issue has been rejected by voters a number
of times; if Council wishes to save money, matters can be referred
to three instead of four non-Charter committees and save about
$50,000; boards can be consolidated for further savings; the
City's financial problems cannot be served by disenfranchising the
City's voters; and urged Council vote against placing the Measure
August 4, 1992
on the November Ballot.
Diane Coler-Dark, Alameda, stated the City's Charter contained
these positions to avoid cronyism and the "good old boy" network
by mayoral appointments; and these valuable positions which provide
checks and balances should not be eliminated.
President Withrow stated he would not have brought this matter
before Council if there were not a financial crisis; the Treasurer
and Auditor have performed well, however, people serve on
commissions and are not compensated; and tasks the Charter charges
to Auditor and Treasurer cannot be compared to charges to Planning
Board [Members].
Councilmember Roth stated the two positions should remain elective,
salaries and benefits can be dropped and requirements reviewed.
President Withrow agreed the positions should be elected rather
than appointed.
Councilman Arnerich stated positions should be separated from
politics, should be elected; one proposed item, Section 2-2a states
"...offices would be established and the incumbents thereof would
be appointed or removed by Council..." and chips away the Charter,
which was not established haphazardly and which contains checks and
balances; the Treasurer and Auditor oversee that monies are acted
upon wisely, and therefore he will not vote to place this matter on
the ballot.
Councilmember Camicia stated he agrees with Councilmembers Roth and
Arnerich, but would like to put Section 4-1 on ballot concerning
requirement for auditor and following the words "five years
accounting experience" add a comma and the words "or equivalent;"
and believes anyone who is elected should receive some salary.
Councilmember Lucas stated the positions are important, should be
independent and some remuneration should be attached even if it is
minor; she would like the Charter to remain as it is regarding the
election procedure and remuneration for these two offices, but
would be willing to place educational requirements on the ballot.
Following brief discussion on educational requirements for the
Auditor, and procedure for filling vacancies if no one ran for the
offices, Councilman Arnerich moved that this matter not be placed
on the ballot, and that the positions remain as they are.
Councilmember Lucas seconded the motion.
Council discussed, and by consensus, agreed that the review of
certain Charter amendments, e.g., education requirements, be
considered at a later time.
Councilman Arnerich's motion was carried by unanimous voice vote -
5.
August 4, 1992
92-576 Ordinance No. 2611. N.S. "Authorizing Amendment to Contract
between the Board of Administraton of the Public Employees'
Retirement System and the City Council of the City of Alameda.
Passed.
Councilmember Camicia moved final passage. Councilman Arnerich
seconded the motion which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.
92-577 Written Communication from Pamela DeSimone, President,
Community of Harbor Bay Isle Owners' Association, Inc., requesting
Council declare a moratorium concerning recently adopted Roofing
Ordinance No. 2575, N.S., and its application to the Community of
Harbor Bay Isle.
Don Roberts, Alameda, stated he believes this proposal is placing
aesthetics over safety; Community of Harbor Bay Isle, with its
shake roofs, has tremendous potential for a massive fire, urged
Council continue the ordinance which applies throughout Alameda.
Marvin Winzenread, Alameda, stated he received approval for a small
back porch, but does not fall within the ten percent requirement to
reroof without reroofing the entire roof.
Keith Turro, Alameda, Chairman, Community Architectural Committee,
Harbor Bay Isle, stated Committee applauds Fire Chief's efforts to
bring in Class A roof, but problem is finding material similar to
shake roof which can be structurally supported; and requested
permission to use treated cedar shakes until further research can
be done by engineers and architects which have already been hired.
Pamela deSimone, Alameda, President, Community of Harbor Bay Isle,
stated the request is for a variance on a small part of the
ordinance, not the entire ordinance; noted strict design standards
placed on homeowners' roofs; roofs are relatively new; Community
supports Class A for total reroofing; displayed roof shingles;
noted City allows additions of ten percent of roof area to use
cedar shakes, and request is for 20 to 25 percent; stated within
the next year or two, appropriate materials will be on the market,
and the Community needs time for that to happen.
Councilmember Lucas stated she is more concerned with safety than
aesthetics; and discussed materials and timeline with Ms. deSimone.
President Withrow clarified, with Ms. deSimone, the exception being
sought is strictly for additions; and new materials are currently
being refined.
Council discussed products with Fire Chief LaGrone who submitted
information sheets to Council regarding two products available,
commented on potential for conflagration due to close proximity of
houses, and stated the Fire Department would like to work with some
citizens on case by case problems.
Councilmember Camicia moved that Fire Department Building
August 4, 1992
Department and Community of Harbor Bay Isle meet and address issues
discussed; report back to Council in two weeks.
Councilmember Roth seconded the motion which was carried by
unanimous voice vote - 5.
NEW BUSINESS AND UNFINISHED BUSINESS
92-578 Consideration of a Ballot Measure Argument concerning
Binding Arbitration Ballot Measure Placed on the Ballot Upon
Petition of Qualified Electors. (Councilmember Camicia)
Councilmember Camicia stated he has drafted a Ballot Measure
Argument in opposition to the Firefighters Measure and has
submitted Draft Two to the Council.
Councilmember Lucas moved to accept the argument. Councilmember
Camicia seconded the motion which was carried by unanimous voice
vote - 5.
92-579 Councilmember Camicia stated he received a complaint from a
resident regarding an ambulance transport night fee and requested
a staff report, off agenda, on ambulance charges.
92-580 Councilmember Camicia requested a detailed staff report on
cost savings derived from using an outside agency to process City's
business licenses.
Vice Mayor Lucas explained the City has a Post Office Box in San
Francisco so deposits can go into Wells Fargo Bank the same day
received.
92-581 Councilmember Camicia stated he received a telephone call
from a homeowner on Eagle Avenue who received misinformation
regarding the rezoning process and missed an opportunity to address
the Council; will provide staff with details and determine whether
City can do something for that particular resident.
Vice Mayor Lucas commented the person is Mrs. [Isabell] Johnson,
and she has also requested staff to respond.
92-582 Vice Mayor Lucas stated the threat of base closure is
increasing and requested a status report from the Navy Base
Committee on strategic- and alternative planning.
92-583 Councilmember Roth questioned whether a Mello-Roos
Assessment District can be formed to handle toxic cleanup for homes
with underground oil storage tanks, and requested staff to look
into the matter.
92-584 Councilman Arnerich stated dry grass areas, caused by the
drought, should be reported to the City so that proper action can
be taken to avoid fires and the loss of homes.
August 4, 1992
92-585 Councilman Arnerich stated he would like letters of
commendation, on behalf of the City Council, to be sent to Sherry
McCarthy, Recreation and Park Department, and Alameda Golf Complex
Operations Manager, Fred Framsted, for two recent outstanding
dedications: Chuck Corica Golf Course and Joan Fairfield Tennis
Complex.
92-586 The City Clerk suggested Council consider, regarding
Resolutions (92-573. 92-574] placing Ballot Measures on the
November Ballot, whether or not to designate Councilmember(s) to
write the Arguments.
President Withrow suggested Councilmember Camicia. Councilman
Arnerich moved Councilmember Camicia be authorized to write the
Ballot Arguments. Councilmember Lucas seconded the motion which
was carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.
ADJOURNMENT
President Withrow adjourned the meeting at 9:25 p.m. and announced
Council would convene the noticed Special Meeting of City Council
following a fifteen minute recess.
Respectfully submitted
DIA E B. FELSCH, CMC
City Clerk
The agenda for this meeting was posted 72 hours in advance.
August 4, 1992
SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING OF THE ALAMEDA CITY COUNCIL
AUGUST 4. 1992
The meeting convened at 9:55 p.m., following the Regular Meeting of
the City Council, with President Withrow presiding.
ROLL CALL - Present: Councilmembers Arnerich, Camicia, Lucas,
Roth, and President Withrow - 5.
Absent: None.
92-587 Resolution No. . "Proposing the Submission of a Ballot
Measure, Upon Motion of the City Council, to Repeal City of Alameda
Resolution No. 12287 pertaining to the General Plan Diagram for
2329 Buena Vista Avenue and Directing the Proposal be Placed on the
Ballot for the November General Election to be Held in the City of
Alameda on Tuesday, November 3, 1992." [See Footnote.] Not adopted.
Carol Simas, Xtra Oil Co., Alameda, stated everything possible was
done to make plans conform to City requirements; learned from the
morning newspaper that Council might put matter on the ballot,
believes they were not properly notified nor treated fairly; also
believes business community should be given as much consideration
as neighborhood community; and has expressed to neighborhood that
they do not want to destroy the neighborhood but be friends.
Jay Schnack, Walnut Creek, Attorney for Simases, requested Council
not adopt recommendation, nor refer matter to the Ballot
prematurely; understands the justification for referring issue to
the Ballot is to avoid spending approximately $50,000 on a Special
Election if referendum qualifies; even if the referendum qualifies,
it is Council's choice to simply rescind [Resolution No. 12287];
believes to refer matter to a ballot before it is determined that
sufficient registered voters care enough about the Measure to sign
a referendum petition, is unfair to the Simases; stated extreme
unfairness to now deprive Simases of decisions previously made
after they worked diligently for two years to try to do everything
the City, Council, and Planning Department has requested.
Joseph Keh, Alameda, commended Vice Mayor Lucas for her proposal
to put car wash issue on the Ballot; hopes Council will support the
proposal; voting on the issue is an opportunity and duty for
citizens; and whichever way the issue is resolved, he will still be
a customer of the gas station.
Footnote: Resolution revised on August 4, 1992 to omit reference to
Resolution No. 12288.
August 4, 1992
President Withrow announced a recess; Council reconvened at 10:37
13-m-
Councilmember Lucas stated she had the Special Council Meeting
called, however, now believes potential legal liability exists if
the Council places Measure on the Ballot; a concern exists that
some rights may have vested; the attorney for Simases proposed that
[referendum] signatures be turned in and if they are valid Council
enact a rescission of the General Plan Amendment [GPA]; she would
like to go in that direction; the reason she asked the Mayor, City
Attorney, Simases and their attorney, to attend a meeting [during
recess] was to get a waiver of their legal rights for any lawsuit
or any damage suit against the City, in the event CAN [Citizens for
Alameda Neighborhoods] obtains the necessary number of signatures
that are certified; she will then vote for a rescission of the GPA;
the Simases will then lose any rights they might possibly have
acquired under the Use Permit procedure and what has previously
taken place; and Simases are willing to do that.
President Withrow stated persons with questions may address the
Council from the podium.
Don Roberts, Alameda, stated he is curious why only two members of
Council went to the meeting.
The City Attorney replied that was due to the Brown Act.
Councilman Arnerich stated he cannot intelligently vote on
something he knows nothing about.
Vice Mayor Lucas stated her concern is the potential liability the
City incurs if Council proceeds to place the Measure on the Ballot
tonight.
Councilman Arnerich stated if the Simases were invited, why were
not CAN [Committee for Alameda Neighborhoods] representatives
invited also; and questioned if anything was put into writing.
Vice Mayor Lucas stated she believes legal rights against the City
exist with the Simas family, not with CAN at this point; feels
responsible because she requested the Special Council Meeting; and
the potential liability exceeds the cost of a Special Election.
Councilman Arnerich inquired if Councilmember Lucas learned of the
potential liability in the past 24 hours.
The City Attorney stated that Council properly convened in Closed
Session to discuss exposure to litigation from many sides, some of
which are significant, on the car wash issue; no action was taken
but Council was advised as to potential claims and problems.
Councilmember Camicia stated what he understands is there is a
third vote; if putting the matter on the ballot can be avoided, and
accomplish what he wants, he is more than happy; and would like to
August 4, 1992
hear the details.
The City Attorney clarified if CAN obtains signatures and presents
them, Council can agree to the position on the petition, agree to
rescind the GPA, without the necessity of a Special Election.
Councilman Arnerich inquired when CAN must file the petition; the
City Attorney replied her understanding is the signatures are
required at 5:00 p.m., August 6th; and the City Clerk so confirmed.
Vice Mayor Lucas stated she sees that as a winning situation if the
signatures come in and qualify: putting the matter on the
[November] ballot would not be necessary, the $3000 cost would be
saved, the cost of a Special Election would be saved, and a lawsuit
will not be filed against the City by the Simas family.
Councilmember Roth inquired if a waiver was signed; and the City
Attorney stated she has a signed waiver written with an agreement
to put it in more official legal language, read the waiver, and
noted it is signed by Ted and Carol Simas and dated.
The City Attorney, in reply to Councilman Arnerich, stated if the
signatures are not gathered, the GPA stands and presumably the car
wash would be built; if signatures are gathered and presented to
Council, Council would have an opportunity to rescind the action.
Ken Takeda, Alameda, stated legal liability from CAN also exists;
the organization is fully aware of filing date and is moving
forward; and addressed controversy on the issues.
Ruth Lafler, Chair, Co-Founder, Committee for Alameda
Neighborhoods, questioned what Vice Mayor Lucas's change of vote is
based upon.
Vice Mayor Lucas stated she believes the car wash would be good for
the community but is upset that so many disagree with her, she may
not be right and therefore was willing to put the matter on the
ballot until she found there is potential liability; she must be
open-minded but unless there is new information presented, she is
committed to rescind.
Ms. Lafler stated there is potential for liability from CAN;
believes a ballot referendum is the only way to handle the matter
fairly; people want well-planned development that supports goals of
the General Plan, and would like Council to place matter on ballot.
Councilmember Camicia moved to continue the meeting past 11:00 p.m.
Councilmember Roth seconded the motion which carried by unanimous
voice vote - 5.
Darlene Banda, Alameda, commended Vice Mayor Lucas for her
concerns; noted a broad sense of community concern about this
issue.
August 4, 1992
Councilman Arnerich moved Council go forward with the resolution.
[The motion failed for lack of a second.]
Councilmember Camicia commended Vice Mayor Lucas for working within
the process to reach a solution and a consensus in the community;
the goal of the referendum process was to give people a way to
express themselves and he believes that has been accomplished.
President Withrow noted the motion failed for lack of a second.
Councilmember Camicia stated he would like the matter clearly
understood.
Vice Mayor Lucas clarified Council is not voting to put the Measure
on the November Ballot; when CAN files the signatures, unless
something completely unexpected occurs, Council will have three
votes to rescind the General Plan Amendment; and questioned if Mrs.
Lafler preferred the matter go on the Ballot in a Special Election.
Mrs. Lafler indicated a Special Election is not necessary if
Council is willing to rescind.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, President Withrow adjourned the
meeting at 11:15 p.m.
Respectfully sub
A /4- ,(
DIANE B. FELSCH, CMC
Ciy Clerk
The agenda for this meeting was posted in advance in accordance
with the Brown Act.
August 4, 1992