1989-03-21 Regular CC MinutesREGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL, CITY OF ALAMEDA
HELD TUESDAY - - - - - - - - - - - - MARCH 21, 1989
The meeting convened at 7:45 p.m. (at the conclusion of the Closed
Session to discuss litigation matters, and the meeting of the
Community Improvement Commission) with President Corica presiding.
The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Councilman Arnerich with the
assistance of two Boy Scouts present for Youth in Government Day.
Reverend Robert Keller gave the invocation.
ROLL CALL - Present: Councilmembers Arnerich, Camicia, Monsef,
Thomas, and President Corica - 5.
Absent: None.
89 -189 President Corica announced that Council met in Closed
Session in Room 313 to consider litigation matters pursuant to
Subsection (a) of the Legal Counsel section of the Brown Act, and
the Council took no action at this time.
SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY
89 -190 Proclamation designating March 21, 1989 as Youth in
Government Day.
Mayor Corica commented on the day's activities, and read the
proclamation; the Management Analyst described activities of the
day, the various departments visited, the role - playing exercise of
City Government in which the young people participated, and
recognized the youth leaders who assisted in the program; and
Mayor Corica then presented Honorary City Official Certificates and
a framed Proclamation to participants.
89 -191 Proclamation designating March 24 through March 31, 1989, as
Community Development Week.
Mayor Corica explained the Co unity Development Block Grant
Program (CDBG), listed projects assisted by the CDBG, and presented
a framed copy of the proclamation to William McCall, a former Mayor
and Councilmember, who accepted on behalf of the senior citizens
and Mastick Senior Center.
89 -192 Proclamation designating April 1 through April as
Earthquake Preparedness Week.
Mayor Corica read the proclamation and stated it would be forwarded
to the Governor's Office of Emergency Service.
MINUTES
Councilman Arnerich made a motion to accept the minutes of the
Special Council Meeting of February 27, 1989, and March 2, 1989.
Councilmember Camicia seconded the motion which was carried by the
following voice votes: Regarding the Special Council Meeting of
March 21, 1989
93
February 27, 1989: Ayes: Councilmembers Arnerich, Camicia, Thomas
and President Corica - 4. Noes: None. Absent: None.
Abstentions: Councilmember Monsef - 1 [due to absence from the
February 27th meeting). Regarding the Special Council Meeting of
March 2, 1989: By unanimous voice vote - 5.
CONSENT CALENDAR
John Scott Graham requested Item No. 1 -B, a resolution regarding
agreement with Alameda Red Cross (See 89 -219), be removed from the
Consent Calendar and placed on the regular agenda.
Councilmember Monsef made a motion to approve the Consent Calendar
with the exception of Item No. 1 -B, described in the previous
paragraph above. Councilmember Camicia seconded the motion and it
was carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.
Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk.
REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
*89 -193 From Acting Finance Director regarding Investment Portfolio
as of February 28, 1989. Accepted.
RESOLUTIONS
*89 -194 Resolution No. 11675 "Approving Parcel Map 5510 (Harbor
Bay Isle Shopping Center) and permitting recording thereof."
Adopted.
*89 -195 Resolution No. 11676 "Adopting plans and specifications
and calling for bids for Alameda Marina Village Sanitary Lift
Station improvements and electrical undergrounding, Assessment
District 84 -3, No. P.W. 10 -88 -17 and directing City Clerk to
advertise same." Adopted.
*89 -196 Resolution No. 11677 "Salary- classification Resolution for
non full -time positions." Adopted.
*89 -197 Resolution No. 11678 "Authorizing application to the
Office of Criminal Justice Planning for a Community Crime
Resistance Program Grant Award." Adopted.
*89 -198 Resolution No. 11679 "Authorizing reprogramming of West
Alameda Business Association FY 1988 -89 Workshop and Training Funds
to FY 1988 -89 promotions." Adopted.
*89 -199 Resolution No. 11680 "Adopting specifications and
provisions for fuel, calling for bids and directing City Clerk to
advertise same." Adopted.
March 21, 1989
9
BILLS
*89 -200 A List of Claims, certified by the City Manager as correct,
was approved in the sum of $2,821,929.45.
RETURN TO REGULAR AGENDA
WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS
89 -201 From Arthur and Bette Collins, requesting rezoning of the
2600 block of Lincoln Avenue, or an interim ordinance preventing
multiple family unit development.
Bette Collins, 2609 Lincoln Avenue, requested, instead of rezoning,
a moratorium on the 2600 block is preferred; with the revision of
the General Plan, the matter will be resolved; however, the Plan
will take some time and therefore the moratorium is requested.
Councilmember Monsef made a motion to accept the communication and
direct the Interim City Attorney to submit an opinion regarding an
interim ordinance concerning the 2600 block. Councilmember Camicia
seconded the motion which was carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.
89 -202 From Patricia Haynes, regarding rezoning of the 2600 block
of Lincoln Avenue.
Ms. Haynes, 2612 Lincoln Avenue, stated she is changing her
request from rezoning to a moratorium; and would appreciate
positive action from Council.
Christine Servente, 2614 Lincoln, stated multiple dwellings would
cause more traffic and parking problems and requested Council
consider the extra problems a multiple dwelling would create.
Councilmember Thomas commented that building an additional single
family dwelling does not constitute constructing a multiple family
dwelling, therefore a moratorium on multiple family dwellings would
not necessarily prohibit an additional single family dwelling.
To Councilman Arnerich's question regarding the possibility of
immediate implementation of a moratorium, the Planning Director
replied that the moratorium could be implemented immediately,
however, because no building permit application has been applied
for there is ample time to examine alternatives and a report from
the Interim City Attorney and the Planning Department.
Councilmember Monsef clarified he has requested information on
whether or not Council should place a moratorium, and moved
acceptance of the communication. Councilmember Thomas seconded the
motion and it was carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.
HEARINGS
89 -203 Consideration of an ordinance amending the Alameda Municipal
Code, Title X, Chapter 2. Electrical Code, Article 3 (in part) by
March 21, 1989
9
substituting the following Sections in their entirety: Section
10 -2318, Schedule of Fees, Section 10 -235, Special Annual Permit,
Section 10 -237, Application for Special Owner's Permit, Section
10 -239, Special Furnace Dealer's Permit, Section 10- 239.1, Special
Equipment Installer's Permit and Section 10 -2319, Payment of Fees.
President Corica announced the procedure of the hearing.
The Engineering Manager of the Bureau of Electricity explained the
background of the hearing.
The public portion of the hearing was opened.
On the call for proponents, the following person spoke:
William Crow, Kirby Electric, 2132 San Antonio, in favor of rates.
On the call for opponents, the following person spoke:
William Crow, Kirby Electric, 2132 San Antonio, opposed to
prepayment of permits if the payments are to be made only for the
amount of the permit being taken out at that time especially
because of cost of issuing individual check for every permit, and
would like to propose a credit balance so the permits can be drawn
via telephone.
President Corica stated he sees no problem with a credit system.
The City Manager noted this has been done by the City for large
developers, and has no problem with it.
The Engineering Manager, Bureau of Electricity, stated the plan has
been discussed, and this system can be used.
Following discussion regarding individuals requesting permits,
etc., Councilmember Thomas suggested that prepayment of fees is a
policy that should be resolved by the Public Utilities Board.
Douglas Durein, President, Public Utilities Board, stated the Board
has no problem [with credit system] as long as the money is present
up front, anyone is welcome to place it in advance; the problem is
that the Bureau is owed money by persons who take out permits and
the monies are not paid.
Councilmember Monsef moved that the Council concur with the
recommendation of the Public Utilities Board. Councilmember
Camicia seconded the motion and it was carried by unanimous voice
vote - 5.
Councilmember Monsef made a motion to take the related ordinance
out of order. Councilmember Camicia seconded the motion which was
carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.
89 -204 Ordinance No. , N.S. "Amending the Alameda Municipal
Code Title X, Chapter 2. Electrical Code, Article 3 (in part) by
March 21, 1989
�6
substituting the following sections in their entirety: Section
10 -2318, Schedule of Fees, Section 10 -235, Special Annual Permit,
Section 10 -237, Application for Special Owner's Permit, Section
10 -239, Special Furnace Dealer's Permit, Section 10- 239.1, Special
Equipment Installer's Permit and Section 10 -2319, Payment of Fees."
Introduced.
Councilmember Monsef moved introduction of the ordinance.
Councilmember Camicia seconded the motion which was carried by
unanimous voice vote - 5.
89 -205 Consideration of establishment of a Community Facilities
District, authorization to levy special taxes pursuant to the
Mello -Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982; consideration of the
proposed debt issue and final determination of whether the public
interest, convenience and necessity require the issuance of bonds
of the District for the Communities Facility District. (Continued
from March 14, 1989, Council Meeting.)
President Corica explained the procedure of the hearing.
The City Manager explained the background of the Mello Roos
financing.
The public portion of the hearing was opened.
On the call for proponents, the following persons spoke.
Stephen Brimhall, Executive Vice - President, Doric Development.
There was a discussion on the advantages and disadvantages of a
prepayment option.
Stephen Casaleggio, Jones, Hall, Hill & White, Bond Counsel,
addressed the matter, stating they have seen no successful
prepayment options apart from purely raw land for certain vast
blocks of property; and the Bond Counsel recommendation is that
the prepayment formula not be made a part of this formula; and the
developer has offered to provide a kind of a disclosure more common
in Mello Roos financings throughout the State.
Councilmember Thomas questioned the total amount of the offering,
$88,000,000 appropriations limit, in Resolution, Item No. 14
(89 -206), and the $22,000,000 [bonded debt] in the Resolution Item
No. 15 (89 -207), and $22,000,000 in Resolution 16.
Mr. Casaleggio explained the Mello Roos statute has a provision
that provides a City creating a Mello Roos, to establish a separate
appropriations limit under Prop 4; some cities ignore, others
utilize it heavily and provide abundant appropriations limit
separate and distinct from the City; the appropriations limit was
established by a common formula of four times the amount of the
bonded debt; the amounts on limits are simply to allow what is
being considered a maximum limit, not what will be used.
March 21, 1989
97
Council discussed, with Bond Counsel, the maximum tax formula.
On the call for opponents, the following persons spoke.
Fred Scullin, 1120 Chestnut Street.
President Corica stated when considering the Mello Roos matter
during the drafting of the Settlement Agreement, it was made clear
that the developer would indicate in the contract what the buyer
would be paying.
Mr. Brimhall stated he has no problem with full disclosure.
The Interim City Attorney requested Bond Counsel answer the
questions raised by Mr. Scullin, and Bond Counsel further
explained, noting that the Mello Roos tax obligation is strictly
that of the Mello Roos District and is not a general obligation of
the City, and in the event of a default, the City is in no way
liable.
President Corica inquired how the City can be held liable and what
recourse does the City have.
Mr. Casaleggio stated typically, in a Mello Roos bond issue there
will be reserve funds, if the reserve fund is depleted, then the
City's remedy is to foreclose against the defaulted installment
only of the special tax; the values in Harbor Bay are far in
excess of on installment of this tax.
The public portion of the hearing was closed.
President Corica commented that the Mello Roos was included in the
Settlement Agreement, so there should have been no surprise to any
one as it was clearly stated in the Settlement Agreement.
Councilmember Thomas stated she is concerned about judicial
foreclosure and a window - period that the City might have liability;
concerned there could be Harbor Bay requests for PD amendments
rezoning residential properties to commercial, thus excluding Mello
Roos land; the $88,000,000; and in a few years people will be
complaining, and she cannot support the resolution.
The City Manager noted the amounts tonight are the maximum amounts,
the actual amount of the bond issue will be determined at the time
of going to the bond market in a few months.
Councilman Arnerich clarified that the bond issue will be
$22,000,000 or below, and the $88,000,000 is a total appropriations
cap.
Councilmember Camicia commented Council should move ahead quickly,
to get the schools, parks, etc., and perhaps Bond Counsel should be
requested to provide a figure on which Council can compromise and
move forward.
March 21, 1989
President Corica agreed.
Bond Counsel suggested Council may wish to consider a $17,000,00 or
$18,000,000 figure, and they may set the appropriations limit as
they see fit.
Council discussed in depth the amounts to be set, the
appropriations limit, the necessity to move ahead.
Councilmember Thomas suggested further information, including a
matket analysis, be provided to Council.
The City Manager replied that staff will provide information to
Council, when returning to size the bond issue, including the
amount of interest rate and of set - asides.
Council further, with Bond Counsel, the Interim City Attorney, and
developer, discussed the matter in detail, the lots in Village V
which would be subject to tax, the $40,000 or $45,000 tax amount
per acre, etc.
President Corica suggested that Council agree to limit to the 627
homes.
Councilmember Camicia agreed and moved the recommendation,
including that stipulation, and amend the figure to $17,000,000.
President Corica asked clarification that the 627 units would be
in; Councilmember Camicia agreed.
Councilmember Monsef seconded the motion.
Councilmember Thomas stated Council has not approved the homes.
The motion was carried by the following voice vote: Ayes:
Councilmembers Arnerich, Camicia, Monsef, and President Corica - 4.
Noes: Councilmember Thomas - 1. Absent: None.
Mr. Casaleggio asked clarification from Council that Council's
motion decreased the maximum bond indebtedness to $17,000,000, and
reduced the appropriation limit to $17,000,000, and the amount of
raw -land tax, or undeveloped -land tax would go up from $40,000 an
acre to $45,000 an acre, to which Council agreed. Councilmember
Monsef also noted that the number of units were set at 627
single- family homes.
Mr. Casaleggio inquired whether the prepayment option was to
remain in or not.
Councilmember Arnerich made a motion to accept Counsel's advice
that the prepayment [option] be out.
Councilmember Monsef seconded the motion which was carried by the
following voice vote: Ayes: Councilmembers Arnerich, Camicia,
Monsef, and President Corica - 4. Noes: Councilmember Thomas - 1.
March 21, 1989
Absent: None.
* * * * * * * President Corica inquired of the Interim City
Attorney the possibility of an extension of, and modification of
the Agreement to which the Interim City Attorney responded that can
be done.
President Corica suggested extending the Settlement Agreement from
March 31st to April 4th.
Councilmember Monsef so moved. Councilmember Camicia seconded the
motion which was carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.
Council, by consensus agreed to move on all three resolutions,
related to the Hearing, at one time. (See 89 -206, 89 -207, 89 -208)
89 -206 Resolution No. 11681. "Formation of Community Facilities
District, authorizing the levy of a Special Tax within the
District, preliminarily establishing an appropriations limit for
the District and submitting levy of the Special Tax and the
establishment of the appropriations limit to the qualified electors
of the District." (Continued from March 14, 1989, Council Meeting)
Adopted. (See 89 -208)
89 -207 Resolution No. 11682. "Determining the necessity to incur
bonded indebtedness within Community Facilities District and
submitting proposition to the qualified electors of the District.
(Community Facilities District No. 1, Harbor Bay)" (Continued from
March 14, 1989, Council Meeting) Adopted. (See 89 -208)
89 -208 Resolution No. 11683. "A Resolution calling Special
Election (Community Facilities District No. 1, Harbor Bay)"
(Continued from March 14, 1989, Council Meeting) Adopted.
Councilmember Monsef made a motion to adopt the three resolutions.
(89 -206, 89 -207, 89 -208) Councilmember Camicia seconded the motion.
Councilmember Camicia stated he would like to be sure Council is
clear on the $88,000,000 appropriation limit discussed.
Mr. Casaleggio stated, for the record, that the first resolution
the City Clerk read, the resolution of formation, on page 3,
paragraph 11, the figure $88,000,000, he understands, has been
reduced by Council to $17,000,000.
Councilmember Monsef and Councilmember Arnerich voiced agreement.
The motion was carried by the following voice vote: Ayes:
Councilmembers Arnerich, Camicia, Monsef, and President Corica - 4.
Noes: Councilmember Thomas - 1. Absent: None.
March 21, 1989
REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
89 -209 From Public Utilities Board concerning the Bureau of
Electricity.
Don Roberts, Portola Avenue, commented regarding meetings held at
restaurants, and the areas of duties of the General Manager of the
Bureau.
Councilmember Thomas stated the report is in response to some of
her concerns, which are concerns of her constituents, following the
rate raise; discussed a number of items, including luncheon
meetings, travel costs; there should be consistency in the City;
does not believe the Bureau is mismanaged, but needs to adhere to
higher standard; every stystem has flaws and should be reviewed;
and she thanked the PUB for its report.
Councilmember Monsef made a motion to accept the report.
Councilmember Thomas seconded the report and it was carried by
unanimous voice vote - 5.
89 -210 From Cable Television Oversight Committee submitting Annual
Report.
Wilma Johnson, Business Manager of United Cable, 2061 Challenger
Drive, stated she was present to answer any questions on the
report.
Councilmember Camicia discussed marketing of United Cable with Ms.
Johnson, inquired regarding the new Marketing Manager, and
marketing events planned.
Councilman Arnerich suggested programming statistics and updates be
publicized, discussed the status of wiring the schools and homes on
Bay Farm Island.
Don Roberts, 880 Portola Avenue, commended the Assistant City
Manager and staff for the report attachment regarding status of
various requirements placed on United Cable.
Liz Rogers, 1261 Weber Street, commented she would like some
mechanism built in so that before United Cable makes changes in
programming, some provision is made for viewer input.
Councilmember Monsef made a motion to accept the report.
Councilmember Camicia seconded the motion and it was carried by
unanimous voice vote - 5.
89 -211 From Chairman, Strategic Planning Committee,
Final Report.
Lloyd Hurwitz, 3517 Oleander Avenue, Chair, Strategic
Committee, reviewed the background of Committee activity.
President Corica stated the report is a good one and
March 21, 1989
submitting
Planning
there are
several recommendations which deserve discussion.
Councilmember Camicia suggested a Work Session on the subject.
President Corica agreed.
Councilman Arnerich stated the report is excellent, is very well
done and agreed a Work Session to review the matter would be
appropriate.
Councilmember Camicia commended Mr. Hurwitz on the report, thanked
others who also have worked hard on this matter, and made a move to
accept the report and schedule a Work Session. Councilmember
Monsef seconded the motion which was carried by unanimous voice
vote - 5.
89 -212 From Assistant City Manager regarding process for City
Attorney selection.
President Corica stated there are three proposals for methods to
select a new City Attorney, and the recommendation is to go for a
Request for Proposals (RFP), although the work will take longer.
Councilmember Camicia stated he believes the report is a good one
and the RFP process makes the most sense, and that is the way he
would like to proceed.
Councilmember Thomas stated Council has been advised the Charter
precludes Council from hiring a firm, and an RFP appears to be more
appropriate when hiring a firm; hiring an individual would appear
to require a different process.
Councilmember Camicia stated a RFP would cover both possibilities,
that a firm could be hired and an individual within the firm could
be designated as City Attorney.
Councilman Arnerich stated he believes Councilmember Camicia is
correct in assuming that if a firm is hired, Council would
designate who within the firm would act as a City Attorney.
The City Manager stated he believes what would be done is to select
an individual who may or may not be a member of a firm, and the
individual would give the proposal.
Councilmember Thomas stated after the Interim City Attorney has
been present for a while, he could help determine the needs of the
City.
The City Manager stated if Council will decide on a RFP, Statement
of Qualifications (SOQ), or search firm, then staff would report
back with detail for Council review.
President Corica stated he would like to see a RFP and have input.
Councilmember Thomas stated SOQ is fine for an individual but if
March 21, 1989
1,0
bidding, then RFP is necessary.
Council discussed with the City Manager and the Interim City
Attorney the alternatives for selection of a City Attorney, the
needs of the City, necessary input from the Interim City Attorney
and the City Manager, etc.
Councilmember Thomas stated information regarding departmental
needs for City Attorney assistance, should also be included.
Councilman Arnerich stated the RFP is the way to go, and when that
is decided, then the criteria could be established, using the
expertise of the Interim City Attorney to establish what Council
would require of a firm or an individual.
President Corica stated he believes the RFP process is the best
approach, and Council will want to input.
Councilman Arnerich made a motion to accept the recommendation as
proposed to develop the questionnaire to form the basis, and go out
for a Request For Proposal. Councilmember Camicia seconded the
motion which was carried by the following voice vote: Ayes:
Councilmembers Arnerich, Camicia, Monsef, and President Corica - 4.
Noes: Councilmember Thomas - 1. Absent: None.
89 -213 From Personnel Director on ramifications and impact of
recognition of Pension 1082 Improvement Committee.
The City Manager stated information has been received from an
actuary on costs of increasing contributions to the health plan and
increasing cost of living improvements, PERS, and other items of
interest; and is prepared to go with a letter of understanding if
that is agreeable.
Councilmember Monsef inquired if the City Manager is proposing is
to put himself into negotiation with the groups.
The City Manager stated he is proposing informal meetings with a
representative of the Police Association, of the Fire Association
and of the Committee, to negotiate improvements with the
understanding that the Council will receive those as
recommendations for approval; but for detailed negotiations, then
a professional negotiator should be used.
Councilmember Monsef stated the City has a professional negotiator,
Council can use the negotiator who is already paid by the City or
put the burden on the City Manager who does not have much time.
President Corica stated it would be a burden to the City Manager;
but perhaps another meeting could be permitted to finalize what has
been started, then turn it over.
Stan Voogd, 1555 Oak Stree
was present only to answer
March 21, 1989
1082 Pension Plan Committee, stated he
estions Council might have.
03
Councilman Arnerich inquired if Mr. Norton's method for proceeding
is acceptable.
Mr. Voogd replied that if the letter of agreement that was
presented can be agreed upon, that will be sufficient to continue
the negotiations that have begun informally.
President Corica inquired how long the procedure will take, to
which Mr. Voogd replied when a letter of agreement is signed
documenting what is to be done, then he believes the process can go
ahead rapidly, on the other hand, it is a complicated matter, and
he, as Committee spokesman, would feel more comfortable with a
professional person, just as the City Manager would feel more
comfortable with a professional person to do the speaking.
The City Manager stated there is a meeting on Friday night and if
it looks like a long process, then there should be a turn to others
to proceed with negotiations, but if appears possible to proceed on
more simplified manner, then perhaps in a couple more meetings he
would have what could be brought back to the Council.
Councilmember Thomas stated this is the third time this has come
before Council in addition to last year; perhaps ability to
negotiate should be conferred on the Committee and have the City
negotiator handle it; she has respect for the City Manager's
ability, but there is a paid negotiator, he is a professional;
possibly during retirement negotiations, the Committee may want to
make trade -offs elsewhere and that will require a lot of
experience, and if the negotiator takes over at that point, there
will be duplication.
Councilmember Camicia stated he believes if there can be a couple
more meetings to determine where things are, it makes sense.
Councilman Arnerich agreed.
President Corica stated perhaps Council should see what happens
Friday; he does not want to burden the City Manager when the City
is paying a professional negotiator.
Councilman Arnerich suggested a report on the April 18 Council
Meeting agenda.
Mr. Voogd agreed that was reasonable.
Councilmember Camicia moved the recommendation for a report back at
the April 18, 1989, Council Meeting, and hopefully with the
understanding that the letter of agreement is worked out.
Councilmember Thomas seconded the motion which carried by unanimous
voice vote - 5.
89 -214 From Personnel Director regarding evaluation of Council
appointed positions.
Gertrude Woods, 1247 Sherman, stated the Library Board does not
March 21, 1989
104
have a mechanism to evaluate the Library Director, and she would
like Council to allow the Personnel Director's assistance in
setting up an evaluation process.
President Corica stated she would be provided the information.
Don Roberts, 880 Portola Avenue, suggested the Personnel Director
obtain information on the federal government's method of evaluation
of employees, with its new system of evaluating an employee on
critical elements which are defined, and for which an employee may
be terminated for non - performance; and he suggests one critical
element for the City Manager's job is his relationship to the City
Council.
Councilmember Camicia stated a procedure must be instituted; he is
particularly interested in the Sunnyvale, Walnut Creek and Palo
Alto examples provided, but was hoping for a recommendation.
The City Manager stated staff can obtain federal government
inmformation suggested; if Council wishes to pull out portions
from several city examples, then staff can provide a recommendation
utilizing the portions Council is interested in.
President Corica stated perhaps Council could wait until the City
Manager has provided the federal government information suggested,
and make a determination then.
Councilman Arnerich inquired if it seemed a likelihood that Council
is in agreement for a written proposal for evaluation; many cities
use oral examinations; he personally is looking toward a written
evaluation.
President Corica suggested making a recomendation when the rest of
the information is provided.
Councilmember Thomas stated an opinion from the Interim City
Attorney is needed regarding what the ramifications are for a
written performance appraisal, an oral one, how does it coincide
with the Charter, saying these three [officials] are at -will
employees; also, because the City has a City Manager with a
three -year contract, what will be the impact of writing a
performance appraisal after -the -fact.
Councilmember Camicia made a motion to accept the recommendation.
Councilman Arnerich seconded the motion which was carried by
unanimous voice vote - 5.
89 -215 From Planning Director on the status of vehicle abatement at
3234 Central Avenue, Frank Landreth, owner.
The City Manager stated Mr. Landreth has reported his vehicles are
in working condition and will be registered or towed off the
property; the City Manager recommended proceeding with the
recommendation [for removal procedures] but give some latitude to
March 27th when he believes Mr. Landreth can have the cars off and
March 21, 1989
have them registered.
A brief Council discussion followed.
Councilmember Camicia made the motion for the recommendation and
that the cars be registered or off the property by March 27th;
Councilmember Thomas seconded the motion which carried by unanimous
voice vote - 5.
89 -216 From Recreation and Parks Director regarding shortfall in
Grant Fund request for the Paratransit Program.
Councilmember Monsef made a motion to accept the recommendation.
Councilmember Thomas seconded and the motion was carried by
unanimous voice vote - 5.
RESOLUTIONS
89 -217 Resolution No. 11684 "Declaring Intention to establish a
Business Improvement Area in the Park Street and Webster Street
commercial areas, to provide for the levying of charges on
specified businesses conducted within such areas, classifying
various businesses for such purposes, describing the boundaries of
the proposed area, the authorized uses to which the proposed
revenues shall be put, the rate of such charges, fixing the date,
time and place of a hearing to be held by the City Council to
consider the establishment of such an area, and directing the
giving of notice of such hearing." Adopted.
Richard Roth, 1417 - 5th Street, encouraged Council to approve the
formation of the Business Improvement District; believes it is
very worthwhile to try it.
Betty Bento, 1542 Park Street, stated she is in opposition to the
BID in the way it is set up; discussed details including fees that
will be raised; it does not deal with parking problems, and small
merchants will not be able to stay in business.
James Selby, 1546 Park Street, stated the reason for wanting the
BID to go through is to continue the improvement activities; the
business community needs it, and urged Council to look the proposal
over and see that it is accomplished.
Diane Coler -Dark, 2857 Jackson Street, stated payment by most
merchants will be only $150 a year, and requested Council be
supportive.
Del Blaylock, stated there is a great need for the BID; there
would be a tremendous amount of benefit for the merchants; and
urged Council analyze the BID and believes Council will see that it
will be beneficial.
Councilmember Monsef stated the action is only to accept the report
and set a hearing date, and moved the recommendation.
Councilmember Camicia seconded the motion.
March 21, 1989
0
Councilmember Thomas stated there should be a representation that a
majority of the businesses want it or else it can be
disestablished; she would like a vote on this matter.
Councilman Arnerich inquired if the Webster Street merchants have
approval of each of the Associations to go forward.
Mr. Roth stated there are petitions signed by those who are
interested; there are some in opposition in the Park Street area,
but to his knowledge, there is no known opposition on Webster
Street; probably 90% of businesses he has talked to have been in
favor.
Further discussion followed regarding how many may or may not be in
favor of the BID.
The City Manager stated he would like a typographical error
corrected on the Resolution of Intention, page 3, Section 4, Sub
(d) should have same inclusion as prior page, to include Pacific
Bell, P.G.& E, Cable TV.
Councilmember Monsef suggested it reflect "Utilities" so that it
will be all inclusive. Council by consensus, agreed.
Councilmember Thomas suggested there should be a summary
explanation to be mailed with the resolution.
The Community Development Director was instructed to prepare the
summary.
Councilmember Camicia clarified that the motion includes the
amendment (d) on page 3.
The motion was carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.
89 -218 Resolution No. 11685 "Authorizing reprogramming of
unexpended FY 1988 -89 UDAG Loan Repayment Funds to BIA Software
Design." Adopted.
Councilmember Monsef made a motion to adopt the resolution.
Councilmember Camicia seconded the motion and it was carried by
unanimous voice vote - 5.
89 -219 Resolution No. 11686 "Authorizing amendment of Grant
Agreement with the Alameda Red Cross for FY 1988 -89 Homeless
Ancillary Services."
John Scott Graham, 17 Tregloan Court, noted there is often help
given to Oakland homeless by the Red Cross and questions if the Red
Cross letter is referring to help for Alameda homeless or Oakland
homeless.
Councilmember Thomas moved adoption of the resolution. By
consensus, the motion was carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.
March 21, 1989
INTRODUCTION OF ORDINANCES
89 -220 Ordinance No. , N.S. "Authorizing purchase of the
Linoaks Motel Site."
Written Communications:
From Virginia Krutilek, Chair pro -tem, Alameda Homeless
Network, requesting temporary use of several units of the
Linoaks to utilize in connection with programs for the
homeless.
From Martha Killebrew, American Red Cross, Alameda Chapter,
expressing a need for continued use of the Linoaks Motel
for Red Cross assistance of the homeless.
Virginia Krutilek, 921 Broadway, stated the purpose of the letter
is to bring an awareness to Council that when the Linoaks facility
is no longer in existence, there will still be a need for placing
people under Section 8 and voucher system; and when planning for
the library, Council should have parallel plans for people who will
be displaced.
John Scott Graham, 17 Tregloan Court, stated he is in favor of
purchase of motel so the City can have space for homeless, and for
barter of better location of parking lot behind the Elks Club, the
City building occupied by the County Health Care Facility be moved
to Linoaks motel, and Alameda Food Bank have space made available
to them; build library on Lincoln behind Elks Club with easement
for foot traffic to library; let Elks Club have land where County
Building is presently located as trade -off for a parking lot.
Richard Roth, 1417 - 5th Street, reviewed demolition costs, stated
parking lot cost and landscaping are low estimates; he believes
the cost of buying two more businesses, their land, and a home
should be double the amount noted; parking revenues are to be used
which were to provide more parking; there is no add -in for
inflation; and stated Council should review carefully.
President Corica stated he has faith in the City Manager's cost
estimates as he has been a Public Works Director and knows
construction costs.
The City Manager noted that demolition costs are lower when there
are many items to be sold for salvage; the professional consultant
provided the cost of purchase of the additional buildings and land;
and explained further detail regarding the figures involved.
Del Blaylock, 1903 Encinal, stated he is not concerned about the
validity of the figures but is more concerned about the use of the
UDAG funds; requested Council think about funding and provide
another method for funding the purchase of the site.
David Plummer, 1401 High Street, stated the City is not getting a
March 21, 1989
08
library with 42,000 square feet but 31,500 square feet; the
Carnegie library with an annex would be 31,000 square feet, so for
an additional 500 square feet, it will cost approximately
$6,000,000 more.
Councilmember Camicia made a motion to introduce the ordinance and
requested that, off - agenda, Council explore the request of the
Homeless Network concerning units on an interim basis.
Councilmember Monsef seconded the motion which was carried by
unanimous voice vote - 5.
FINAL PASSAGE OF ORDINANCES
89 -221 Ordinance No. , N.S. "Amending the Alameda Municipal
Code by amending various sections of Chapter 1, Title XI, thereof,
relating to regulations for yards for substandard lots and for
permitted encroachments in required yards." (Continued from March
14, 1989 Council Meeting.)
Councilmember Thomas moved the ordinance be tabled to the next
Council Meeting. Councilmember Monsef seconded and the motion was
carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.
NEW BUSINESS
89 -222 Councilmember Camicia requested to be advised whether the
former City Attorney is associated with the firm of Meyer &
Mitchell; he is interested because Mr. Mitchell does some work
for the City.
ADJOURNMENT
89 -223 Councilmember Monsef stated Vice -Mayor Thomas lost a member
of her family a few days ago and requested adjournment in memory of
Dale Ganser as an expression of Council's deepest sympathy to
Vice -Mayor Thomas.
President Corica adjourned the meeting in memory of Dale Ganser,
Vice Mayor Thomas's stepbrother.
The meeting was adjourned at approximately 12:00 a.m.
Respectfully submitted,
4
DIANE B. FELSCH
City Clerk
The agenda for this meeting was posted 72 hours in advance in
accordance with the Brown Act.
March 21, 1989