1970-07-07 Regular CC MinutesREGULAR MEETING OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ALAMEDA
HELD TUESDAY EVENING - - - - -
- JULY 7, 1970
The meeting convened at 7:30 o'clock p.m. with President La Croix presiding. The Pledge of
Allegiance was led by Councilman Longaker and was followed by an inspiring Invocation delivered by The
Reverend Doyle D. Dewberry, Pastor of the Calvary Baptist Church.
ROLL CALL:
The roll was called and Councilmen Fore, Levy, Longaker, McCall and President La Croix
were noted present. Absent None.
MINUTES:
1. The minutes of the regular meeting held June 16 and the special meeting held
approved as transcribed.
WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS:
2. 1/ From Alameda Jaycee Auxiliary, signed by Mrs. Steven Fletcher,
with regard to the continued building taking place in the City.
President, expressing deep conce
President La Croix congratulated the Auxiliary on its interest and agreed there was reason for concern on
this subject. He expressed the hope that through proper approach to the question, building could be curtailed
and held to a point which would be in the best interests of the City and that some of the problems which
had beset the community in the last few years in this connection might be overcome.
3. V From Bay Farm Island Reclamation District No. 2105, signed by Mr. Bruce T. Mitchell, Secretary,
ing approval of Warrant No. 170 in the amount of $50,000 to replenish the revolving fund.
The matter was referred to "Resolutions"
4. From Mr. Bob Alexander, 1830 Nason Street, protesting the rules for tournament play on the Golf
Courses. He complained that he, as the Chairman of two golf tournaments, had been given a set of rules
which prohibited tournament play on the North Course on weekends. However, he stated he had observed that
some organizations had been permitted to conduct tournaments on that Course.
President La Croix stated he had discussed this complaint with the Chairman of the Recreation Commission.
He had been informed that there had been some deviation from the regular procedure in one or two instances,
but that the Recreation Department staff and the Commission were studying the matter and attempting to
formulate a policy which would eliminate the ;possibility of occurrences of this kind.
Councilman Longaker commented that he was grateful to Mr. Alexander for bringing the matter to the attention'
of the Council and that a policy would be set which would preclude a recurrence. He pointed out the matter
would be discussed at the meeting of the Commission on July 9 and suggested that Mr. Alexander attend.
5. From Miss Tonya Parnak, 1333 Walnut Street, Berkeley, commending the Council for its response
suggestions that salvable items be accumulated for recycling.
President La Croix accepted the accolades with appreciation and said he felt it would be proper to thank
the City Manager, the City Engineer and his staff for their initial interest and efforts in carrying out
this project. He extended congratulations to ;Mr. Hanna on the commendation.
6. From Mr. William S. Godfrey, 1235 Hawthorne Street, requesting an extension of time of one year for
completion of public improvements in connection with Parcel Map No. 427. The property involved was at the
southwesterly end of Hawthorne Street.
City Engineer Hanna stated the property in question was unusually difficult to plan and improve
result, it had taken a much longer period of time to develop than was originally estimated. He
was no disadvantage to the public or to the neighborhood in extending the time
Councilman McCall moved the requested time extension of one year be granted for completion of said public
improvements in connection with the designated Parcel Map. Councilman Levy seconded the motion which
carried on the following roll call vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None.
7. ✓ From Park Street District Association, signed by Mr. Gordon H. Matson, Chairman Parking Committee,
requesting the decision be delayed on disposition of the Webb Avenue Fire Station property until further
studies could be made on parking conditions and needs, submitting a petition signed by 344 people recommend-
ing the City acquire locations indicated on the attached drawing for off - street parking.
President La Croix pointed out that proposals had been invited on disposition of this property and the
Council was waiting to observe the response. It was expected that a report would be before the Council a
its meeting of July 21.; Mr. Matson was to be informed that no action was contemplated until the Council had
received this information and had the opportunity to discuss and consider the matter thoroughly.
Councilman McCall called attention to the proposal of the Alameda Historical Society .dated June 16
It was stated this matter, would be considered in connection with the bid review.
8. From The Honorable Randolph Collier, Senator from the First State District and Chairman of the
Committee on Transportation, with regard to legislation on diversion of gas tax funds. It was requested
that the City Council adopt a resolution opposing any such diversion.
City Manager Weller, on request, expressed the opinion that the Council, should it adopt a resolution such
as requested, would be locking itself into a position which might or might not be tenable in the future.
He said he felt the general position of the Council in the matter was quite clear, that it did not want
presently allocated gas tax funds diverted for purposes unrelated to the basic and present purposes for
which the tax was enacted. He suggested, however, that there might be an occasion when the use of these
funds could be proposed for a purpose which would seem appropriate to the Council at the time He also
suggested that the City Council might desire to express opposition to AB 1320 with regard to diversion
of gas tax funds in support of education.
Councilman McCall expressed his agreement with Senator Collier's position in this matter. He pointed out
there had been extensive studies on street and highway deficiencies for which these funds were needed.
Councilman Fore congratulated Senator Collier on his stand and expressed his firm thinking that gas tax
funds should not be diverted to other areas.
After some discussion, Councilman Longaker moved that the City Council take no action in this matter.
Councilman Levy seconded the motion which carried on the following roll call vote. Aye's: Councilmen
Levy, Longaker and President La Croix, (3). Noes: Councilman Fore and McCall, (2). Absent : None.
Councilman McCall requested that Mr. Weller furnish the Council with a complete report on Senator Collier's
letter, as he felt the Council had voted on something on which it did not have the entire story. Council-
man Longaker explained the reason for his motion was that he felt he did not know enough about the subject
at this point to take any action, and he would like to have more information on it.
HEARINGS:
9. /In the Matter of an Appeal from the decision of the Planning Board to grant a Use Permit to allow a
nursery school and/or day care center at 44 Garden Road. The Appeal had been filed by Mr. John E. Mitcheom
on behalf of Vince G. and Sol A. Legaspi.
The involved parties had been informed that this would be the time and place for the Hearing in this matter
and the minutes of the Planning Board meeting at which the application was considered had been sent to the
Councilmen.
Mr. Donald Johnson, Planning Director, presented the factual data as submitted in his memorandum dated
June 30, 1970. He said the Appeal concerned a Use Permit granted to Mr. William W. Whattam for a child
day care center at the designated address. He pointed out that the Appeal had called attention to the
petition signed by 32 home owners in the immediate vicinity, which was presented at the Council meeting of
June 16 during the Hearing on the Appeal by Mr. Whattam from certain conditions stipulated by the Board in
granting the Use Permit. The matter was now before the Council on total Appeal.
Mr. Johnson said the staff position remained substantially the same. It was felt the business could be
tolerated and permitted if the limits imposed by the Board in granting the Permit were exerted; in other
words, if the applicant would observe the limit of only six children and the other conditions. He said
the staff had no specific knowledge as to whether the limits were completely acceptable to the applicants
nor if they were presently being observed. He said Mrs. Whattam had informed him that she could not
operate under the conditions specified.
City Attorney Cunningham stated, in connection with questions on the subject, that as long as the Appeal
period was open the applicant could not consider that the Use Permit had given him a property right.
He stated the issue before the Council was whether the action and findings of the Planning Board at its
meeting of June 8, under Section 11-162(e) of the Municipal Code, should be affirmed, modified or reversed.
On the call for proponents, Mr. John E. Mitcheom, 1319 High Street, addressed the Council on behalf of
Mr. and Mrs. Legaspi. He called attention to the three items listed to substantiate the Appeal: ,(1) exces-
sive vehicular traffic caused by applicant's operation; (2) excessive noise coming from premises; (3)
hazardous condition created by exits directly into joint driveway. He stated he would be glad to answer
any questions the Councilmen might have.
A question and answer period brought out the information that the agreement on the driveway use had been
between the former owners of the properties that there would be traffic in and out and no stopping, and
that there was no consideration given for use other than that permitted in an "R-1" zone. Mr. Mitcheom
stated people parking their cars in the driveway to pick up their children had caused the situation to
come to a head.
With regard to the claim that there was excessive noise, Mr. Mitcheom stated the lots were of a sub-
standard width and the adjacent property on the north was quite close to the subject property. Conse-
quently, the neighbor had been bothered by the increasing number of children and the noise of their
playing in the yard. Several of the Councilmen had inspected the property and said they had found it to
be very quiet.
Mr. Mitcheom stated the business was in operation at the present time and the neighbors claimed it was
exceeding the number of children allowed by the Council ruling. He contended that the location was simply
not appropriate for a nursery and that the Use Permit should be denied on the grounds outlined. He said
he could not see where there was a financial hardship and felt it was reasonable that people would want
to get along with their neighbors. He pointed out again the common driveway with double garages at the
rear of the lots and the turnaround area, and the difficulty which would be caused by installing a fence
with cars having to back out.
Mr. Noah H. Garrett, 25 Garden Road, said it was his impression that the Whattams still did not have a
license for the operation of this business and there were nine children from the home at Godfrey Park and
five in the home. He urged that the Permit be denied.
In clarification, Mr. Cunningham stated from the time the Planning Board had granted the Use Permit for
the occupation, the Whattams could legally operate the business under the conditions imposed, subject to
the appeal time running out and the knowledge that during that time an appeal might be filed, as had
happened.
On the call for opponents, Mr. William W. Whattam, 44 Garden Road, came forward. He stated Mrs. Whattam
had had her vacation planned for some time so she could not be present at this Hearing. He stated they
did not have a license from the State issued by the Alameda County Welfare Department, that the home study
had not been completed as yet. He said they were operating the business in the home, with a woman whom
they had employed for quite some time doing the housework and caring for six children. He pointed out that
their children were on vacation with Mrs. Whattam so it was possible to have six children of other mothers
in the home. When their children were home, he said, they visited with relatives or friends during the day.
Councilman Longaker questioned the operation of the child care center without license from the
Department. Mr. Whattam stated this was permitted while the home study was in progress.
Councilman Fore questioned the fact, in view of the stipulations limiting the number of children to six,
that he had seen ten children at the home on June 16. Mr. Whattam stated they had endeavored to allow their
clients time to find other facilities.
Wel fare
Councilman McCall questioned the previous Appeal of the Whattams for more than six children in view of the
circumstances. Mr. Whattam said they could get along with the restriction but would like to be permitted
to have more children as there was a demand for the service and they felt they could handle more. He invited
the Councilmen to inspect the premises in order that they might have a better picture of the situation.
He stated there was no agreement with regard to the driveway, that eight feet of the ten -foot driveway was
his property. Councilman McCall said he knew of the good the Whattams were doing with their service. On
the other hand, he pointed out, the home was located in an "R -1" District and he would not want an operation
of this type next to his home.
Mrs. Shirley Ortega, 2465 Shore Line Drive, and Mrs. Carolyn Runyon, 2020 Alameda Avenue, spoke in strong
support of Mr. and Mrs. Whattam. Mrs. Ortega stated she wished there were more such facilities in the City.
The Hearing was declared closed. Councilman McCall stated he would like to have a full clarification from
the City Attorney with regard to the aspect of the license in this matter. He felt there was a conflict
with`the zoning issue. Mr. Cunningham agreed that parties involved might face a dilemma in a situation of
this sort. He said he could not see any illegality except insofar as the conditions set down by the City
agencies were concerned on the 90 -day limitation with six children.
There was some discussion. Councilman McCall moved the Hearing be continued, pointing out the 90 -day li
ation imposed by the Planning Board. The motion died for lack of a second. In reply to a question, Mr.
Cunningham stated the Permit could be reviewed by the Planning Board at any time for compliance.
President La Croix stated he felt there were two courses open to the Council - either it did not want the
operation, as requested in the Appeal being heard this evening, or it believed in the operation, as consti-
tuted under the Use Permit granted by the Board and upheld by the Council on the Appeal by Mr. Whattam at
its meeting of June 16.
Councilman Fore then moved the Appeal be granted and the decision of the Planning Board at its meeting of
June 8, 1970, be reversed. Councilman Longaker seconded' the motion, saying if he had been present at the
Hearing on June 16 he would have felt that granting a Use Permit under the circumstances would have been
a mistake. On roll call the motion carried by the following vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None.
The hope was expressed that a reasonable time would be allowed for clients of the service to place their
children elsewhere. President La Croix suggested that a list be provided through the Family Service Bureau
or through the Red Cross of properly licensed and authorized day care centers in the City for people in need
of the service. It was suggested that those present needing such facilities contact Mr. Johnson, who was
requested to investigate the matter.
10. In the Matter of an Appeal from the decision of the Planning Board to deny a variance to allow a non-
conforming use (taxi operation and parking facilities) in the "R -4" District at 1616 Paru Street. The
Appeal had been filed by Mr. George W. Wilson, owner of Goodwill Cab.
Mr. Wilson had been informed that this would be the time and place for the Hearing in the
atter.
Mr. Johnson reviewed the action of the Board, as set forth in his memorandum dated July 2, 1970. He said
the property on which Mr. Wilson proposed to relocate is 70. by 108 feet, or 7,560 square feet, with no
improvements other than a large rather dilapidated storage shed. Under the Zoning Ordinance it could legally
contain five dwelling units. Mr. Wilson proposed to improve the storage shed, grade and surface the remain-
ing property and to store his vehicles and perform light maintenance on them on the subject property.
The Board in its motion for denial had recognized that Mr. Wilson was to be commended for the operation he
ran. However, in light of the neighborhood feeling on the matter, six persons having appeared in opposition,
and because it was a business use in a residential zone, it could make no finding for hardship and therefore
had entered a unanimous resolution for denial.
City Attorney Cunningham stated the issue before the Council was whether or not the action and findings o'
the Planning Board, under Section 11- 161(b) and (e) of the Municipal Code, should be affirmed, modified o
reversed.
On the call for proponents, Mr. Wilson, 1616 Buena Vista Avenue, addressed the Council. He reviewed the
operation of his business and said, since the doubling of his force, conditions had become very crowded in
the operation, carried on in his home. He said he had an opportunity to purchase the subject property and
he felt it could be used for apartments or for his business. He said the business would be operated in the
same way as at present; the move would merely allow him more outlet. He explained that he had appeared
before the Board on the same application in April and been denied. At that time, he had inadvertently
missed the appeal time and had therefore refiled his application.
Mr. Wilson said the opponents to the proposal had claimed there would be additional noise. He said he
would have two shifts, checking in and out morning and evening. He said the cabs were contacted by radio
and the only time they would be on the premises would be when they were out of operation. He did not feel
there would be objectionable noise.
In reply to a question, Mr. Wilson stated there were usually one or two cabs parked at his home. He said
he used as many cabs as the business called for, and there was a dispatcher at the home twenty-four hours
a day. Mr. Wilson said a boat works across the street from his home used the street for parking and
because of this situation and the crowding of his home due to the increase in personnel, he wished to use
the Paru Street location for the business. He said there had been no opposition to his operating his
business from his home at 1616 Buena Vista Avenue, at the time he had applied for a permit to do so some
years ago.
Councilman Fore questioned Mr. Wilson briefly with regard to the possibility of his constructing an apart-
ment dwelling on the subject property in the future.
Messrs. John Barni, Sr., 1438 Park Street; Harry Schroeder, 1624 Buena Vista Avenue; Joseph Supriano,
1620 Buena Vista Avenue, and Mrs. Supriano spoke in support of the Appeal.
On the call for opponents, the following spoke: Messrs. Spencer M. Thatcher, 1601 Lincoln Avenue; Ralph
Pierce, 1620 Paru Street; Albert Loeffler, 3270 Madison Street, owner of property at 1598 Pacific Avenue;
William Nelson, 1607 Paru Street. They objected to a commercial business being operated in a residential
area, although they commended Mr. Wilson on the operation of his business. They also expressed concern
for the safety of the children in the neighborhood, in view of the additional traffic which would be
generated by the proposed business.
Councilman Longaker stated he had observed in inspecting the property that the surrounding homes were very
well maintained and that there was a great deal of traffic in the area. He moved the Appeal be denied
and the decision of the Planning Board in this matter be affirmed. Councilman McCall seconded the motion
which carried on the following roll call vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None.
The hope was expressed that Mr. Wilson could find a properly zoned parcel on which he might relocate his
business.
REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS:
11.Y From Public Utilities Board, signed by Mr. L. F. Randall, Secretary, submitting its Resolution
No. 2711 adopting the Budget for the Bureau of Electricity for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1971, and
pledging a dividend of $850,000 to the General Fund of the City.
Councilman Levy commended the Board on the amount of the dividend and moved the report be accepted.
Councilman Fore seconded the motion which carried on the following roll call vote. Ayes: Five. Noes:
None. Absent: None.
12. From the Mayor, City Manager and City Auditor, submitting a report on the Count of Money hel
1970, indicating the sum of $10,132,553.43 in the City Treasury at that time.
The report was noted and ordered filed.
13. From the Auditor and Assessor, submitting the net assessment values for the fiscal year ending
June 30, 1971, indicating the gross taxable City roll at $127,369,237, exclusive of the State-assessed
public utility roll.
Councilman Fore moved the report be accepted. Councilman Levy seconded the motion which carried on the
following roll call vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None.
14. / From the City Manager, recommending contract be awarded to Gallagher & Burk, Inc., low bidder, for
the project of Resurfacing Tilden Way and Park Street north of Blanding Avenue, at a price of $20,025.20.
Councilman McCall moved the recommendation be approved, and the contract be awarded to the designated firm
for the specified project at the price quoted. Councilman Longaker seconded the motion which carried on
the following roll call vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None.
15. V From the City Manager, transmitting recommendations on the 1970-71 salaries and benefits for Fire
Department and Miscellaneous City employees.
d May 20,
The recommendations agreed upon during the "meet and confer" sessions held during the previous month
with the Fire Fighters Union, Local 689, and the Alameda Municipal Employees' Association were as follows;
as stated in detail in the memorandum dated July 2, 1970: a general salary increase for all employees
represented by the Association of 71/2% effective July 1, 1970; a general salary increase for all employees
represented by the Fire Fighters of 7% effective July 1,1970, and an additional 3% effective January 1,
1971; certain additional adjustments as listed for specific classifications.
Benefits included minor changes in medical coverage in Blue Cross and Kaiser health plans; modifications
in the sick leave plan; adjustment in the vacation schedule to provide an annual allowance of four weeks
vacation after 15 years rather than after 20 years; formalization of an education incentive plan.
Applicable to Fire Department employees were benefits to modify the holiday pay formula; payment of over-
time in excess of 48 hours; reduction of probation period; and a change in the acting pay policy.
Applicable to Miscellaneous Employees represented by the Employees' Association were benefits to modify
the holiday policy; payment for uniforms for Crossing Guards reduction of the work week for Engineering
employees to coincide with hours worked by other City Hall employees.
Councilman Fore moved the recommendation be approved. Councilman Levy seconded the motion.
Mr. Cunningham stated he assumed the motion included a general direction to the staff to prepare the neces-
sary ordinances and resolutions to accomplish the recommendationsset forth. Councilmen Fore and Levy
indicated this was, their understanding and the intention of the motion.
After some discussion and clarification the question was put and the motion carried on the
call vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None.
16.V From the City Manager, recommending a time extension of ten working days be granted the contractor
completion of work on the project of Widening and Resurfacing Maitland Drive and County Road.
Councilman Longaker moved the requested time extension of ten working days be granted for completion of the
specified project. Councilman McCall seconded the motion which carried on the following roll call vote.
Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None.
ollowing roll
17. From the City Manager, recommending public improvements in connection with Parcel Map No. 442 be
accepted and the bond be released. This Map covered division of property at the westerly corner of Fir
Avenue and Island Drive for Mr. Anthony Lagorio.
Councilman Levy moved the recommendation be approved and said public improvements in connection with Parcel
Map No. 442 be accepted and the bond on file be released. Councilman McCall seconded the motion which
carried on the following roll call vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None.
NEW BUSINESS:
18. President La Croix stated it had been brought to his attention that, especially during the summer
months, when many children ride their bicycles, there is an increase of injury to older persons due to
thoughtlessness or failure to realize the hazards. He asked if, through the appropriate City Department,
the Alameda Times -Star might be requested to cooperate with an article on this subject, pointing out to
youngsters that they have a responsibility in riding their bicycles on the streets and sidewalks of the
City, and that the problem be brought to their attention.
The City Attorney suggested parents might show more interest in such an article if they were reminded that
they were liable in monetary damages for injuries to person or property caused by heir children's willful
negligence.
19. At this time, President La Croix recognized and welcomed Mrs. Anne Diament, membe
Authority of the City of Alameda.
RESOLUTIONS
20. =' The following resolution was introduced by Councilman Fore, who moved its adop
"Resolution No. 7643
Approving Warrant No. 170 of Board of Trustees of Reclamation District
No. 2105.
The motion to adopt said resolution was seconded by Councilman Levy and on roll call ca
ing vote. Ayes: Four. Noes: President La Croix, (1). Absent: None.
21.E The following resolution was introduced by Councilman Levy, who moved its
"Resolution No. 7644
Confirming Canvass by Board of Supervisors of Alameda
Primary Election Held June 2, 1970."
ied by the follow-
adoption:
The motion to adopt said resolution was seconded by Councilman McCall and on roll cal
ing vote. Ayes : Five. Noes: None. Absent: None.
carried by the follow-
22. The following resolution was introduced by Councilman M c C a l l , who moved its adoption:
"Resolution No. 7645
Ordering Vacation of Three Unused 'Public Utility Easements (Within
Lot 2, Block 2, Tract 3011)."
The motion to adopt said resolution was seconded by Councilman Levy and on
ing vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None.
23.
The follow
oll call carried by the follow
ng resolution was introduced by Councilman McCall, who moved its adoption:
Approving Final Map of Condominium Subdivision Known as Tract 3189,
Authorizing Execution of Agreement for Construction of Public Improve-
ments Therein, and Approving Faithful Performance Bond as to Sufficiency
(Ballena Bay, Pan — Pacific Development Company)."
The motion to adopt, said resolution was seconded by Councilman Levy.
Mr. Cunningham pointed out that a 28-foot private roadway appearing on the Tentative Map of the subdivision
had been modified to a width of 24 feet. It so appeared on the Final Map and was approved by the City
Engineer.
The question was then put and the motion carried on the following roll call vote. Ayes: Four. Noes: None,
Abstaining: President La Croix, (1). Absent: None.
24. The following resolution was introduced by Councilman McCall, who moved its adoption:
"Resolution No. 7647
Authorizing the Execution of a Contract with Brink's, Incorporated, for
Their Services Relating to Parking Meter Collections, for the Fiscal
Year 1970-1971."
The motion to adopt said resolution was seconded by Councilman Levy and on roll call, carried by the follow-
ing vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None.
It was directed, in accordance with Mr. Cunningham's request, that the Mayor and the City Clerk not sign
the contract until the required insurance was furnished by Brink's.
25:' The following resolution was introduced by Councilman Fore, who moved its adoption:
"Resolution No. 7648
Adopting Specifications, Special Provisions and Plans for Pavement Repair
and Resurfacing of Otis Drive from Grand Street to Park Street and Re-
surfacing of Clinton Avenue from Willow Street to Park Street, Calling
for Bids and Directing City Clerk to Advertise Same."
The motion to adopt said resolution was seconded by Councilman McCall and on roll call carried by the follow-
ing vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None.
26.V President La Croix stated he, as Chairman of the Alameda County Mayors' Conference, had met with two
other Mayors and Supervisors John Murphy, Chairman of the Alameda County Board of Supervisors, Emanuel
Razeto and L. W. Sweeney, with regard to the Highway Advisory Committee meetings, which Supervisor Razeto
had chaired for a number of years. He said it had been felt for some time that the Mayors of Alameda County
would like stronger representation than they had been receiving, in all fairness to Supervisor Razeto. The
Highway Advisory Committee had voted to have a representative of the Mayors' Conference chair the Committee
on a rotating basis. As a result of the meeting just held, President La Croix stated he was pleased to
announce that the Chairman for this year would be former Mayor of Newark James Ballentine and there would
be a Vice-Chairman.
ORDINANCES FOR PASSAGE:
27. V
"Ordinance No. 1624,
New Series
Amending the Alameda Municipal Code by Repealing Sections 3-1251 and
3-1252 Thereof, Relating to Water Users Tax."
President La Croix explained that it had been determined after a period of time through study that it was
not economically proper or feasible at this time for the East Bay Municipal Utility District to collect
this tax as the costs of collection far exceeded the amount to be derived by the City from such tax. It
had therefore been recommended by the City Manager that the City not collect the water users tax.
President La Croix stated the proposal had been challenged and a meeting had been set up with the President
and Manager of the Utility District, the City Manager, Councilman McCall and himself. He said he felt it
had been proved it was not proper to attempt to enforce the collection of this tax at this time It had
been mentioned that if any other city were to adopt the tax, the District would have to find means of
making the collection, which would make the costs less and therefore might make it more beneficial to the
City to enter into the collection of the water users tax at that time
Councilman McCall said he understood the problem but he did not think it fair. He requested that the
Alameda County and the Contra Costa Mayors' Conferences look into the matter as, if all cities were to
impose the tax, it would be economically feasible and much simpler to set up the collection. Under the
circumstances, he said he would have to agree and go along with the ordinance, although he would continue
to pursue the matter for, as long as the Bureau of Electricity was taxed, the Utility District was in the
same category.
Councilman Longaker moved the ordinance be passed as submitted. The motion was seconded by Councilman
Levy and carried on the following roll call vote. Ayes Councilmen Levy, Longaker and President La Croix,
(3). Noes: Councilmen Fore and McCall, (2). Absent: None.
BILLS:
28. Two itemized Lists of Claims against the City of Alameda and the Departments thereof, in the total
amounts of $56,370.10 and $116,400.65, respectively, were presented to the Council at this meeting.
The Lists were accompanied by certifications from the City Manager that the Claims shown were correct.
Councilman Levy moved the bilis as itemized in the two Lists of Claims filed with the City Clerk on July 7,
1970, and presented to the City Council at this meeting, be allowed and paid. The motion was seconded by
Councilman Longaker and carried on the following roll call vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent:, None.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, GENERAL:
29. Mr. Frank Gottstein, 731 Haight Avenue, stated he had seen a Board of Supervisors candida
post in his block. He inquired if there was not an ordinance prohibiting this. He was assured
such a City ordinance and the candidate would be informed and requested to remove the signs.
FILING:
30. Monthly Report of Securities Transactions - June, 1970.
31. Agreement - Between Pan - Pacific Development Company and City - re Tract 3189.
32. Agreement - Between Brink's, Incorporated and City of Alameda.
33. Specifications No. PW 7 -70 -14 - Pavement Repair and Tesurfacing of Otis Drive
Clinton Avenue, Willow to Parka
MEMORIAL RESOLUTIONS
34. The following resolution was introduced by Councilman McCall, who moved its adoption:
olution No. 7649
Resolution of the Council of the City of Alameda in Memoriam to
Bessie V. Frates, Retired Employee.
"IN A SPIRIT OF SADNESS, the Council of the City of Alameda records the death o
one of its former loyal employees, BESSIE V. FRATES.
"WHEREAS, Mrs. Frates had commenced her employment with the City as an Intermediate
Typist -Clerk on July 6, 1959, and had performed her duties conscientiously and most efficiently
until her retirement on October 1, 1965; and
"WHEREAS, Mrs. Frates had always been a most amiable and obliging person, well liked
for her kindly and cooperative attitude toward her fellow employees.
"NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that, in recognition of the faithful service given
by Mrs. Frates while in City employ and her harmonious relations with all of her associates,
the Council of the City of Alameda hereby expresses its gratitude for the loyalty and excellent
work of this former employee.
"BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that this resolution be spread in full upon the
this meeting and a copy thereof be sent to the family of Mrs. Frates in order to ex
members a sincere expression of condolence in their bereavement.
"BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that when this meeting of the Council of the City of Alameda
adjourns, it shall do so in respect to the memory of BESSIE V. FRATES."
The motion to adopt said resolution was seconded by Councilman Levy and on roll call car
ing vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None.
35. ,. The following resolution was introduced by Councilman Longaker, who moved its adoption:
"Resolution No. 7650
Resolution of the Council of the City of Alameda in Memoriam to
Walter V. Howe.
"WITH GREAT SORROW, the Council of the City of Alameda
its civic- minded citizens, WALTER V. HOWE.
ecords the death of one
"WHEREAS, Mr. Howe began his public service on June 18, 1940, with his appointment
as a member of the Civil Service Board, from which membership he resigned on May 6, 1941, to
accept immediate appointment as a Councilman of the City of Alameda to fill ;a vacancy and then,
at the next General Municipal Election held March 9, 1943, was elected to the City Council for
a four -year term ending in April 1947, during which time he served as Vice- Mayor; and
"WHEREAS, Mr. Howe was next appointed, on December 19, 1950, as a member of the
of Education, in which post he continued to serve until June 30,'1962; and
"WHEREAS, Mr. Howe had served conscientiously and capably in these phases of City
responsibility and had been highly respected in the community for his participation in the
worthwhile programs of civic, fraternal and religious organizations.
"NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that, in recognition of his contribution of personal
service to the City on behalf of its people and his friendliness toward all of his associates,
the Council of the City of Alameda hereby expresses its sorrow at the loss of this fine man
and its appreciation of his innate kindness.
"BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this resolution be spread in full upon the minutes o
this meeting and that a copy - thereof be sent to the family of Mr. Howe in order to extend to
its members a sincere expression of sympathy in their bereavement.
"BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that when this meeting of the Council of the City 0
adjourns, it shall do so in respect to the memory of WALTER V. HOWE."
The motion to adopt said resolution was seconded by Councilman Levy and on roll call carried by the follow-
ing vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None.
The President declared all of the foregoing resolutions adopted.
36. Councilman McCall stated he had been quite upset with regard to the discussion between Messrs. Alan
Bingham of A-C Transit District and George Silliman of BART at the Mayors' Conference which had met in the
City of Alameda recently. He said he felt the City of Alameda should receive the best possible trans-
portation for its people and he, when he was Mayor, had fought hard for this provision. He said he felt
it would behoove the City Council to take a firm stand until such time as it was guaranteed a full connec-
tion for the people to get to San Francisco from Alameda in the same amount of time, with insistence that
A-C Transit provide transportation unless BART felt they would like to construct a tube to provide a
direct connection, as originally promised.
President La Croix pointed out he had informed Mr. Silliman that many people would continue to use the "0"
express line to San Francisco, operated by the A-C Transit District. He said a study was expected from
the Transit District shortly on this subject. He said he felt the meeting had been a good one as it
showed the necessity for cooperation between the BART and A-C Transit people. He said he shared Council-
man McCall 's sentiments and had so stated.
37. Councilman Fore moved the Council adjourn this meeting to an adjourned regular session on Thursday
afternoon, July 9, 1970, at 5:00 o'clock, for an executive session. The motion was seconded by Councilman
Levy and unanimously carried.
38. v President La Croix stated the meeting would be adjourned in respect to the memory of Bessie V. Frates,
Walter V. Howe and Kimberly Ann "Kim" McCaffity. He said Miss McCaffity, only 22 years of age, had been a
very fine young lady, a neighbor of his working for the Recreation Department, one of the most vivacious
young people, extremely outgoing, athletic and well-liked by adults as well as young people. She had
organized within the Recreation Department the girls' softball league and had participated in a volleyball
league. Just prior to her death from cancer, she had gone to Hawaii with a competitive volleyball team.
He then requested that all stand for a moment of silence in observance of the passing of Bessie V. Frates,
Walter V. Howe and Kimberly Ann "Kim" McCaffity.
ADJOURNMENT:
39. There being no further business to come before the meeting, the Council adjourned in respect to the
memory of BESSIE V. FRATES, WALTER V. HOWE and KIMBERLY ANN "KIM" McCAFFITY, to assemble in adjourned
regular session on Thursday afternoon, July 9, 1970, at 5:00 o'clock.
Respectfully submitted,
City Clerk