Loading...
1971-05-04 Regular CC Minutes23`1 REGULAR MEETING OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ALAMEDA HELD TUESDAY MAY 4, 1971 The meeting convened at 7:30 o'clock p.m. with President La Croix presiding. The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Councilman McCall and was followed by an inspiring Invocation delivered by The Reverend Laurence T. Nutting, Retired Pastor of the Court Street United Methodist Church. ROLL CALL: The roll was called and Councilmen Fore, Levy, Longaker, McCall and President La Croix, Jr., (5), were noted present. Absent: None. MINUTES: 1. Councilman Fore called attention to a statement by Councilman McCall at the regular meeting held April 20, as recorded in the minutes, that "knowing the busy schedule of all members of the Council and that the present Vice Mayor had done an excellent job in the office, he would move that the name of Councilman Gustave Levy be placed in nomination. Councilman Longaker seconded the motion." Councilman Fore said Councilman McCall had not contacted him to learn his schedule and he requested the minutes be corrected to state that Councilman McCall had contacted other members of the Council in this regard but not Councilman Fore. He said no one knew his schedule. Councilman Levy said he had no objection to the change. With this addition, the minutes of the regular meeting held April 20, and those of the special meeting held April 22, 1971, were approved as transcribed. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS: 2. "1 Communications had been received from the following, in favor of rezoning from the "R -5 ", General Apartment, to the "R -4 ", Neighborhood Apartment District, certain properties in the area of Broadway, Lincoln and Santa Clara Avenues: James and Lillian Chrisand, 2700 Santa Clara Avenue; Nancy Murphy, 549 Santa Clara Avenue; Mrs. Josephine Morrissey, 2119 Encinal Avenue; Nathalie L. Bain, 2600 Santa Clara Avenue; Mrs. Dorothy Francis, 463 -A Central Avenue; Louie C. and Rose A. Rava, 1519 Broadway. The letters were referred to "Ordinances for Passage ". 3. v9 From the Housing Authority of the City of Alameda, signed by Mr. R. D. Marquardt, Executive Director - Secretary, transmitting the request of Chairman Howard K. Palmer, Jr., to speak on the subject of additional leased housing. President La Croix recognized Chairman Palmer and Commissioners Ken Kofman and William S. Godfrey. The latter addressed the Council, saying the purpose of his appearance was to answer any questions the members of the Council might have on the communication dated April 27, 1971, from the Housing Authority to the City Manager, copies of which had been sent to the Councilmen to inform them of the status of the leased housing program. Mr. Godfrey commented that the Housing Authority, being a separate political subdivision, was not subject to City taxes. However, he said, the Authority was appreciative of the many services rendered by the City and he was very happy, on behalf of Chairman Palmer, to hand to the City Manager the second installment check for the voluntary in lieu tax of the Authority in the amount of $11,412.36. On question, Mr. Godfrey stated the Housing Authority was requesting that the Department of Housing and Urban Development commence again with the supplement program under Section 23 for 250 units, of which 100 must be delegated to elderly persons. This would net out at 78 additional units. Councilman McCall said he objected to anyone from outside of the City obtaining this low -cost housing. On question, Mr. Godfrey explained probably 99% plus of the families involved were originally Alameda people, although the Authority was not permitted to discriminate between Alameda residents and those from locations outside the City under the HUD program. He said he understood there were between 1100 and 1500 applications pending at the present time and the vast majority were old Alameda people, also there was no class discrimination whatsoever. It was stated there was no policy at the present time with regard to military people and this would have to be decided by the Authority before opening of the newly constructed buildings. Councilman McCall explained he felt it was a primary responsibility of the community to provide low -cost housing for young people in military service, in the low income category, who could not get housing on the Naval Base, and that the City's elderly persons must be given priority consideration. He said he had noted in the recent census figures that in San Leandro and Hayward there were not many people indicated in public housing. He expressed the opinion that until these cities do their fair share in this way, the City of Alameda should not be put in the position by the Federal Government of having to do more than at present. On request, City Attorney Cunningham stated it appeared that Article 34 of the Constitution of the State of California had been upheld as constitutional and he would assume, if the Authority wanted to build public housing beyond the number already authorized, that Article 34 would be applicable. After some discussion, it was determined that no action should be taken by the City Council in the matter at this time. 4. i From Bay Farm Island Reclamation District No. 2105, signed by Mr. Bruce T. Mitchell, Secretary, requesting approval of Warrant No. 175 in the amount of $50,000 to replenish the revolving fund. The matter was referred to "Resolutions ". 5. v Further communications had been received in favor of the proposed rezoning of the properties in the area of Broadway, Lincoln and Santa Clara Avenues from the following: Otto W. and Olive Babcock Sammet, 2624 Janis Circle; Florence and Bill Poole, 2631 Janis Circle; Mr. and Mrs. Edward B. Barrett, 2627 Janis Circle; Mr. and Mrs. Gary E. Jud, 2630 Janis Circle; Benjamin G. and Martha Medina, 2629 Janis Circle; Clarence R. and Marion A. Sherman, 2626 Janis Circle; Gladys M. MacDonald, 1517 Pearl Street; Jean L. Lead, 2628 Janis Circle; Floyd L. Boyle, 2621 Janis Circle; Mrs. B. Glatze, 2621 Janis Circle; Vera George Know, 2524 Central Avenue; Mrs. A. Boyle, 2621 Janis Circle; Pearl Lyerla, 2122 Santa Clara Avenue; Katherine E. and William Woodall, 1529 Court Street; Robert E. and Adah A. Lutz, 2997 Johnson Avenue; Mr. and Mrs. James MacDonnell, 2121 Encinal Avenue. 6. f' A petition signed by sixteen property owners in the area involved, thanking the Council for its sincere dedication and interest at the Hearing on the subject and requesting that the Ordinance be adopted to effect the zone change from the "R -5" to the "R -4" District. 7. From Mrs. Alice E. Peyresaub, sister, and Marie A. and Edward F. Gilligan, cousins, of the late Mr. Alfred J. Mathebat, owner of the property known as 1546 Broadway, indicating they were in favor of the rezoning. 8. From Mr. and Mrs. Robert Kopp, 2609 Santa Clara Avenue, the petitioners, commending the City Council on its action in declining to reopen the Hearing on the rezoning application and pointing out additional support from Mrs. Peyresaub and Mr. and Mrs. Gilligan brought the total to fourteen properties and 48,365 square feet of area represented, in favor of the zone change. 9. ' From Norma P. Barretta, Ph. D., San Pedro, California, a California State Credentialed School Psychologist presently studying various types of special education facilities in Europe, stating she hoped to work with Mr. and Mrs. Murphy in their proposed school to provide an unusual educational oppor- tunity for the children of Alameda. 10. '' ° From Mr. Richard C. West, 1728 Versailles Avenue, expressing opposition to the proposed rezoning on Broadway and the opinion that an equitable solution should be found. The communications were all referred to "Ordinances for Passage." REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: 11.V From the City Manager, recommending contract be awarded to Gallagher & Burk, Inc., low bidder, for the project of Improvement of Santa Clara Avenue from Grand Street to Park Street, at a price of $132,342. Councilman Longaker moved the recommendation be adopted, and the contract for the specified project be awarded to the designated company at the price quoted. The motion was seconded by Councilman Levy and carried on the following roll call vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None. 12.' From the Acting City Manager, reporting all work satisfactorily completed on the project of Installing a Storm Sewer in Ninth Street from Pacific Avenue to Buena Vista Avenue, recommending it be accepted and the Notice of Completion be ordered filed. Councilman Levy moved the recommendation be followed, the work on the specified project be accepted and the Notice of Completion be filed. Councilman Longaker seconded the motion which carried on the follow- ing roll call vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None. 13. `From the Acting City Manager, recommending contract be awarded to Western Toro & Garden Sales, Inc., sole bidder, for furnishing three Haulsters for the Golf and Park Departments, at a net price of $4,431.68. Councilman Fore moved the recommendation be approved, that the contract be awarded to the named company for furnishing the designated equipment at the price quoted. Councilman Levy seconded the motion which carried on the following roll call vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None. 14.E From the Acting City Manager, recommending contract be awarded to Cavanaugh Motors, sole bidder, for furnishing two Light Class and one Sub - Compact Sedans for the Street Department, at a net price of $6,604.88. Councilman McCall moved the recommendation be adopted, that the contract be awarded to the designated company for furnishing the specified vehicles at the price quoted. Councilman Fore seconded the motion which carried on the following roll call vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None. } 15. V From the Acting City Manager, submitting a progress report on adoption of the 1970 Building Code. This was in accordance with the request of the Council at its previous meeting in connection with a suggestion by Mr. J. Paul Gutleben, 2844 San Jose Avenue, that the requirements for fire blocking be omitted from the City's Building Code. It was reported that there was no objection by the appropriate staff members to removing the requirement from the restrictions and it was proposed to exclude the provision in adopting the 1970 Uniform Building Code in the next few months. Councilman Longaker moved the report be accepted. Councilman Fore seconded the motion which carried on the following roll call vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: 16. Brought up was the matter of the Final Map and Agreement for the subdivision known as Tract No. 3253, a twelve -unit condominium development on Willow Street between Whitehall Place and Sandcreek Way. 239 The subject had been continued from the meeting of April 6, 1971, pending receipt of the required bond from the subdivider. Mr. Cunningham requested that the matter be continued once again to the meeting of May 18, 1971, at which time the subdivider had assured him he would have obtained financing, and hence the bond and agreement would be on hand by that date. It was so ordered. NEW BUSINESS: 17.E Councilman McCall expressed his opposition to the published statements of Mr. Abe Kofman, Publisher of the Alameda Times -Star, on the subject of Councilman McCall's position with regard to the location of the new Post Office on the South Shore. He said everyone knew he was opposed to the site originally proposed between Webb and Lincoln Avenues but not including frontage on Everett Street, and to taking the property on Park Street, which would have wiped out a portion of what he considered a nice business district. He said he was proud and happy to have the building on the South Shore and hoped it would be the main office and would be a first -class facility providing adequate parking for employees and vehicles. Councilman McCall then voiced his strong objection to other remarks by Mr. Kofman with regard to replace- ment of the Fruitvale Bridge, the location of the proposed Civic Center complex, and his position on the City Council. He said his statements were no defamation of any member of the City Council or anyone else. He expressed his admiration for other members of the Kofman family, including Mr. Ken Kofman, member of the Housing Authority of the City of Alameda. President La Croix commented that it had been the unanimous opinion of the City Council that the site first chosen by the Post Office officials, between Webb and Lincoln Avenues, was the wrong location because of traffic flow and traffic congestion, as pointed up by the Planning Director and the City Engineer. 18. Councilman Fore commended Councilman McCall on his remarks. RESOLUTIONS: 19. The following resolution was introduced by Councilman Fore, who moved its adoption: "Resolution No. 7767 Approving Final Map of Subdivision Known as Tract 3258, Authorizing Execution of Agreement for Construction of Public Improvements Therein, Approving Faithful Performance Bonds as to Sufficiency, and Accepting Certain Easements and Parcels of Land (Braddock & Logan, a Copartnership, Subdividers)." The motion to adopt said resolution was seconded by Councilman Levy and carried on the following roll call vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None. 20. V The following resolution was introduced by Councilman McCall, who moved its adoption: "Resolution No. 7768 Approving Final Map of Condominium Subdivision Known as Tract 3299 (2709 Central Avenue - Doric Development, Inc., a California Corporation)." The motion to adopt said resolution was seconded by Councilman Levy and carried on the following roll call vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None. 21. ' ./The following resolution was introduced by Councilman Longaker, who moved its adoption: "Resolution No. 7769 Adopting Specifications for Furnishing to the City of Alameda Class 'B' Portland Cement Concrete Transit Mix for the Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 1972, Calling for Bids and Directing City Clerk to Advertise Same." The motion to adopt said resolution was seconded by Councilman McCall and carried on the following roll call vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None. 22. The following resolution was introduced by Councilman Levy, who moved its adoption: "Resolution No. 7770 Adopting Specifications, Special Provisions and Plans for Installation of House Laterals, Minor Street Patching with Asphalt Concrete, Repair of Portland Cement Concrete Sidewalk, Driveway, Curb and Gutter, for the Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 1972, Calling for Bids and Directing City Clerk to Advertise Same." The motion to adopt said resolution was seconded by Councilman McCall and carried on the following roll call vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None. 23. The following resolution was introduced by Councilman McCall, who moved its adoption: "Resolution No. 7771 Approving Warrant No. 175 of Board of Trustees of Reclamation District No. 2105." b 9 The motion to adopt said resolution was seconded by Councilman Fore and carried on the following roll call vote. Ayes: Four. Noes: President La Croix, (1). Absent: None. 24. "Resolution No. 7772 Authorizing Execution of Agreement with Wilbur Smith & Associates, Inc., California, for Traffic Study." It was explained that the purpose of this study was to review the street system proposed in a preliminary plan for the development of Bay Farm Island, incorporating recommendations by the engineering firm of Peat, Marwick, Mitchell & Co. Mr. Weller explained the City was concerned with the movement of traffic on and off the Island essentially, irrespective of whether the fill project or the so- called uplands were the area involved, and how it could be adequately accommodated. He said the expenditure involved would be a maximum of $2,000 and Utah Construction & Mining Co. would pay one -half of the cost. On request, City Engineer Hanna stated his Department was in need of the assistance to be provided by Wilbur Smith & Associates in this matter due to the fact that it was short - handed at the present time. He estimated the study would require about two weeks' time. To a question by Councilman Longaker, Mr. Hanna stated the study was not specifically intended to include a survey of the need for a bridge between Bay Farm Island and, possibly, Broadway, although it might indirectly cover the question. Councilman Longaker asked, before any final plans are approved for Utah, that it be determined whether a bridge across from Broadway to Bay Farm Island would be needed and, if so, who would stand the cost of such a bridge. Councilman McCall raised questions as to whether the City of Oakland and the Port of Oakland would parti- cipate in the cost of the proposed six -lane Doolittle Drive and the east end of Maitland Drive. He said he was concerned with the whole question of whether Broadway would be sufficient or the Southern Crossing would be needed, from a traffic engineering standpoint, based on facts and figures; otherwise, he objected to spending a dime of the Alameda taxpayers' money. Mr. Hanna said, pointing out the possible delay in construction or the abandonment of the Southern Cross- ing project, the study would determine what the traffic problems would be without the Crossing. Councilman Longaker moved the resolution be adopted. Councilman Levy seconded the motion. Speaking on the question, Councilman Fore questioned the need for the study. He also expressed the opinion that the people should have the right to vote on whether they want the Southern Crossing. Councilman McCall expressed the opinion that it would be impossible to take the projected additional population of 28,000, 25,000 or 20,000 off Bay Farm Island via the present Bridge and put them on the main Alameda streets, and until such time as consideration was given to an alternative route over the "Island ", he felt the City was "spinning its wheels ". The question was then put and the motion carried on the following roll call vote. Ayes: Councilmen Levy, Longaker and President La Croix, (3). Noes: Councilmen Fore and McCall, (2). Absent: None. ORDINANCES FOR PASSAGE: 25. "Ordinance No. 1643, New Series An Ordinance Reclassifying and Rezoning Certain Property Within the City of Alameda by Amending Zoning Ordinance No. 1277, New Series." (From "R -5 ", General Apartment District, to "R -4 ", Neighborhood Apartment District - Robert and Audrey Kopp). President La Croix pointed out that the Hearing had been held on this petition and that phase of the matter would not be reopened. He said, however, comments from the audience on the subject would be permitted. Mr. Ned Robinson of the firm of Stark, Stewart, Simon & Sparrowe, Attorneys representing Mr. and Mrs. Edward Murphy, addressed the Council. He said he felt if the ordinance were passed to change the zone as requested, a great injustice would be done to the Murphys, who had purchased the property in reliance on the "R -5" zoning. He said he did not question the legality of the Hearing and pointed out a large number of people were present in support of the Murphys' position. Mr. Robinson said he felt the Council, in approaching the rezoning, had stepped into a neighborhood feud and there were strong emotional differences of opinion within the area. To rezone a piece of property in a form of retribution because one group possessed more votes, he said, he felt was a grave injustice. He pointed out the property had been in the "R -5" zone for more than ten years and at the time of its adoption was part of a general scheme of rezoning. within the City. Since that time there had been no requests for zone changes in the area. He argued that Broadway would become a bigger street in the future and would as a result carry additional traffic and be more in tune with a higher density use. Mr. Robinson said he felt the integrity of the City was involved in the case as people coming into the City with the hope of improving it, purchasing property and hoping to develop it in accordance with the zoning standards and then having the property zoned down, would lose confidence in the ability of the City to abide by its ordinances. He agreed, as a lawyer, that there is no vested or legal right to maintain the zoning, but a person who has a started project has a vested right. He said he felt there was a substantial question as to whether or not Mr. and Mrs. Murphy had a started project and to try to 241 stop the project shortly after its inception would be grossly unfair. He said they had made substantial improvements to the properties and had plans for an additional tennis court in addition to the court and swimming pool already constructed. He submitted a site diagram proposed for the properties, for exami- nation by the Councilmen. Mr. Robinson said he felt it was of extreme significance that the Planning Board had recently suggested that the zoning ordinance of some years ago be restudied with the thought in mind that some portions of the City possibly should be up- or down-zoned. He said he thought this was an excellent suggestion and the Murphys were happy and willing to go along with it and work with it. However, to rezone piecemeal because the people in the neighborhood do not agree, he felt, would be a grave mistake. He expressed the opinion that to deny Mr. Murphy the opportunity to provide for the City the delightful recreation and living area where children could learn to play tennis and have the advantages provided therein, was a great disservice, not only to Mr. and Mrs. Murphy but to the City of Alameda. Mr. Robert Freedman, Attorney, then spoke as the representative for Mr. and Mrs. Robert Kopp, and a number of the proponents of the zone change from "R-5" to "R-4". He expressed the opinion that a key factor in the Council action was that the proponents sought and would gain no financial benefit from the proposal to change to the "R-4" zone. In fact, as a practicality, he said they would probably lose money because if the change were refused these people would be in a position to seek and obtain the same finan- cial benefit that the Murphys sought to reap by preserving the "R-5" District. Also, he said, should the Council act favorably on the proposal and down-zone to "R-4", it would not mean that Mr. and Mrs. Murphy could not have the present swimming pool and operate the present tennis court. It would only mean that if they should continue to expand beyond the present facilities they would need to obtain a Use Permit from the City, that they were not cut off from developing the area in the future but would have to show good cause and reason for expansion of a commercial nature in the sort of operation proposed. Mr. Freedman said it seemed peculiar that prior to this evening the draft plan of the Murphys' proposed development had not been brought before the Council, and commented that statements made by them at the Planning Board Hearing were either not true or the intention had always been to create a commercial country club-type complex. To do so in an area which was essentially residential, he said, brought up another very critical point. Apparently the area had been determined to be residential and the desire of the people was to preserve it as such. He pointed out all of the surrounding area was limited to a much lesser use than that proposed. He argued that anyone buying a piece of property would be aware of the zoning and know that the legislative body of a municipality would have the power to change the zoning, and there was no vested right to preserve any particular zoning characteristic. He commented that a number of other property owners, most of them in favor of the zone change, had also purchased their proper- ties with reliance on a certain understanding of the physical nature of the area and the fact that it was a residential neighborhood, and it defied reasonable belief to contend that any of these property owners could ever have conceived that a commercial country club development like that proposed by the Murphys would lie in the future for them. He requested that the Council take into consideration all the points set forth and preserve and foster the rather unique character of Alameda as a residential area considered a rather attractive place to live and not a place of industry or commerce. Councilman McCall moved the ordinance be passed as submitted. Councilman Levy seconded the motion. Councilman McCall, speaking on the question, said he admired Mr. Robinson and his father very much and acknowledged the presence of Mr. Freedman. He said he wished to make it plain that to put a point over to him it was not necessary to have an attorney so long as the presentation was made honestly and from the heart. Councilman Fore expressed his strong disapproval of down-zoning the subject properties. The question was then put and the motion carried on the following roll call vote. Ayes: Councilmen Levy, McCall and President La Croix, (3). Noes: Councilmen Fore and Longaker, (2). Absent: None. BILLS: 26. An itemized List of Claims against the City of Alameda and the Departments thereof, in the total amount of $37,231.90, was presented to the Council at this meeting. The List was accompanied by certification from the City Manager that the Claims shown were correct. Councilman Levy moved the bills as itemized in the List of Claims filed with the City Clerk on May 4, 1971, and presented to the City Council at this meeting, be allowed and paid. The motion was seconded by Councilman Fore and carried on the following roll call vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, GENERAL: 27. Mr. John Mitcheom, 1319 High Street, Secretary-Treasurer of the Alameda Real Estate Board, said the Board, in writing to the Council on the rezoning matter under discussion this evening, had taken no stand in favor of either the proponents or the opponents but they had wished to express their fears as to this type of zoning as it was a matter of grave concern. 28. Mr. James Dance, 428 Coral Reef Road, remarked that he had been shocked at the happenings in the City of Berkeley on this date when three newly-elected members of the City Council had refused to pledge allegiance to the United States flag. He said the citizens of Alameda could be justly proud that their Councilmen salute the flag before their meetings. He suggested that the agenda and minutes of this and subsequent meetings carry the item that the Pledge of Allegiance was included. 29. Mr. Joseph O. Golonka, 2606 Santa Clara Avenue, requested clarification of the limits of the area affected by the rezoning accomplished by the ordinance adopted this evening. 30. Mr. Frank Gottstein, 731 Haight Avenue, expressed the hope that President La Croix, as the newly elected Mayor, would be willing to permit the people to address the Council. 242 Mr. Gottstein stated that at one time the City had built concrete steps for access to the beach at the south end of Ninth Street and now a building was to be constructed at the location. He complained that the residents would be deprived of the view of the lagoon and ducks and boating. He repeated his comp- laint that he had been denied the opportunity to speak on the subject of this development at the Plan- ning Board meeting, and protested various features of the development, such as moving the sewers, for which it was said the developer was standing the cost. FILING: 31. Financial and Operating Report - Bureau of Electricity as of February 28, 1971 - Verified by George A. Hackleman. 32. Specifications No. MS 5 -71 -5 - 1971 -72. 33. Specifications No. PW 5 -71 -10 34. Specifications No. PW 5 -71 -11 35. Specifications No. PW 5 -71 -12 36. 37. Class "B" Portland Cement Concrete Transit Mix for Fiscal Year - Installation of House Laterals, 1971 -72. - Minor Street Patching, 1971 -72. - Repair of Sidewalk, Driveway, Curb and Gutter, 1971 -72. Agreement - Between Braddock & Logan and City - re Tract No. 3258. Agreement - Between Wilbur Smith & Associates, Inc., Calif. and City - re Traffic Study. MEMORIAL RESOLUTIONS: 38. After eulogizing the gentleman for his many years of work for the boys of the community, having been Past - President of the Alameda Boys' Club and given unselfishly of his time and resources, and a loving husband and father, Councilman Longaker introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: "Resolution No. 7773 Resolution of the Council of the City of Alameda in Memory of Maynard R. Moody, Former Member of the Golf Commission. "WITH GREAT SORROW, the Council of the City of Alameda records the death of one of its most loyal and civic - minded citizens, MAYNARD R. MOODY. "WHEREAS, Dr. Moody began his public service on September 30, 1946, with his appoint- ment as a member of the Golf Commission and, with the reorganization of the Commission as an advisory board had continued to serve until December 31, 1961; and "WHEREAS, Dr. Moody, a native Alamedan, had performed capably and conscientiously as a member of this Commission in the best interests of this aspect of the recreational activities of the community, and had been an active participant in philanthropic endeavors on behalf of the youth of the City. "NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Council of the City of Alameda, in acknowledge- ment of the unselfish contribution of time and effort by this fine .man for the good of the City and its people, does hereby express its heartfelt gratitude and its sense of personal loss in his passing. "BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this resolution be spread in full upon the minutes of this meeting and a copy thereof be sent to the family of Dr. Moody in order to convey to its members sincere sympathy 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 MAYNARD R. MOODY." The motion to adopt said resolution was seconded by Councilman Fore. Councilman McCall said it had been his privilege in 1927 and 1928 to caddy for Dr. Moody's father and he had been in school with Dr. Moody and his wife, Aileen. He said Dr. Moody had been a dedicated man, devoted to his family, and concerned with everything that was for the City's good. As one of the early members of the Alameda Commuters Committee, he had done a great deal for the youth of the community. He suggested that something should be done in tribute to Dr. Moody, possibly by the Alameda Golf Club and other organizations in the City, as the work of this outstanding citizen deserved special recogni- tion The question was put and the motion carried on the following roll call vote. Ayes: Five. Noes: None. Absent: None. The President declared the foregoing resolutions adopted. 39.)/ President La Croix requested that all stand in a moment of silence in observance of the passing of Dr. Maynard R. Moody and Sgt. Scott W. Jones, U. S. Army, who had lost his life in the Southeastern Asian conflict. 40. Councilman Longaker moved the Council adjourn to an executive session for the purpose of discuss- ing appointments to the various City Boards and Commissions. Councilman Levy seconded the motion which carried unanimously. At this point, Councilman Fore left the meeting. After a five - minute recess, the Council reconvened in Room 303 for its deliberations. At the conclusion of the discussion with regard to prospective appointees to the Planning Board to fill the vacancy caused by the resignation of Mr. Eric Essex, the City Attorney was requested to prepare an appropriate resolu- tion for action by the Council at its next regular meeting on May 18, 1971. 41.1 Mr. Cunningham requested authorization to compromise the claim involving the City and Charles E. Rawlinson - Universal Terminals, for one -half of the amount involved, or $359.38. Councilman McCall moved the authorization be granted as requested. Councilman Levy seconded the motion which carried on the following roll call vote. Ayes: Four. Noes: None. Absent: One. ADJOURNMENT: 42. There being no further business to come before the meeting, the Council adjourned in respect to the memory of Dr. MAYNARD R. MOODY and Sgt. SCOTT W. JONES, to assemble in regular session on Tuesday, May 18, 1971, at 7:30 o'clock p.m. Respectfully submitted, City Clerk 24:3