1960-03-21 Special CC MinutesSPECIAL MEETING OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ALAMEDA
HELD MONDAY EVENING, MARCH 21, 1960
The meeting convened at 7:30 o'clock p.m. with President McCall presiding. The
Pledge of Allegiance was led by Councilman Freeman.
ROLL CALL:
The roll was called and Councilmen Collischonn, Freeman, Petersen, Schacht and
President McCall, (5), were noted present. Absent: None.
1. The Clerk read the Call and Notice of Special Meeting, dated March 17, 1960,
and signed by the Mayor - setting forth the time, place and purpose of the meeting.
An acknowledgment of receipt of a copy of the "Call and Notice" was signed by the
respective Councilmen on March 18, 1960. Also on file was the Affidavit of Service
of said copies of the "Call and Notice" to the several Councilmen, signed by Police
Officer 4. Cummings.
REPORTS OF OFFICERS, BOARDS, ETCETERA:
2. From the City Manager, reporting that the swimming pool facilities constructed
in Lincoln Park under a lease agreement between Alameda Swimming Pool Association
and the City have been completed in accordance with the plans and specifications
approved by the City Engineer. It was recommended the work be accepted and the
deposits or bonds posted by the Association and /or Mr. Frank Weeden be returned
forthwith.
Councilman Schacht moved the recommendation be approved; that the work on the swim-
ming pool project be accepted as conforming to the plans and specifications therefor
and authorization be granted for the return of the negotiable bonds in the amount of
$25,000., which were deposited in connection therewith. The motion was seconded by
Councilman Collischonn and on roll call carried by the following vote. Ayes: Coun-
cilmen Collischonn, Freeman, Schacht and President McCall, (L). Noes: None. Not
Voting: Councilman Petersen, (1). Absent: None.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS:
3': The matter was presented with regard to the acquisition of the Maritime School
property by the State.
President McCall explained that the discussion should be confined to this property
in its relationship to the ultimate development of a State Beach -Park.
The following spoke in opposition to the City's contemplated plans for the develop-
ment of a State Beach -Park in this vicinity:
Mrs. Myrle McClure of the South Shore Realty Company, President of the Ala-
meda Real Estate Board - stated Alameda is not a "resort" city, there are already
plenty of parks here and all available land should be developed for residences.
Mr. Andrew Pagano, President, West End Merchants Association, stated the land
should be sold for private development and any other proposal should be submitted
to the voters.
Mr. Lewis Groper, Jeweler on Webster Street, vociferously objected to a State
Beach in such a populated area as Alameda, claiming the State would eventually take
more land for its facilities as the population increases.
Mr. G. N. Pope, 1820 Bay Street, contended there is no need for more beach
development.
Mr. Costas S. Porikos, 1502 East Shore Drive, stated the City needs more prop-
erty on the tax rolls and felt the land should be sold for private enterprise.
Mr. Pagano, 1318 Park Avenue, speaking as a private citizen, stated there is
plenty of, acreage on Bay Farm Island and suggested the possibility of locating the
beach -park there might be looked into. He felt a beach development attracts the
wrong type of people to the City and property values are destroyed.
Mr. Wesley Suman, 1511 Gibbons Drive, said the influx of people attracted to a
State Beach -Park would crowd the streets and add to the police problem over the week-
ends. He felt more revenue would result from the property by having it on the tax
rolls.
The following spoke in favor of the proposed development of a State Beach -Park:
Mr. Leo Gunston, 1077 Park Avenue, felt it would eventually bring more income
from the tourist trade and there should be no objection to making a nice beach -city
of Alameda.
Mr. Harold Ainslow, 28L0 Johnson Avenue, stated that at a meeting this morning
of the Board of Directors of Alameda Chamber of Commerce he had voted to approve the
action taken by this Council and he wanted to publicly state that he so voted purely
because of the economic factors involved. He felt endorsement of this project is
essential because there would then be an opportunity to have the beach facilities
improved.
Each of the Councilmen then expressed his opinions concerning the matter. Councilman
Collischonn deplored the small attendance and said he was appalled at the lack of
interest of the citizens in, presumably, a controversial subject, which has been
5
before the public for the past eighteen months. He pointed out the Council has been
working on this matter all of this time and no indication of opposition had been made
until just now - and then from a few sources such as the realtors and merchants. He
pointed out there is still plenty of land available for private development of resi-
dential districts. Also, with regard to the policing problem, he felt a State Beach -
Park is always well operated and controlled. He urged, however, that if there is a
widespread objection on the part of the citizens of Alameda to this State Beach -Park,
now is the time to express themselves.
Councilman Schacht agreed there should be many more present at this meeting to learn
what is proposed. He referred to the Bond Issue Election of 1955 for the Washington
Park Fill Area and said it had been his understanding the main purpose was to expand
recreational facilities which had become inadequate. He also pointed out that the
sale of a certain portion of the land was to help pay off the Bond Issue, and the
present proposed sale will pay off the entire Bond Issue. He spoke of the inevitable
growth in population of the City and felt the community could benefit from additional
recreational facilities provided by the State which, although they might bring more
people into the City, would also be available to the citizens of Alameda at a consider-
able savings for maintenance. He said he believed when it was first announced that a
State Beach -Park project wauld be in Alameda there seemed to be enthusiastic accentance.
Councilman Schacht pointed out the City could not develop this entire area as the
State could, and until there is some real expression from a majority of the people
that the Council is taking the wrong action, he does not feel disposed to change the
honest conclusion he has reached that the Council is acting in the best interests of
the community.
Councilman Freeman stated she had been adamantly against the fill of Washington Park.
However, the $600,000. Bond Issue had been passed by vote of the people and of that
amount about half has been spent just for the fill itself - nothing has been done to
improve it. Since the City has it, something must be done - it can't just lie there
because "someone" thinks the City can get more money for it. Councilman Freeman
cited the difficulty the City had in selling the Encinal Housing Project property.
She emphasized the important factor of the retention of the beach and said that if
the State comes in to develop this beach -park, it will assume the retention of the
Fill Area from Washington Park completely around the perimeter of the beach to Grand
Street. This is not a mean consideration, in fact it is a very costly one as proved
by the fact that 8158,000. has been allocated by the Reclamation District to do this
for three years. She said the City of Alameda could not keep up a beach area that
extensive, and she felt it is very fortunate the State has shown an interest, that
Assemblyman Crown has worked so hard for it and there is now the possibility of obtain-
ing a worthwhile development which could be maintained and controlled properly. Coun-
cilman Freeman said she, too, would welcome any expression of opinions from the citizens
but she would suggest they also offer some constructive criticism and possibly some
alternative proposal in the best interests of the community.
Councilman Petersen stated he does not believe there is another city in the State
which has the problem Alameda has of Government ownership of land versus private owner-
ship of land - the approximate percentages being forty -seven and fifty- three, respec-
tively. Efforts have been made to alleviate this problem, without too much success.
He felt the City now has an opportunity to get some land back on the tax rolls and it
would be more than the forty -two acres of Fill Area - it would also take in some tide-
lands which might be developed by private interests. He claimed that it would be one
hundred acres, plus. He said that if the tax structure is increased by private owner-
ship of land, the tax burden is lessened for the taxpayers, and if this area is sold
to private developers the assessed valuation of the City will be increased. He agreed
the City is going to grow in population and he reiterated that this land should be
added to the tax rolls through private ownership.
President McCall then reviewed the history of the City's attempts to get back on the
tax rolls as much as possible of the Federally-owned land not actually being used for
military purposes. He said it is recognized that Alameda Naval Air Station is part
of the City's economy. A large map of the City was then displayed which showed the
several large areas owned by the Federal Government and the Regents of the University
of California, and pointed out those portions which have been or are going to be
released for development by the City or private enterprise. He emphasized that this
Council's fight to get certain lands back on the tax rolls is gradually effecting
results. He enumerated the acreage of the several parcels which are being recovered,
in the total amount of 283.24, which will add to the City's assessed valuation and
bring in new industry and employment. The Government property declared surplus equals
approximately three and one -half per cent of the highland of the City. He declared
this has been accomplished by the City Council and the Chamber of Commerce. President
McCall referred to the amount of publicity which has been given this matter in general.
He felt the City has a chance to have this area developed by the State as a fine recrea-
tional facility which the City could not afford to establish or maintain - and the need
for which is obvious by the large crowds which already are using the unimproved South
Shore Beach. In conclusion, he remarked that this Council has done its duty in its
responsibility to do as much as could possibly be done for all the citizens of this
community.
There being no objections, the matter was then laid over to the next regular meeting
of the Council to be held on April 5, 1960. The Councilmen indicated they would be
willing to appear before any interested groups to speak on this subject.
4:I The matter was then submitted concerning the appointment of an Auditor, ex- officio
Assessor, and a Treasurer, ex- officio Tax Collector, of the City of Alameda, for the
remainder of the unexpired terms of Messrs. Bernard E. Jost and Homer R. Dallas, both
of whom have tendered their resignations, effective as of April 17, 1960.
It was suggested the Council declare an executive session for the purpose of discuss-
ing the personnel involved. There were no objections on the part of any Councilman
to this procedure. ,
Mr. Annibale pointed out the Council should consider the matter, reach a meeting of
the minds and, at the next regular meeting, have a resolution prepared making the
appointments - or the Council can return to public session to take action this
evening.
President McCall then declared a fifteen - minute recess and asked that the Council
Chamber be cleared for the Council's executive session.
Upon reconvening the Special Meeting, Councilman Petersen moved that Mr. Harold E.
Crabb be appointed to the office of Treasurer, ex- officio Tax Collector, and Mr.
Raymond E. Brown be appointed to the office of Auditor, ex- officio Assessor, of the
City of Alameda, effective as of April 17, 1960, to serve the unexpired terms of
Messrs. Dallas and Jost, resigned. The motion was seconded by Councilman Collischonn
and on roll call carried by the followin vote. Ayes: Councilmen Collischonn, Freeman,
Petersen, Schacht and President McCall, (5). Noes: None. Absent: None.
ADJOURNMENT:
5. There being no further business to come before the meeting, the Council
adjourned - to assemble in regular session on Tuesday evening, April 5, 1960, at
7:30 o'clock.
Respectfully submitted,
Ci s erk