Loading...
2010-01-26 Joint CC ARRA CIC MinutesMINUTES OF THE SPECIAL JOINT CITY COUNCIL, ALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (ARRA) AND COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION (CIC) MEETING TUESDAY- -JANUARY 26, 2010- -7:00 P.M. Mayor/Chair Johnson convened the joint meeting at 7:10 p.m. Councilmember / Commissioner Tam led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL - Present: Councilmembers / Board Members / Commissioners deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese, Tam and Mayor/Chair Johnson – 5. Absent: None. CONSENT CALENDAR Councilmember Matarrese moved approval of the Consent Calendar. Councilmember Tam seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote – 5. [Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk preceding the paragraph number.] (*10-029 CC/*10-01 CIC) Minutes of the Special Joint City Council and Community Improvement Commission (CIC) meeting held on December 15, 2009, and the Regular City Council Meeting held on January 19, 2010. Approved. (*10- 030 CC) Recommendation to Award a Contract in the Amount of $60,280 to AZCO Supply and Authorize a Ten Percent Contingency to Purchase Twenty-five Streetlight Poles as Part of the Woodstock to Webster Street Neighborhood Improvement Project, and Authorize the Interim City Manager to Execute the Contract and Related Documents. Accepted. AGENDA ITEMS (10-031 CC/ARRA) Recommendation to Accept Transmittal of the: 1) Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) for Fiscal Year ended June 30, 2009; 2) Auditor’s Agreed Upon Procedures Report on Compliance with Vehicle Code Section 40200.3 Parking Citation Processing; 3) Agreed Upon Procedures Report on Compliance with the Proposition 111 21005-06 Appropriations Limit Increment; 4) Police and Fire Retirement System Pension Plans 1079 and 1092 Audit Report for Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2009; 5) Metropolitan Transportation Commission Grant Programs Financial Statements for Year Ended June 30, 2009; and 6) Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority Basic Component Unit Financial Statements for the Year Ended June 30, 2009. Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority and Community Improvement Commission January 26, 2010 1 The Interim City Manager/Interim Executive Director and City Auditor gave brief presentations. Councilmember/Board Member Tam stated the City’s net assets saw an increase of $6.9 million as a result of revenue exceeding expenses; additional progress has been made on capital asset improvements; refinancing was done; inquired how much of the net increase is from revenue exceeding expenses. The Interim City Manager/Interim Executive Director responded asset increases do not necessarily mean cash revenue increased because debt might have been paid off or a capital project may have finished; stated overall revenues stayed the same; the increase in all funds was only $3 million; a $6 million increase in the context of $205 million is not huge. Councilmember/Board Member Tam stated there was a savings of $3.1 million in the Police Department fund; $2.6 million was because of debt retirement; inquired whether said amount contributes to the $6.9 million, to which the Interim City Manager/Interim Executive Director responded in the affirmative. Councilmember/Board Member Matarrese inquired whether the amount does not represent a $6.9 million increase in cash, to which the Interim City Manager/Interim Executive Director responded in the affirmative. Councilmember/Board Member Matarrese inquired whether the workers compensation fund is still negative, to which the Interim City Manager/Interim Executive Director responded in the affirmative. Councilmember/Board Member Matarrese inquired whether the amount is assets, not cash. The Interim City Manager/Interim Executive Director responded in the affirmative; stated government financial assets include cash, bonds, capital improvement projects, etc. Councilmember/Board Member Gilmore inquired whether the net cash available is just under $10 million, to which the Interim City Manager/Interim Executive Director responded in the affirmative; stated there are still a couple of liabilities. Councilmember/Board Member Tam moved approval of the staff recommendation. Vice Mayor/Board Member deHaan seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote – 5. Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority and Community Improvement Commission January 26, 2010 2 (10-032 CC/ARRA/10-02 CIC) Recommendation to Accept the Financial Report for the Fourth Fiscal Quarter Ending June 2009. The Interim City Manager/Interim Executive Director gave a presentation. Mayor/Chair Johnson stated the Community Development Department fund went down significantly; inquired the amount, to which the Interim City Manager/Interim Executive Director responded $800,000 was drawn down from the fund balance. Mayor/Chair Johnson inquired whether the department is now operating in balance. The Interim City Manager/Interim Executive Director responded in the affirmative; stated some of the fund balance would be used during the current fiscal year; continued the presentation. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Matarrese inquired why the urban runoff fund balance is so large. The Public Works Director stated the Storm Drain Master Plan is currently being completed, which will result in a 10 or 20-year capital improvement program to spend down the money. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Matarrese stated that he receives complaints about the pond near the Tube entrance behind Marina Village Loop; inquired whether the project could be completed since the fund has $7.5 million. The Pubic Works Director responded the project would probably be identified as one of the priorities in the Plan; stated other areas might be of higher priority, such as homes that would be inundated by a 100-year flood; that he would check whether the Alameda Landing project might be contributing funds and ensure the project is reviewed as part of the Master Plan. In response to Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Matarrese’s inquiry about when the Plan would be completed, the Public Works Director stated the Plan should be done in 12 months; the Sewer Plan would be finished first. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Matarrese inquired whether the [urban runoff] funds could be used for sewers, to which the Public Works Director responded in the negative; stated 10% of sewer funds can be used for urban runoff. In response to Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Gilmore’s inquiries about the negative fund balance in the risk management and workers compensation funds and about incurred liabilities, the Interim City Manager/Interim Executive Director stated negatives are Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority and Community Improvement Commission January 26, 2010 3 real money paid out for claims; incurred liabilities are the amount that an actuarial believes should be reserved for future risks, which the City does not have; the City is trying to get out of the $1.7 million negative and, then, will have to start putting money away to cover the liability as required by joint powers agreements. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Tam stated in Fiscal Year 2008-09, revenues ended up being $3.4 million more than expenditures; the City was able to put $1.7 million in the undesignated fund balance; inquired how much of the savings came from the reduction in force; further stated the appearance is cuts were made and the savings went into internal service funds. The Interim City Manager/Interim Executive Director responded the budget was approved at $76 million in revenue and $81 million in expenditures; stated Attachments B and C focus on the general fund; $6.5 million was absorbed. In response to Vice Mayor/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan’s inquiry whether the City is still in a dispute with Alameda County over Emergency Medical Service charges, the Interim City Manager/Interim Executive Director stated the matter is potential litigation and is not included [as a liability]. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Matarrese inquired whether the potential liability should be included; to which the Interim City Manager/Interim Executive Director responded the numbers were not included based on Closed Session discussions. In response to Mayor/Chair Johnson’s inquiry regarding the amount, the Interim City Manager/Interim Executive Director stated the amount is $840,000; continued the presentation. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Tam inquired which department has the highest workers compensation allocation, to which the Interim City Manager/Interim Executive Director responded the three highest departments are Police, Fire and Public Works; departments are charged back the following year. Mayor/Chair Johnson inquired whether workers compensation claims are consistent with other cities, to which the Interim City Manager/Interim Executive Director responded that she did not know. In response to Mayor/Chair Johnson’s inquiry about whether worker safety programs would help, the Interim City Manager/Interim Executive Director responded Risk Management has an aggressive program. The Public Works Director stated Public Works holds meetings every week. Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority and Community Improvement Commission January 26, 2010 4 The City Attorney stated a citywide safety program is being started. The Interim City Manager/Interim Executive Director continued the presentation. Mayor/Chair Johnson inquired whether the [general fund] fund balance would be cut in half if the suggested amount for workers compensation was set aside, to which the Interim City Manager/Interim Executive Director responded $6.5 million would be taken from the $8.4 million [fund balance]. Vice Mayor/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan inquired whether funding is included for Other Post Employment Benefits (OPEB), to which the Interim City Manager/Interim Executive Director responded in the negative. In response to Vice Mayor/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan’s inquiry regarding the present value of OPEB, the Interim City Manager/Interim Executive Director stated the amount is $74.7 million. Mayor/Chair Johnson stated the claims reduce the City’s ability to provide service to the public and need to be managed as best as possible. The Interim City Manager/Interim Executive Director stated staff worked to have the [workers compensation and risk management] funds break even over an 18-month period [ending June 2010]; next, staff will work to make the balances positive over the following 18-month period. Vice Mayor/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan stated the City is working to meet obligations and has not made additional money. The Interim City Manager/Interim Executive Director stated staff is working to break down the funds. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Gilmore stated the cash in the general fund seems like an illusion when there are other funds that should have reserves. The Interim City Manager/Interim Executive Director stated Council might want to revisit the fund balance policy; the fund balance also includes loans. Mayor/Chair Johnson stated maintenance was being deferred to build the fund balance; deferred maintenance ends up costing more. The Interim City Manager/Interim Executive Director stated new internal service funds, such as the facilities maintenance fund, have been created to start having disciple and put money aside. Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority and Community Improvement Commission January 26, 2010 5 Mayor/Chair Johnson stated people did not know about the internal service fund negatives because there were not separate accounts; having a clear budget is very important to understand the real fund balance. The Interim City Manager/Interim Executive Director stated not having workers compensation and risk management funds is very risky. Mayor/Chair Johnson stated the City is also developing a systematic way for dealing with large maintenance projects. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Matarrese stated “why” should be addressed in the discussion about the appropriate [general fund] fund balance. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Tam stated that she understand the City is trying to have a balance between providing services and increasing the bond rating by having a reserve; $9.9 million of the $18.2 million fund balance is cash. In response to Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Tam’s inquiry regarding cash on hand, the Interim City Manager Interim/Executive Director stated bond rating agencies review all cash reserves, such as the $3 million cash in equipment replacement; going forward rating agencies will start to look at issues like OPEB. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Tam inquired how many positions were eliminated, the Human Resources Director responded the number of positions went from 650 to 575; stated many positions that were cut were not filled. Mayor/Chair Johnson inquired whether the positions remain in the budget, to which the Interim City Manager/Interim Executive Director responded in the negative. Councilmember/Board Member/Commissioner Tam stated times are tough; the City had to make cuts; carefully characterizing the [general fund] fund balance is important, particularly if there might be about another five years of tough times. The Interim City Manager/Interim Executive Director stated the State Chief Legislative Analyst is forecasting no growth until 2014; the decision was to make the cuts all at one time; a plan was created to recover negatives in 24 months; the City was not prepared for the latest surprise of the State wanting to take the gas tax. In response to Vice Mayor/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan’s inquiry about full time equivalent employees, the Interim City Manager/Interim Executive Director stated the audit amounts are simply the numbers that were included in the budget, not the actual number of employees. Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority and Community Improvement Commission January 26, 2010 6 Vice Mayor/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan inquired when the actual numbers would be provided, to which the Interim City Manager/Interim Executive Director responded the actual numbers for the current fiscal year could be provided with the mid year report. Mayor/Chair Johnson stated the public expects the Council to put the City into as sound a financial position as soon as possible; there are still a lot of negative funds; the City dose not have any extra money and still has a lot of liabilities that need to be paid, as well as deferred maintenance. The Interim City Manager/Interim Executive Director stated staff will be recommending certain funds be designated as part of the mid year report, which will bring the fund balance down to $8.1 million; further stated the general fund budget went down from around $87 million to $63 million. Vice Mayor/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan noted revenue projections are not very good. The Interim City Manager/Interim Executive Director stated Alameda and Piedmont are the only two cities in the County that have not had property tax losses. Mayor/Chair Johnson stated the City has done a good job managing the cuts with minimal impacts on public service levels. Vice Mayor/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan stated the sewer fund is down from $18.4 million to $12.4 million; $3 million was loaned to a project; inquired whether $3 million was spent on sewer projects. The Public Works Director responded the affirmative; stated projects were completed on both Central Avenue and Fernside Boulevard. In response to Vice Mayor/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan’s inquiry regarding spending projections for the current year, the Public Works Director stated staff is planning $2 million in capital improvement projects per year and will review new requirements as a result of the wet weather facility issue. Vice Mayor/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan inquired how much revenue is generated each year, to which the Public Works Director responded $6.5 million, which is close to what is spent for operations. In response to Vice Mayor/Board Member/Commissioner deHaan’s further inquiry regarding the sewer fund, the Public Works Director responded the audited revenue is $6.5 million; the $6.4 million in expenses does not include capital projects; further stated a Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority and Community Improvement Commission January 26, 2010 7 presentation would be given in spring or summer. Councilmember Matarrese moved approval of the staff recommendation. Vice Mayor deHaan seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote – 5. CITY MANAGER COMMUNICATIONS (10-033 CC) Supplemental Education Revenue and Augmentation Fund (SERAF) - Proposed Payment Plan The Interim City Manager gave a brief presentation. Mayor Johnson stated no one knows what the State will do to balance its budget this year. The Interim City Manager stated the State had a $24 billion shortfall in June 2009; the deficit was $14 to $15 billion in January, 2010; the deficit will continue to accelerate since the State has not made significant cuts; the biggest concern is whether the State will securitize more property tax borrowing from cities; that she does not know what the State will do with the gas tax. Councilmember Matarrese stated redevelopment tax increment is no longer sheltered but is being taken away; any thought of selling redevelopment bonds will be seriously encumbered. Mayor Johnson inquired whether a job loss analysis has been performed, to which the Economic Development Director responded in the affirmative. Vice Mayor deHaan stated the State has taken money away [from cities] for years. The Interim City Manager stated Alameda has given $54 million to the State over the years. Councilmember Matarrese stated over $5 million has been taken from redevelopment. Mayor Johnson stated State representatives will be coming to the Mayor’s Conference in February. The Interim City Manager continued the presentation. Mayor Johnson inquired what will happen to cities that have made tax increment commitments. Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority and Community Improvement Commission January 26, 2010 8 The Interim City Manager responded cities have to meet obligations; stated trying to get a developer to forego repayment of tax increment commitments is very optimistic. Mayor Johnson stated some amounts are so large that some cities would not be able to find a cash fund from which to borrow; inquired whether other cities would need to cover cities within the County that cannot pay, to which the Interim City Manager responded in the negative. The Interim City Manager continued the presentation. Mayor Johnson stated redevelopment would be impacted tremendously; cities are no longer going to be able to commit tax increment to development projects. The Interim City Manager stated the legislature and Department of Finance have had very little communication in the past; the Department of Finance tried to explain that old base numbers cannot be used for calculations; some cities have already made pledges; no bond proceeds are left for tax allocation bonds; the West End Capital Improvement Projects’ net cash available has gone down from $11.4 million to $6 million in one year. Mayor Johnson stated the State is putting in policies that will kill jobs. The Interim City Manager stated 80% of tax increment is the most flexible and is used to subsidize commercial and industrial development and job creation. Councilmember Gilmore stated that she is infuriated with the State; the State was $24 billion in debt; the State did not cut their budget but took property tax money from cities; the State is also taking redevelopment money; the current deficit is $14 billion and will probably go back up to the previous deficit. Councilmember Tam stated the State deficit was up to $21.6 billion last week. Councilmember Gilmore stated the State has taken property taxes and redevelopment money and is threatening to take gas tax; the State is not acting to cut its budget; at some point, the State will not be able to squeeze any more money out of local jurisdictions. The Interim City Manager stated the Governor’s proposal is to eliminate furloughs, require State employees to pay part of PERS, and cut school administration costs; that she is still uncertain how the State will use ERAF to pay the traffic court; Alameda’s gas tax of approximately $1.3 million is used for pothole repair. Councilmember Gilmore stated the State will have to act to cut their budget sooner or later. The Interim City Manager stated one-third of the Assembly will be termed out and 17%will Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority and Community Improvement Commission January 26, 2010 9 be up for re-election; the proposed payment plan is very conservative and ensures that all obligations are covered; no action is needed tonight; the matter will come back to Council for approval. Councilmember Gilmore suggested a cover letter be included when the check is sent to the State. Mayor Johnson stated the State should be made aware of how the City has been impacted. The Interim City Manager stated the City has yet to receive securitization money, but money has been taken out [of property taxes]; the State is making the City absorb the negative cash. Councilmember Matarrese stated reserves act as a buffer; redevelopment has changed; development will have to be done differently. Vice Mayor deHaan stated the LCC is trying to stop the raids; hopefully, the League’s ballot initiative will be on the November ballot. Mayor Johnson stated California government needs significant restructuring to save the State. Councilmember Tam stated the LCC has collected 273,000 signatures; one million signatures are needed. (ARRA) ARRA Revenue and Expense - Ten-Year History Authority Member Matarrese inquired why ARRA has a fund balance, why the balance is so large, and what is the use of the fund balance; stated the fund balance is approximately $9 million; buildings cannot be secured; more money will need to be put in the buildings if secured; questioned whether the fund balance is being spent appropriately. The Interim Executive Director responded fund balance issues cannot be discussed at this time because of the Exclusive Negotiating Agreement; stated staff will review better strategic planning for long-term leases; fund balance uses will be discussed as part of the mid year report. Authority Member deHaan inquired how much funding the Alameda Collaborative brings to the table, to which the Economic Development Director responded none. (10-034 CC) Golf Enterprise Fund Revenue and Expense - Ten Year History Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority and Community Improvement Commission January 26, 2010 10 The Interim City Manager gave a brief presentation. Councilmember Matarrese inquired how the negative interest is derived. The Interim City Manager responded a negative interest indicates a reversal or credit from a prior year. The Interim City Manager continued the presentation. Mayor Johnson inquired why supply costs are so different; stated supply costs were consistent between 2001 and 2009; now costs are down to almost nothing. The Interim City Manager responded that she would look into the matter; continued the presentation. Councilmember Tam stated the unrestricted fund balance was $8.35 million in Fiscal Year 2000-2001 and went down to $1 million in Fiscal Year 2008-2009; the South Course needs a new sprinkler system which would cost approximately $1 million; inquired whether the $1 million would come from the unrestricted fund balance. The Interim City Manager responded in the affirmative; continued the presentation. Mayor Johnson inquired whether the net income loss would be the same as an operating loss, to which the Interim City Manager responded in the affirmative. Mayor Johnson stated the Golf Course has been operating at a loss for a number of years. Councilmember Matarrese stated the general downward trend of the unrestricted fund balance does not match up with capital outlay and capital improvement numbers; some of the delta from year to year in the unrestricted fund balance is assumed to go into operations; the actual net income is the cash balance; June to December shows a positive; the missing piece of data is what the unrestricted fund balance total will be for Fiscal Year 2009-2010; all deltas need to be known prior to operating contract discussions; Fiscal Year 2001-2002 to Fiscal Year 2002-2003 had a $4 million loss; details are needed. The Interim City Manager stated the matter will come to Council at the second meeting in February; staff will provide some generic negotiating criteria as to what direction Council wants to take. Vice Mayor deHaan inquired whether different accounting practices have been applied. The Interim City Manager responded the audit was closed by a person with no history or knowledge of the Golf Course; stated ten years of data was gathered. Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority and Community Improvement Commission January 26, 2010 11 Vice Mayor deHaan stated that he is not comfortable with some of the numbers or explanations; he has concerns with the extreme draw down. The Interim City Manager stated the numbers are real; the balance sheet would be discussed; General Fund transfers have declined from $8 million to $830,000 over the last ten years. Councilmember Matarrese stated knowing what kind of policy is needed is important going forward in order to protect the asset. The Interim City Manager stated everyone thought that the fund balance was cash, which is not true. Councilmember Matarrese stated Council was given a presentation regarding building a Club House with the fund balance. Mayor Johnson stated Council had a joint meeting with the Golf Commission on the matter; the idea was shut down because Council had serious concerns with the numbers; building a Golf Course at the former Naval Base was another crazy idea presented. The Interim City Manager continued the presentation. Vice Mayor deHaan stated in Fiscal Year 2004-05 the Payment in Lieu of Taxes (PILOT) was used bail out the General Fund; the PILOT grew around $215,000; subsequently, the PILOT went down because of less play. Speaker: Jane Sullwold, Golf Commission. In response to Ms.Sullwold’s inquiry, the Interim City Manager responded the Return on Investment (ROI) is blended in with the PILOT. In response to Ms. Sullwold’s inquiry, the Interim City Manager responded the Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) requires the City to inventory everything at the Golf Course and create a present value of the asset. Councilmember Gilmore stated Council and the Golf Commission were told that there was a fund balance of over $5 million at a previous meeting. Mayor Johnson inquired whether Council could rely on the numbers presented tonight. The Interim City Manager responded in the affirmative; stated a National Golf Federation (NGF) number should not be used as an actual. Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority and Community Improvement Commission January 26, 2010 12 Mayor Johnson stated that she is confident the current numbers are good. Councilmember Matarrese stated that he has a hard time characterizing net income as a profit because capital outlay shows mostly zeros. Ms. Sullwold stated the only way to get capital improvements is to infuse cash into the property; seeing funds dwindle over the last five years has been frustrating; Council needs to allow the maximum amount of time to ensure that the right choice is made regarding an outside manager. Mayor Johnson stated many golfers do not acknowledge how much money is needed to maintain a golf course; the Golf Course has not been taken care of for at least ten years; the asset is wasting away. Ms. Sullwold stated the driving range was the last major capital improvement. Vice Mayor deHaan stated the greens have been redone and a new irrigation system was installed on the North Course, which is not enough. COUNCIL REFERRALS (10-035 CC) Discussion of Athletic Field Improvement. Councilmember Matarrese stated the Council/School District Subcommittee discussed the desire to have artificial turfs for Thompson and Willie Stargell Fields; tonight’s referral is to request Council to consider giving direction to the Interim City Manager to research how the City might be able to work with the School District to pull funds or have the City finance the artificial turf fields with a joint use agreement to allow City use; saving water would be one thing to consider; a joint use agreement would allow the City to gain field space and allow the School District to get maximum use of the fields. Vice Mayor deHaan inquired whether other fields are jointly used with the School District. The Park and Recreation Director responded the School District uses City fields; stated there are formal agreements for the use of the pools and Peralta College hardball fields. Vice Mayor deHaan inquired whether the City uses the School District’s fields, to which the Park and Recreation Director responded in the negative. Councilmember Matarrese stated a joint use agreement could allow City use when the School District is not using a field. Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority and Community Improvement Commission January 26, 2010 13 Councilmember Gilmore stated having artificial turf would increase the School District’s usage and may not give the City an opportunity to use the fields; the School District would want the fields at the same time as the City. Councilmember Matarrese stated a joint use agreement would guarantee commensurate use. Mayor Johnson stated the City’s sports programs jointly use many School District facilities, such as the gyms. The Park and Recreation Director stated non-profits also use School District facilities. Councilmember Matarrese stated a joint use agreement would provide an opportunity to make an improvement; Richmond High School has artificial turf. Mayor Johnson stated that she attended an Alameda/Encinal football game and the field was extremely muddy. Councilmember Gilmore inquired whether the City has a joint use agreement for Ruby Bridges, to which the Park and Recreation Director responded in the affirmative. Mayor Johnson stated a more comprehensive joint venture for athletic facilities has been discussed along with joint maintenance; a meeting is needed with Nino Borsoni (Alameda Soccer Club); a higher level of maintenance is needed; athletic facilities maintenance differs from the other parks. Councilmember Gilmore inquired how much time staff would need and what would be put aside if Council votes to give the Interim City Manager direction to research the issue. The Park and Recreation Director responded not much time would be needed for the research; stated figuring out financing might take some time. The Interim City Manager stated a lot of things have been done with the School District on a handshake; a huge clean up is being done; artificial turf can be used in the rain and could cover its own maintenance costs. Mayor Johnson stated the City needs to make up for what it does not have; other cities have beautiful athletic facilities. Vice Mayor deHaan inquired what would be the cost of an all weather field. The Park and Recreation Director responded the cost depends upon infrastructure but could be approximately $1 million. Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority and Community Improvement Commission January 26, 2010 14 Vice Mayor deHaan stated the lifespan is a concerning factor; the Interim City Manager is on the right track; understanding which fields have joint use agreements is important. The Park and Recreation Director stated centralized scheduling would become more efficient. The Interim City Manager stated the matter could come back to Council in May and could be put into the budget. Mayor Johnson stated Alameda High School does not have a track; Alameda College has a beautiful track that is locked; requested that the Interim City Manager discuss the possibility of having the City and School District work with the College to use the track. Councilmember Gilmore inquired why Alameda College would not let the City use the track. The Park and Recreation Director responded the College wants to keep the track pristine; the College would charge a fee for having a custodian open the restrooms. Mayor Johnson stated many colleges have nice facilities open to the public. (10-036 CC) Vice Mayor deHaan stated that he and Councilmember Gilmore had the opportunity to meet with the Secretary of the Department of Transportation on the SS Petersburg; the ship discharges petroleum offshore; piers are not adequate to bring a tanker in for fueling in Haiti. Councilmember Gilmore stated the ship will take sixteen days to get to Haiti and has the capability to pump fuel as far away as four miles from shore; the first cargo will be jet fuel; the jet fuel on the island is not close to the airport; the distribution system was destroyed by the earthquake; other countries aiding Haiti do not have the capability to pump fuel. Vice Mayor deHaan stated the Secretary of the Department of Transportation emphasized that infrastructure will be built, not repaired; Haiti is very underdeveloped. (10-037 CC) Vice Mayor deHaan stated that he attended a kickoff of the 2010 census; the census is a ten minute questionnaire which will go out in March; allocation of federal funds is predicated on the census. (10-038 CC) Councilmember Tam stated that she attended the League of California Cities Policy Committee Meeting last Thursday as well as the East Bay Division Meeting; the State is looking at a $21.6 billion deficit over the next 18 months which is expected to persist over the next five years; the Governor is proposing to use State transit monies to pay off State bonds which will adversely affect AC Transit; the Governor wants to lower the Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority and Community Improvement Commission January 26, 2010 15 tax on gas; the approach is not transit friendly; the legislature is trying to be optimistic, not shut down during the budget crisis and hoping to get some policy changes despite the fact that this is an election year; Assembly Member Wesley Chesbro is helping to get some funding to improve the recycling rate; the priority for cities is job creation and economic stimulus; the League is trying to get Councilmembers help to gather signatures; the League is expecting approximately fifty different measures which could be distilled down to eighteen; pension reform is not part of the League’s goals this year; the ballot initiative signature allocation is 24,000 for the thirty-three cities in Alameda and Contra Costa counties; Contra Costa County Board of Supervisor Mary Piepho focused on the delta water issues and her opposition to the $11 billion water bond that will be coming in November; Supervisor Piepho stated the State cannot afford more dept and is very opposed to any effort to build a different version of the peripheral canal which is causing major divides in the Legislation between northern and southern California. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Mayor/Chair Johnson adjourned the joint meeting at 10:32 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger, City Clerk Secretary, CIC The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act. Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority and Community Improvement Commission January 26, 2010 16