Loading...
2021-07-06 Continued 2021-06-15 Regular CC MinutesContinued June 15, 2021 Regular Meeting Alameda City Council July 6, 2021 1 MIUTES OF THE CONTINUED JUNE 15, 2021 CITY COUNCIL MEETING TUESDAY- -JULY 6, 2021- -5:00 P.M. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft convened the meeting at 5:10 p.m. Councilmember Daysog led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL - Present: Councilmembers Daysog, Herrera Spencer, Knox White, Vella, and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft – 5. [Note: The meeting was conducted via Zoom] Absent: None. CONTINUED AGENDA ITEMS (21-437) Recommendation to Accept Update on Progress To Date Addressing Police Reform and Racial Equity; Provide Di rection on a Pilot Mental Health Response Program; and Consideration of a Draft Work Plan for the Remaining Topics. The City Clerk announced public comment was previously closed; the matter is a continuation of the June 15th Council discussion; noted a motion by Councilmember Herrera Spencer to approve Option 1 and seconded by Councilmember Knox White is on the floor; noted the remaining Council time has been continued. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated the vote is important; the matter goes back one year when Subcommittees on Police Reform and Racial Equity were formed; Council directed the City Manager to return with a proposal for alternative mental health response to calls for service; noted a Request for Proposals (RFP) was not done; however, one can be issued at later date; stated the City Manager provided proposals from the Felton Institute and the Alameda Fire Department (AFD); expressed support for the City working with the Felton Institute; stated the City is looking for an alternative to Police response with mental health expertise and behavioral health experience; cultural competency is an important portion of the recommendation; noted problematic calls for service within the City have involved people of color encountering the Alameda Police Department (APD); stated the Felton Institute has a track record of 70 years working in the behavioral and mental health field; Felton Institute is proposing to offer mental health outreach during the day where needed in order to reduce the number of mental health related calls and allow for better outcomes for struggling individuals; Felton Institute has experience working with people in encampments; some Felton Institute staff members have lived experience; outlined a forum held in Oakland for alternatives to mental health crises that emphasized public safety staff are trained to perform life - saving emergency response; mental health response can take hours in time spent with an individual; outlined an instance with mental health response having a peaceful outcome; stated that she is very impressed with the proposal from Felton Institute and would like to see the Felton Institute selected for the pilot program; while the pilot program is running, the City Manager can put together an RFP; in contrast, AFD provides wonderful emergency response and mutual aid; the AFD proposal is on e page Continued March 16, 2021 Regular Meeting Alameda City Council July 6, 2021 2 long and includes an emphasis on staffing and equipment; the proposal calls for a Management Analyst, Firefighter/Paramedic, a vehicle with specific needs, two work station desktops and includes a two sentence remark for mental health response services; the proposal includes a 100 -hour mental health training for Alameda Emergency Medical Services (EMS) with a sentence referring to a follow-up crisis management unit; the City will be better served selecting an experienced provider. Councilmember Herrera Spencer stated that she agrees the matter is an important decision; she is familiar with mental health and cultural competency; she made the motion to support AFD in hopes for a first responder option; she would like an opportunity given to AFD to explain their proposal. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft noted the City Manager provided contact information for both Felton Institute and AFD; stated both have provided input in response to questions from Council. Councilmember Herrera Spencer stated that she would like clarification on the Community Paramedicine Program and additional details brought to the table by AFD; AFD is the best choice for the pilot program. The Interim Fire Chief stated AFD has set out to provide a solution to problem; AFD’s proposal is 5 pages long; AFD has been part of first response for over 40 years and has had ambulance transport program for 37 years; AFD has responded to a variety of medical service calls for a variety of services, including mental health crises; AFD has been an integral part of responses over the years having transported people to authorized facilities, including local emergency departments and the County mental health hospital; the Community Paramedicine Program includes one Community Paramedic providing community outreach 40 hours per week; the program services homeless people in the community; first responders are the first to arrive on the scene when someone calls 911; AFD responds to medical emergency service and mental health crisis calls; the AFD program is designed to meet community concerns including a 24-hour operation and a lowered Police presence in response to calls for service; AFD developed a program response without Police assistance when app ropriate; the program developed includes a trained paramedic and Emergency Medical Technician (EMT) being available at all times; an alternate phone number for emergency response could be considered in the future; most people have been trained to dial 911 in an emergency; in instances where AFD responds to calls for service, the scene and patient are evaluated; AFD’s program has been designed to utilize existing resources within the City. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft requested clarification about the additional training. The Interim Fire Chief stated there are three components to the training: crisis intervention training which includes de-escalation, specific behavioral health training, and the laws surrounding 5150 holds; if AFD is provided with 5150 training, the department will be able to provide services where needed allowing Police not to be Continued June 15, 2021 Regular Meeting Alameda City Council July 6, 2021 3 called out to the scene; the 5150 training is critical; very few Fire Departments within the State are allowed to provide the service outside of Police Departments; the training would allow AFD to take over 5150 calls; the County EMS agency is working with the County Mental Health Department to give approval and training through the Mental Health Department. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether AFD would respond to service calls which are considered non-violent and non-combative or whether APD would respond. The Interim Fire Chief responded if callers are be violent or presenting the potential for violence toward themselves or another, APD would be needed; stated AFD wo uld respond to non-medical and non-violent calls for service; medical units are a radio call away if the need arises. Councilmember Herrera Spencer stated there are times where dispatch does not know the full situation when providing service call informa tion; inquired whether AFD is able to administer Naloxone in instances of an overdose. The Interim Fire Chief responded in the affirmative; stated if calls have a medical need associated with a drug related problem, a medical need will be determined and a first responder with ambulance transport will be involved. In response to Councilmember Herrera Spencer’s inquiry, the Deputy Fire Chief stated many times when a call is responded to, the situation is evaluated and a determination is made whether there is a medical component needing treatment; outlined various medical ailments which need treatment; stated the Police determine whether or not to call a 5150 hold; Officers have the choice between calling in a 5150 hold or taking individuals to a hospital for treatment; the proposed program will allow the current process to expand evaluation and look at alternate destinations for individuals; situations may call for different approaches depending on the individual; the proposal includes a mental health professional offering follow-up care and will allow AFD to evaluate the situation to offer the best care; the proposal is currently in use by the San Francisco Fire Department with 11 crisis mobile units; San Mateo County also uses paramedic EMT responses to mental health crisis calls; the proposal does not stipulate treating an individual on-site; however, AFD will be able to deescalate situations and evaluate the proper destination for individuals. Councilmember Herrera Spencer stated the City currently has meetings with AFD and Alameda Hospital; the meetings allow the public to participate; inquired whether adding the proposed pilot program to the quarterly meetings would be appropriate in order to allow for public participation. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated the discussion must remain on the topic of mental health response as an alternative to Police. Continued March 16, 2021 Regular Meeting Alameda City Council July 6, 2021 4 Councilmember Herrera Spencer stated that she believes the quarterly meetings are part of the reason behind AFD’s program being the best choice. Vice Mayor Vella requested clarification about AFD’s proposed approach to dispatch; stated that she would like to focus on the non -emergency line versus 911. The Interim Fire Chief stated calls will likely come in through 911; another number can be opened as an alternate to 911 for non-emergencies; having calls triaged through the dispatch center is important; callers are not able to evaluate situations the same as a trained professional; dispatchers are trained to extract information from callers; AFD will provide additional support and training where needed; the first step in the process is to receive the call for service and triage for dispatch of service. Vice Mayor Vella inquired whether AFD can work with Police and dispatch for non - emergency calls to ensure calls are directed to the pilot program unit, to which the Interim Fire Chief responded in the affirmative. Vice Mayor Vella inquired who decides whether or not an individual is being combative; questioned whether the matter will be triaged by personnel in the; inquired how the decision is made to engage with an individual and how to provide relative clarity. The Police Chief responded the information received by dispatch is key; stated APD must look at those actively engaged with violence; if the goal is to minimize Police response, the information coming in from dispatch must be critically analyzed; outlined response to a hypothetical report of an active shooter appropriately having Police response; stated someone previously involved with a violent act which is no longer actively engaged could be looked at outside of Police. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the Police Chief will direct the chosen pilot program provider to appropriate calls for service. The Police Chief responded if active violence is not present, the chosen responder will be in the best position to respond to the call; the provider could arrive and determine active violence is occurring and can request Police response; training will be key for the program provider. Vice Mayor Vella inquired whether training will occur with both AFD and APD to ensure all providers are on the same page, to which the Police Chief responded in the affirmative. The Interim Fire Chief responded in the affirmative; stated staff has already been meeting on related matters. Vice Mayor Vella inquired the startup timeline; questioned the timeline and process for both San Francisco and San Mateo locations in hiring a clinician for the program. Continued June 15, 2021 Regular Meeting Alameda City Council July 6, 2021 5 The Deputy Fire Chief responded San Francisco is unique in having multiple social workers; stated that he is unsure of the recruitment process; currently, Alameda would need one social worker at 40 hours per week; the training timeline will start with training paramedics through the clinician portion of the program; those eligible for de-escalation training will receive the training; the timeline will fall closer to December or January in having people up and running with a staffed unit; training will continue as people enter the department; the timeline is reasonable. Vice Mayor Vella inquired whether the City will be working simultaneously with the County to get alternative transports and approvals. The Deputy Fire Chief responded staff has been working with the County; stated the County is ready to go and has been waiting on Council’s decision; the County is ready to provide training including tentative 5150 training. Al Gilbert, Felton Institute, stated the Felton Institute is the largest provider of 5150 services in San Francisco and is the only agency that provides the service for transitional age youth, adults and older adults; Felton responded to 71,000 calls in the last year due to running the suicide hotline for San Francisco County; Felton Institute has the contract in Alameda County to work with those comi ng out of jail with mental illnesses; Felton Institute will work to train the Police and Fire Departments; training in 5150 does not equate mental health professional status; Felton Institute will treat people while out in the field and can be operating within 60 days. Curtis Penn, Felton Institute, stated providing response to non-medical calls would be a waste of AFD resources; the training received by Firefighters tends to be counterintuitive to the training required for mental health services; outlined the need for trainings in harm reduction modalities, wellness recovery action plans and understanding cognitive behavioral intervention. Councilmember Knox White stated that he is interested in understanding what the Felton Institute has to offer. Mr. Penn stated the Felton Institute is offering the antithesis of the Fire Department and will be engaging with people in the community; the Felton Institute will not be a triage unit and will not respond to merely take vitals and leave; assessments and plan s of care will be provided while connecting people with mental health providers in Alameda County to further understand and provide proper care; team members will not be on the scene to triage, instead de-escalation tactics will be used. Vice Mayor Vella expressed support for responses being provided as soon as possible; stated there are existing frameworks to build from; expressed concern about the clinician position; stated the City does not have social workers to pull and hire from; the proposal received from AFD has been innovative and works within an existing framework; inquired how the City will fill the clinician position and what the position entails during the pilot program; stated the position is not traditional for the City; the goal Continued March 16, 2021 Regular Meeting Alameda City Council July 6, 2021 6 is to make changes as the program progresses; expressed concern about the clinician position. The City Manager responded if Council decides to proceed with AFD’s proposal, a mental health professional will perform follow-up work at some point in the future; stated the position does not currently exist and can be competitive; the best route to take is to contract for the clinician position during the first year of the pilot program; a contract can be made with another agency to provide follow-up work in coordination with AFD rather than having a staff member fill the position. Vice Mayor Vella inquired whether the recommendation is a change from the proposal or whether the recommendation is included within the framework. The City Manager responded the recommendation is within the proposed framework; stated the recommendation is to have the clinician not be City staff, rather it would be a contracted position. Vice Mayor Vella requested further clarification from AFD. The Interim Fire Chief stated the contracted p osition is a good idea due to the position being competitive and difficult to fill. Vice Mayor Vella stated her goal is to have something start as soon as possible; expressed support for City staff working behind the scenes; inquired whether an amendment to the motion needs to be provided in order to provide contract services; expressed support for the clinician position not holding up the process and for consideration of ways to incorporate the Felton Institute in providing services. The City Manager responded the service being provided is specific and will meet the intent of the position; stated the motion can be amended or clarified; the pilot program will create lead time and the clinician position could possibly be subject to layoffs at the end if the City decides to move in a different direction; the recommendation provides a faster implementation. Councilmember Knox White stated the matter is the first step of many in the process; the City has an embarrassment of riches; the City needs many things due to cuts over the years; both proposals could be considered in a perfect world; the discussion consists of agreement in the goal to reduce Police response to non -crime and non- violent prevention calls; expressed support for consideration of protocols and decisions to engage being outside of Police; stated mistakes will be made within process and structure; the City should be ready to change as it moves quickly; expressed support for Option 1 with strong Council direction to start working on the mental health professional piece added into the response; the need for someone to be on staff is present; the City can consider options as the program moves forward; Option 1 allows the City to find a program which exists and does not need to be set up from scratch; the process of figuring out how to integrate will be long; the pilot program will allow for the conversation Continued June 15, 2021 Regular Meeting Alameda City Council July 6, 2021 7 to decide which program the City should have that included any contracted mental health services; he does not think the contracting process wil l slow the process down much; expressed support for monthly reporting on the change in calls and the related protocols and for discussions on how to better serve the community; stated the matter is a simple win due to agreement in allowing people to perform jobs better; requested Councilmember Herrera Spencer provide direction in iterating and bringing the Felton Institute and other community players into thinking about how to bring the mental health direct response into the pilot program; stated the budget for the year has been approved and includes mental health funding; the question for the City is how to engage with the Felton Institute; the goal is for other cities to engage in the same system as Alameda; there is an opportunity to start the journey. Councilmember Daysog stated the aftermath of incidents involving dancing in the street have been calling for a reform of the way policing of non -violent calls are conducted; two programs are before Council which represent the reform sought; the most import ant portion of the reform has to do with the delivery of mental health professionals to an event which is happening in real-time and the ability of mental health professionals to call on their experience to perform a range of things in order to de -escalate situations and understand and communicate with individuals; professionals must also transmit individuals to the appropriate service or set of mental health services; both entities present for the matter represent the reform being sought; he is of the opin ion that the Felton Institute is the best represented entity for reform; the Felton Institute performs services at all times and has the comparative advantage of dealing with mental health issues; staff members in AFD have the capacity and can train -up to ultimately deal with mental health issues; the level and depth of experience with the Felton Institute, when compared to AFD, is provided in lived experience; either choice will reform City Hall in regards to delivery of Police services; the Felton Institute does represent more of the reform desired by citizens and is more in line with the Crisis Assistance Helping Out On The Streets (CAHOOTS) model; the Felton Institute is a non-City entity that would provide a set of services to improve the way in which Police and the City handle non- emergency calls for service; he has no doubt that AFD will be able to train -up quickly over the future months; the edge is given to the Felton Institute based on field individuals responding to calls at 2:00 a.m. that know the proper questions to ask as opposed to providing the answers which need to be delivered; the residents of Alameda will be served with reforming Police in regard to non -violent emergency situations; expressed support for the Felton Institute and the possibility of having contracts being provided to the Felton Institute in order to provide clinical services in conjunction with AFD. Councilmember Herrera Spencer stated that she appreciates the Felton Institute applying for the program; she is hopeful that th e City Manager looks at other agencies as well; Alameda Family Services has provided counseling at multiple levels for over 50 years; other agencies within Alameda could be well qualified for the program; inquired whether other agencies will be allowed to apply to the RFP. Continued March 16, 2021 Regular Meeting Alameda City Council July 6, 2021 8 The City Manager responded an RFP will be issued during the pilot program which will allow other agencies to provide proposals for a long-term solution; stated the recommendation for the mental health component would be to allow any ent ity the opportunity to provide proposal; currently, the Felton Institute has been the only agency with the capacity to provide proposal on the full program; other entities might be able to provide proposal on partial programs. Vice Mayor Vella expressed concern about going out for bids delaying the process. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether a substitute motion is being made. Vice Mayor Vella stated that she would like to give direction to staff to work and move forward with entities which have previously applied and provided proposals, such as the Felton Institute; expediency is important and other groups have not put in for the program; noted the program is a pilot. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she can support a program which has the Felton Institute providing mental health component of AFD responses. Vice Mayor Vella stated the recommendation encapsulates what has been directed. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft requested clarification about the motion on the table. The City Clerk stated the motion is to approve Option 1; noted Vice Mayor Vella has proposed a friendly amendment to the motion to give additional direction for the City Manager to work with the Felton Institute; stated the amendment has not yet been accepted by the maker of the motion. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft requested Option 1 be restated. The City Clerk stated Option 1 is the “Fire Forward” proposal from AFD; the amendment includes incorporation of the Felton Institute to provide additional services. Councilmember Herrera Spencer stated that the amendment is not her preference; she would prefer being able to put out an RFP; inquired whether the City Manager envisions supporting AFD or whether other organizations would be interested in submitting bids. The City Manager responded the ask is different; stated other organizations could be interested; however, the time period would be longer than a direct contract program between AFD and the Felton Institute. Councilmember Herrera Spencer inquired how much longer the process will take to pu t out an RFP. The City Manager responded there will be a minimum 90-day delay in process; stated the timeline is not definitive; putting together an RFP does take a longer period of time. Continued June 15, 2021 Regular Meeting Alameda City Council July 6, 2021 9 Councilmember Herrera Spencer inquired whether the response rece ived from the Felton Institute is appropriate for the proposed alternate role. The City Manager responded the Felton Institute’s role would change if they provide mental health services under the AFD proposal; stated the change will need to be negotiated. Mr. Gilbert stated the Felton Institute is trained to provide mental health work required by the City; the scope of work will need to be determined; noted the Felton Institute is ready to provide support to the City. Councilmember Herrera Spencer inquired the potential timeline delay to negotiate with the Felton Institute versus putting out an RFP for other agencies. The City Manager responded limiting negotiations to one agency allows for a straightforward conclusion to be met between AFD and the Felton Institute; an RFP consists of putting a document together, receiving bids and establishing scoring. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft requested clarification for the timeline in processes. The City Manager stated the process will take less than 90 -days, roughly half the time is needed. Councilmember Daysog stated that his votes will be with the Felton Institute at all stages. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the friendly amendment is accepted by the maker of the motion. Councilmember Herrera Spencer questioned whether the Vice Mayor is interested in opening the process through an RFP. *** (21-438) Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she would entertain a motion allowing all members to have up to three minutes of speaking time. Councilmember Herrera Spencer moved approval of allowing the additional time. Councilmember Daysog seconded the motion, which carried by the following roll call vote: Councilmembers Daysog: Aye; Herrera Spencer: Aye; Knox White: Aye; Vella: Aye; and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye. Ayes: 5. *** Vice Mayor Vella stated the City provided an opportunity for other groups to apply and no other agencies applied; expressed concern about the timeframe; stated AFD is Continued March 16, 2021 Regular Meeting Alameda City Council July 6, 2021 10 working hard to get the program up to speed; expressed support for AFD beginnin g negotiations with the Felton Institute as soon as possible; stated that she would like the process to begin streamlined due to multiple agencies being involved; the program is a pilot and the City should determine what the program will look like; the rec ommendation does not exclude Alameda Family Services or any other agency from applying; she would like to act with expediency and many Councilmembers have voiced a preference for the Felton Institute to be engaged with the program relative to providing men tal health services; an RFP does not need to be issued and would cause unnecessary delays at this point; expressed concern for engaging in hypothetical scenarios to end up with what is currently being proposed. Councilmember Herrera Spencer inquired whether the Felton Institute currently has patients in the City of Alameda. Mr. Gilbert responded in Felton Institute currently serves clients within Alameda County; stated the office holds a separate clinic where mental health professionals deal with emergency crises in Alameda County; an early psychosis program is housed in the Alameda office. Councilmember Herrera Spencer inquired whether everyone in Alameda would be able to receive services within the City of Alameda. Mr. Gilbert responded in the affirmative; stated the Felton Institute does not currently have staff working outside of a contract; the Felton Institute is an agency working with Alameda and other counties; staff can be allocated based on the funding. Councilmember Herrera Spencer stated it is critical to offer mental health services within the City of Alameda; it is not appropriate to ask those seeking mental health services to travel to different cities for service; it is important to offer mental health services within the City of Alameda. Mr. Gilbert stated if the City pays for services, the services can be provided; clinical staff is working at the Atlantic Avenue office location on an early psychosis program , which requires additional professionals; a training center is also availa ble at the Alameda location; the Felton Institute is not currently contracted nor funded with the City of Alameda to provide clinical support services. Councilmember Herrera Spencer stated that she would like the information kept in mind by Councilmembers; expressed concern about negotiating with one agency that does not appear to have current services within Alameda; questioned the cost for choosing one agency. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated none of the locations referenced by AFD are within Alameda; outlined the CAHOOTS model; stated that she is working on a proposal to use a floor or two of Alameda Hospital for other mental health uses similar to the CAHOOTS model. Continued June 15, 2021 Regular Meeting Alameda City Council July 6, 2021 11 Councilmember Knox White expressed concern about requiring an RFP; questioned whether a date can be set for the program to be up and running; stated Council has provided issues of importance; expressed support for giving the City Manager flexibility in making a decision about whether or not to put out an RFP and for having a program up and running by the end of the year; stated the program process should not be delayed due to the City Manager being required to issue an RFP; RFPs typically are a longer process than anticipated; expressed support for the pilot program allowing the City to learn and decide what topics to include in a future RFP. Councilmember Herrera Spencer expressed support for the comments provided by Councilmember Knox White; stated if the City Manager feel the direction provided is sufficient, then she is supportive; she can accept the comments provided as a friendly amendment. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she cannot support a proposal that does not include the Felton Institute stepping in during the pilot program; the Felton Institute has the experience needed and Alameda Family Services does not; Alameda Family Services performs group counselling sessions well; the mental health services needed for the pilot program are more specialized; the Felton Institute is prepared to step in and begin as soon as possible; expressed support for the program being up and running by the fall; stated that she can support the friendly amendment previously made. Councilmember Herrera Spencer stated the City Manager can choose the Felton Institute under the direction given from Councilmember Knox White; she would prefer keeping the option open with the proposed amendment language from Councilmember Knox White. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the direction includes an RFP being issued. Councilmember Knox White stated that his friendly amendment includes having the program up and running by September; neither of the organizations have the program ready to go and likely will not be running by September; expressed support for giving the City Manager until the end of December to have a program up and running; stated the City Manager can decide which process to use in order to ensure mental health goals set by Council are met; an RFP will not work in the same way; expressed concern about using County resources; stated that he supports allowing the City Manager the flexibility in identifying the program partners. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated it is important to note that the City Manager has indicated he can have an agreement between the Felton Institute and AFD in half the time of an RFP. The City Manager stated the 90-day timeline for an RFP; he will have to return to Council after issuing the RFP; the timeline will likely be longer than 90 -days if Council Continued March 16, 2021 Regular Meeting Alameda City Council July 6, 2021 12 desires an RFP be issued; not issuing an RFP and contracting with the Felton Institute can be implemented in half the time of issuing a standard RFP. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired how long an agreement between the Felton Institute and AFD would take. The City Manager responded an agreement could be in place by the end of August or early September; stated having the resources and staff in place will likely be by the end of fall. Councilmember Daysog stated the broader picture includes a reform process using a pilot program; Council should not lose sight of the process; if the Felton Institute provides back-end services through an agreement struck with AFD, the program is still being conducted on a pilot basis and should move forward; expressed support in moving forward with the Felton Institute providing back-end services under a contract with AFD; stated Council is trying to move forward and respond professionally to the concerns raised by Alameda residents. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether Felton Institute staff should accompany AFD members on calls for service. Councilmember Daysog stated the decision should be made based on a discussion between AFD, Felton Institute and the City Manager; his understanding of the discussion is that the Felton Institute would be providing the back-end services; expressed support if AFD and the City Manager contract for the Felton Institute to provide additional services on calls. Councilmember Herrera Spencer inquired whether the City Manager is proposing to work with the Felton Institute to provide services in the cleanest and easiest way; s tated that she would like AFD to be the lead entity for calls; AFD will determine who will perform additional services when needed. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether Councilmember Herrera Spencer is looking for the City Manager to create an agreement between AFD and the Felton Institute. Councilmember Herrera Spencer responded in the affirmative; stated the Felton Institute is not her preferred choice and that she would not be limiting her selection; noted her decision is based on Council input; expressed support for AFD working as the lead entity; stated the ask is different from the original proposal and is unfortunate. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft requested clarification of the motion. The City Clerk stated neither of the two friendly amendments have be en accepted; the original motion is to approve Option 1 “Fire Forward” proposal from AFD; the friendly amendment proposed by Vice Mayor Vella is to give direction to supplement the motion with mental health services being provided by the Felton Institute; the second proposed Continued June 15, 2021 Regular Meeting Alameda City Council July 6, 2021 13 friendly amendment from Councilmember Knox White is to have the City Manager make the determination about which company to contract with in the most expedient way possible. The City Manager stated that he can work within the direction provided. Councilmember Daysog inquired whether the first amendment could be voted on with the second amendment to follow. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft requested clarification on the action to be taken by Council. The City Attorney stated the amendments are not necessarily compatible; the maker and seconder of the motion will need to either accept or reject each of the amendments in turn, then Council may conduct a vote. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the amendments should be considered in the order proposed. The City Attorney responded in the affirmative; stated Council should determine whether the maker and seconder of the motion accept or reject the first amendment proposed by Vice Mayor Vella and if the amendment is not accepted, the second amendment should be considered in the same way. Councilmember Knox White expressed support for either friendly amendment. Councilmember Knox White withdrew his friendly amendment. The City Attorney stated there is a friendly amendment remaining from Vice Mayor Vella; noted Councilmember Herrera Spencer may provide a thumbs up or down to indicate agreement with the amendment due to having zero speaking time remaining. *** (21-439) Vice Mayor Vella moved approval of allowing Councilmember Herrera Spencer one minute of speaking time to state her motion. Councilmember Daysog seconded the motion, which carried by the following roll call vote: Councilmembers Daysog: Aye; Herrera Spencer: Aye; Knox White: Aye; Vella: Aye; and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye. Ayes: 5. *** Councilmember Herrera Spencer stated that her preference is to modify her motion to include comments provided by Councilmember Knox White in allowing the City Manager to decide whether or not he would like to work with the Felton Institute. Councilmember Herrera Spencer modified her motion to approve Option 1 and give the City Manager the opportunity to work with whomever in order to expeditiously create a Continued March 16, 2021 Regular Meeting Alameda City Council July 6, 2021 14 deal with whichever provider can have the program up and running as soon as possible, but no later than the end of the year. Councilmember Knox White seconded the motion, which carried by the following roll call vote: Councilmembers Daysog: No; Herrera Spencer: Aye; Knox White: Aye; Vella: Aye; and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft: No. Ayes: 3. Noes: 2. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired when the City Manager will return to Council for an update. The City Manager responded an interim report back to Council can be provided at the first meeting in September; noted an off -agenda report can be provided sooner if desired. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated time is of the essence and she is not willing to wait until September for a report; inquired whether a report can be provided before Council goes on break in August, to which the City Manager responded in the affirmative. Councilmember Herrera Spencer stated there are other points regarding timelines in the staff report not addressed in the matter; questioned whether the additional points are to be discussed. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated the discussion had been centered on mental health response. The City Manager stated the other discussion points are a status report and are not time critical in the same sense as the alternate mental health response; noted staff can bring the matter forth a the September Council meeting. (21-440) Public Hearing to Consider a Call for Review of the Historical Advisory Board’s Decision to Approve Certificate of Approval No. PLN20-0431 to Allow the Demolition of Two Main Buildings and Four Accessory Buildings at 620 Central Avenue (the “McKay Wellness Center Project”); and (21-440A) Resolution No. 15792, “Approving Certificate of Approval Application No. PLN20-0431 to Allow the Demolition of Two Main Buildings and Four Accessory Buildings at 620 Central Avenue (The “McKay Wellness Center” Project).” Adopted The City Planner gave a Power Point presentation. Doug Biggs, Alameda Point Collaborative, gave a brief presentation. Councilmember Daysog stated that he signed on to the call for review due to the ballot statement reading: “shall an ordinance confirming the City Council’s action to permit reuse of vacant Federal buildings on a 3.65 acre parcel on McKay Avenue and allow for the development of a wellness center…;” the statement refers to reuse of the site; the Continued June 15, 2021 Regular Meeting Alameda City Council July 6, 2021 15 ballot statement does not reference any kind of demolition; inquired the legal constraints in using the term “reuse” on a ballot; whether there is a limit to the range of activities and reuse permitted on the site. The City Attorney responded two previous ballot measures, Measures A and B, went to the voters; Measure B was prepared by the voters to overturn Council’s decision to rezone the property; Measure A was a Council proposed measure to compete with Measure B and affirm Council’s rezoning decision; the underlying decision was related to zoning and was not project-specific; the voters decided to support Measure A, with the legal meaning being a defeat to Measure B; Measure A’s principal and only legal function was to compete with and defeat Measure B; Measure A did not have the effective of constraining Council action and did not add additional limitations to the Charter or City laws; Measure A confirmed that Council’s rezoning decision had been correct; the ballot measure language provided a lot of information as background , including reuse; it is possible that voters casted votes based on the background information; however, the legal significance for Measure A was to compete with Measure B and to allow the Council decision to move forward; the result does not restrict future Council decisions and despite the vote which took place, the result does not limit Council’s action. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft requested clarification about Measure B in relation to rezoning. The Assistant City Attorney stated Measure B was a citizen’s initiative to rezone the same parcel open space following Council’s action to rezone the property, remove the G overlay and maintain the administrative professional underlying zoning. *** (21-441) Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether Council would like to lower public comment speaking time. Vice Mayor Vella moved approval of limiting speaking time to 1:00 per speaker. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft seconded the motion, which failed by the following roll call vote: Councilmembers Daysog: No; Herrera Spencer: No; Knox White: No; Vella: Aye; and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye. Ayes: 2. Noes: 3. *** Urged Council deny the certificate of approval to demolish the historic property on McKay Avenue; discussed ballot information about Building 2 being structurally sound and reused; stated numerous community tours have been conducted; ballot measure language was specific about reuse of existing federal buildings; the matter should be submitted to the voters: Lis Cox, Alameda. Urged Council to support the Historical Advisory Board (HAB) decision; stated the matter is an attempt to stop the wellness center; the site is important for historical purposes; however, the buildings have lost their historic integrity; she agrees the ballot Continued March 16, 2021 Regular Meeting Alameda City Council July 6, 2021 16 measures state the buildings will be reused; she would like more information on the cost differences; the matter should not come back to the voters: Theresa Rude, Alameda. Stated that she feels the matter is a bait and switch; discussed ballot language; urged Council not to approve the demolition of buildings: Karen Miller, Alameda. Expressed support for HAB; stated that he is saddened by the attempts to stop the wellness center; offered an apology to the Merchant Marine veterans which were misled into signing a petition under false pretenses and claims; outlined his experience witnessing the petition process; stated it is disheartening to see people used for projects which will help many homeless elders and veterans; expressed support for the project: Zac Bowling, Alameda. Stated that she strongly objects to the proposed demolition at McKay Avenue; urged Council to deny the request; discussed the history of the property and Page and Turnbull reports; stated there is a case to be argued that the architect fulfils the description of a master architect; outlined project designs by Bruno on the National List of Historic Places; urged Council wait until the documents are fully reviewed by National Historians before erasing the past; stated it is irresponsible to take action without full consideration of historic importance and economic value; outlined nearby historic restorations: Carmen Reid, Alameda. Stated that he is opposed to demolition of the buildings; he believes Councilmember Knox White has a conflict of interest; discussed the uses allowed under the lease: Jay Garfinkle, Alameda. Discussed correspondence; stated the City has plenty of monuments to war and should not put buildings before helping people in the community; the opponents of the project are not only fighting for preservation; urged Council stop catering to the anti-progress, change-averse and privileged people of the City and allow the wellness center to proceed as approved by HAB: Jenice Anderson, Alameda. Urged Council to deny the effort to demolish an important architectural and hist oric building; discussed the American Merchant Marine service; stated tearing down the buildings prematurely erases the history of America; expressed support for the space being used as an interpretive center that documents the history of the site; stated Alameda has a strong history of supporting military armed forces : Christian Yuhas, American Merchant Marine. Stated that he is a veteran with 21 years in the Navy; discussed Merchant Marine ships delivering troops during the Korean and Vietnam wars; state d the role for Merchant Marines was vital near dangerous waters; discussed the history of World War II; stated it is the duty of Councilmembers to follow instructions and proceed to allow a thorough evaluation of the property: Felix Fortuna, Alameda. Continued June 15, 2021 Regular Meeting Alameda City Council July 6, 2021 17 Stated the surplus facilities were to be repurposed for homeless services; the buildings had been certified for reuse there has been a misleading intent; discussed alternate locations for the facility and ballot measure language; stated a vote to demolish the building is a betrayal of the voters’ will: Harvey Rosenthal, Alameda. Stated that she opposes demolition; the HAB holds a position that the project site has significant historic value; the historic value is supported by the local and national communities; the option to demolish the building contradicts the City’s commitments to protection of the environment and preservation of unique historic character; demolition releases toxins into the environment and marine life is particularly sensitive; expressed concern about the developer circumventing an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) process; urged Councilmember Knox White to recuse himself from the discussion due to association with the developer causing a conflict of interest : Fey Adelstein, Alameda. Stated many of the public speakers are living history; he takes issue around whether or not Municipal Code Section 12-21.3 applies to the matter; discussed the process to obtain a Certificate of Approval; noted processes and discussions have not happened for a Certificate of Approval; urged the process and procedures be completed properly : Matt Reid, Alameda. Discussed a Commission on Persons With Disabilities meeting related to the HAB approval of the permit for demolition for the wellness center; stated the we llness center will provide desperately needed housing and services for seniors and unhoused people, including people being discharged from the hospital; a large percentage of people in Alameda are people with disabilities; each delay in the project is a de lay to housing and necessary follow-up care for medically fragile people; delaying the center has life and death consequences; expressed concern about opponents of the wellness center using the historic preservation process to dismiss the conclusions of preservation experts; urged Council to uphold the HAB’s decision and allow the center to meet the needs of the community and for Council to take reasonable measures to ensure the McKay Avenue project becomes operational without further delay: Beth Kenny, Commission on Persons with Disabilities. Stated the opposition is not a fight against the homeless and services for people in need; expressed concern about how the matter is being handled; stated the matter should follow the letter or spirit of the law; the legal analysis presented by staff is not supported; facts which are in dispute have been presented; the analysis provided by Page and Turnbull was made by evaluation only; the information falls beyond the timelines provided by State and federal guidelines; the project will not pass scrutiny before a State or federal court; questioned whether the scope of the project has been changed; discussed the project developer and Assembly Bill 1486; stated the premise of environmental quality has been thwarted; urged Council slow down and re-examine the process to complete a proper EIR: John Healy, Appellant. Stated the Alameda Municipal Code defines which structures can qualify as Alameda Historical Monuments; the Code is the only authority needed to verify the Merch ant Continued March 16, 2021 Regular Meeting Alameda City Council July 6, 2021 18 Marine buildings on McKay Avenue qualify as monuments; the Code states a monument can be any size or group of structures of a particular historic significance to the City; the buildings on McKay qualify and are the last World War II Merchant Marine buildings standing in the country; discussed training officers at the site; stated the buildings are designed by a notable East Bay architect and have received strong public support in the form of over 1,000 signatures on a petition and nearly 100 e -mails to the HAB; discussed staff presenting information to the HAB; urged Council to deny the demolition of the McKay Avenue historical monument site: Mike Van Dine, Alameda. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft expressed concern about inaccurate remarks related about the City Planner. Discussed his experience in removing the G overlay for the site; stated Council set values for wanting homeless services in Alameda; the opponents have battled to stop the center; discussed the special election; expressed support for Council lea dership; stated the City and its voters believe in the valuable services the site can provide; justice for the homeless delayed is justice for the homeless denied; urged Council to uphold the HAB’s decision and ensure the services are provided: Former Councilmember Jim Oddie, Alameda. Urged Council deny the Certificate of Approval to demolish the historic buildings; stated the developer has reversed the plan to reuse the buildings that the voters approved in 2019 as Measure A; the ballot language is not arbitrary; a new election is needed for the developer to take a new approach to the project; urged Council to count those that have submitted comments opposing demolition; expressed support for a new site to be considered; discussed purchase of the Marina Village Inn Hotel; stated the demolition of historic buildings is irresponsible; the buildings should be preserved and restored : Maria Perales, Alameda. Stated that her understanding of Measure A would permit the reuse and rehabilitation of vacant Federal buildings to ensure development of a senior assisted living and wellness center for unhoused individuals in Alameda; there had been no indication that the buildings might not be rehabbed; the reuse of buildings had been touted as part of the appeal in voting yes; the project can now only go forward if the buildings are demolished; expressed concern for the about face; stated that she has a distrust in the intentions and voracity of the developer; Council should delay any decisions regarding McKay Avenue until suitability for rehabilitation and reuse can be further established in an independent manner: Dolores Kelleher, Alameda. Urged Council allow the wellness center to proceed; stated there is irony in the defense of history being cherry-picked; she is tired of the actions of opposition; Alameda has a racist history and many of the comments arguing for history do not seem to care; expressed support for helping the present community: Alexia Arocha, Alameda. Stated discussed the latest Page and Turnbull report; stated opponents to the wellness center forced a Special Election in an attempt to stop a project which will help many of Continued June 15, 2021 Regular Meeting Alameda City Council July 6, 2021 19 the most vulnerable community members; opponents have tried to propose tearing down the same buildings in order to build a park; opponents are trying to overturn the HAB’s decision to allow the buildings to be torn down; the hypocrisy is appalling and transparent; urged Council end the hypocrisy, help those in need and uphold the HAB’s decision: Browyn Harris, Alameda. Stated that he is not opposed to the wellness center; he is opposed to destruction of the buildings due to family members serving in World War II and the Korean War; expressed support for keeping the historical aspect of the site; discussed family members’ military exp erience in Alameda; the Measure statement noted the buildings would be reused: Dan Tuazon, Alameda. Stated that he is a champion for the homeless, but not for the project; he object s to the certification of demolition; substantial changes have been made t o the wellness center scope and size; an EIR should be initiated by the developer at once; urged Council to demand an EIR be obtained prior to demolition of the historic buildings; discussed the staff report addendum; stated there will be a significant impact and effect to 620 Central Avenue; an EIR is required for any project with significant effect on the environment; he is a proponent for wellness centers: Brenden Sullivan, Alameda. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft moved approval of the HAB decision to approve the Certificate of Approval to allow demolition of two main buildings and four accessory buildings at 620 Central Avenue and associated resolution. Councilmember Knox White seconded the motion. Under discussion, Councilmember Daysog stated that his concern is that the people of Alameda have spoken in favor of having a wellness center at 620 Central Avenue; a wellness center must happen at the site; the proposition before the residents was for reuse of the buildings; other parts of the ballot referenced using existing facilities; the context of the language was clear the project would be completed within the existing structure; outlined cost implications for construction projects; stated there may have been a realization that the project will cost more money; the evaluation should have been done prior; the perspective of reuse has been set and put before the voters; the ballot language did not reference demolition; the contents of the materials put before voters is most important; if needed, a discussion should occur related to costs within the contest of reusing the buildings on the site; he respects the City Attorney’s assessment of the matter; however, the voters voted for something in Measure A which had been framed a certain way; the matter does not necessarily constrain City Hall and Council by remaining within the framework of reuse. Councilmember Herrera Spencer stated that she filed the appeal because she does not think the City Code section has been followed; a question was posed to the HAB about whether to remove the building from the Historical Building Study List (HBSL); there has not been a discussion in regard to the monument list versus the HBSL; it is incumbent upon staff to follow the Code section; expressed support for staff trying to separate Continued March 16, 2021 Regular Meeting Alameda City Council July 6, 2021 20 delisting from the HBSL; stated the City’s Code section does not have a process for demolition connected to the HBSL; she does not think the process was addressed at the HAB level; the City’s Code section speaks to the monument list and the buildings in question are on the HBSL which differs from the monument list; the HAB did vote not to delist the building and an opportunity should have been provided in order to clarify; there have been two votes from the HAB, including one vote not to delist the building; a discussion about what to do with the monument list should have occurred after the first vote; the City has a Code section related to demolition; the ballot language should also be honored related to reuse of the building; a vote for demolition should no t be considered at this time; outlined comments provided by Christian Yuhas; stated the buildings are to be used in times of war and peace; expressed support for time being provided to work through the process of the buildings being on the National Registr y prior to demolition, for the buildings not to be demolished and for the Certificate of Approval to be withheld until the process has been completed; stated staff can request information from the National Registry to find the current timeline; noted the C ity can be more reasonable working with the National Registry to provide an opportunity to decide whether or not the buildings are of historical significance; the EIR is a legitimate concern; there are ways to avoid an EIR; many people care about the environment and demolishing buildings can impact a community; speakers have misrepresented her position in regard to tearing down the buildings; there have been discussions related to using the buildings as part of the park to help provide a facility for studen t activities; it is better to protect and reuse existing buildings; expressed concern about a bait and switch; stated ballot language for reuse should be honored; many people have supported the reuse and would not support demolition. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated the title of Measure A referenced is: “The Caring for Alameda Act;” she worked closely on the Measure with others; the focus of the Measure was to provide a facility for vulnerable individuals; she has worked closely to address the housing crisis; people complain about homelessness and fight even benign and humane solutions which provide a respite center to ensure people do not have to live and die on the streets; as the problem grows, more people live and die on the street; it is well and good to remember the Merchant Marines; a significant percentage of the homeless population are veterans; it is the ultimate insult for veterans to be left homeless; the Veterans Administration (VA) has made some significant headway in getting homeless veterans housed; however, headway has been lost during the pandemic leaving more veterans to become homeless; she appreciates the voters ’ intention with Measure A and she is ready to move forward with the matter. Vice Mayor Vella noted that she was at the Alameda County Democratic Central Committee meeting in February of 2019 when Council colleagues made presentations; widening of the street and the addition of parking for Crab Cove was discussed as part of Measure B; a number of things were said by various proponents of both measures; some of the talking points in support of Measure B had been to add parking, possibly indicating the removal of buildings; there have been numerous opportunities to address the matter; she does not appreciate the arguments against the well ness center are not at the same time and instead are attempted at multiple times creating a domino effect; Continued June 15, 2021 Regular Meeting Alameda City Council July 6, 2021 21 the approach is disingenuous and is not the finest moment for the community; expressed concern about additional roadblocks being placed in front of providing much needed services to the most vulnerable members of the community; outlined her family’s military service background; stated that she does not want to put buildings in front of people; voters ultimately voted to lead with compassion for the com munity as a whole and provide needed services in a way which ensures caring for vulnerable community members; expressed support for the motion. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft outlined her family’s military background; stated reference was made to the Marina Village Inn; expressed support for the City purchasing the property; stated the City will be working towards purchasing the property for the purpose of providing transitional housing for families and individuals; many resources are needed and roofs are needed above people’s heads. Councilmember Knox White expressed support for the HAB members; stated the finding made has been consistent with what has been presented by historic experts; stated Measure A was not an approval for a project ; Measure A was created in opposition to Measure B; Measure B is related to a zoning conflict and lost in the election; the people voted not to rezone the property due to the wellness center; the zoning decision stands and has been supported by the voters; expressed support for the motion. On the call for the question, the motion carried by the following roll call vote: Councilmembers Daysog: Abstain; Herrera Spencer: No; Knox White: Aye; Vella: Aye; and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye. Ayes: 3. Noes: 1. Abstention: 1. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft adjourned the meeting at 8:04 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger City Clerk The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Sunshine Ordinance.