Loading...
2021-11-02 Regular CC MinutesRegular Meeting Alameda City Council November 2, 2021 1 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING TUESDAY- -NOVEMBER 2, 2021- -7:00 P.M. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft convened the meeting at 7:15 p.m. ROLL CALL - Present: Councilmembers Daysog, Herrera Spencer, Knox White, Vella, and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft – 5. [Note: The meeting was conducted via Zoom] Absent: None. AGENDA CHANGES (21-680) Councilmember Daysog moved approval of hearing the referral regarding License Plate Readers [paragraph no. 21-706] after the continued agenda item. Councilmember Herrera Spencer second the motion which failed by the following roll call vote: Councilmembers Daysog: Aye; Herrera Spencer: Ayes; Knox White: No; Vella: No; and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft: No. Ayes: 2. Noes: 3. PROCLAMATIONS, SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY AND ANNOUNCEMENTS (21-681) Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft read and presented a Proclamation to Ricci Zombeck. Ricci Zombeck, former Interim Fire Chief, made brief comments. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (21-682) Brian Kennedy, Alameda, announced the National Day of Remembrance for Victims of Illegal Alien Crime; discussed Alameda being a Sanctuary City. (21-683) Marilyn Rothman, Alameda, questioned whether anything is being done about the Police Oversight Commission; stated that she has heard nothing for months; she also has not heard anything about the death of Mario Gonzales; expressed support for a progress report. (21-684) Jenice Anderson, Alameda, stated that she agrees with Speaker Rothman; the City could be a leader in the region; noted that no one is illegal on stolen land. (21-685) Carmen Reid, Alameda, stated that she is disappointed to learn that Councilmembers supported redoing an appraisal from park land to housing in relation to Jean Sweeney Park; the decisions should have been made in public; the matter was brought forth at the Open Government Commission and was denied; urged Council to do better going forward in being more inclusive to neighbors and the community. CONSENT CALENDAR Urged Council send the Centro Legal de la Raza item [paragraph no. 21-690] back to staff; stated that she does not agree with going out with a new Requests for Proposals; she has no objection to legal services for tenants being handled by the City Attorney’s office; favorable feedback has been received by those who have worked with the City Attorney’s office; she does Regular Meeting Alameda City Council November 2, 2021 2 not like the idea of a mediation program; the program does not offer a remedy for a tenant whose landlord refuses to participate; expressed concern about enforcement; expressed support for a legal assistance program for tenants that is more tenant-friendly being housed in the City Attorney’s office and for continuing the local emergency [paragraph no. 21-692]: Toni Grimm, Alameda Renters Coalition. Expressed support for comments provided by Speaker Grimm; stated the problem with mediation is the program is non-binding, does not include enforcement, discourages tenants from seeking legal advice and has one legal right given up in exchange for another; a landlord represented by counsel knows their rights and benefits, while tenants do not; tenants do not truly have the opportunity to fully negotiate on their own behalf; a mediator is not obligated to give a tenant any legal advice; people benefitting from the service are typically of low-income, elderly, disabled and mothers with children; urged Council not yank the program away from people in uncertain times: Lana Rishina, Alameda. Expressed support for the permanent continuation of conducting City Council meetings via teleconference; stated remote participation is easier for all: Marilyn Rothman, Alameda. Expressed support for the Centro Legal de la Raza matter; stated that she is not fully aware of the impacts the services provide; discussed her experience answering questions for tenants through Alameda Renters Coalition; stated many tenants have benefitted from legal help; when facing eviction, there is an imbalance between tenants and landlords; she has benefitted from services provided by Centro Legal de la Raza; noted that her relationship with her landlord improved due to better understanding: Laura Woodard, Alameda Renters Coalition. Councilmember Daysog requested the resolution declaring an emergency [paragraph no. 21- 692] be removed from the Consent Calendar for discussion. Councilmember Herrera Spencer moved approval of remainder of the Consent Calendar. Councilmember Knox White seconded the motion. Under discussion, Councilmember Daysog stated that he will support continuing the local emergency; critical pieces of local rules are linked to the continuation, such as the moratorium on rent increases and evictions; he understands the difficulties many are facing; small mom and pop landlords are also facing difficulties; he does not think anyone is interested in evictions; however, small mom and pop landlords should be able to get back into working within the rent regulation system in place; the rent regulation system does allow a small rent increase; while Council cannot adopt any changes to the moratorium on rent increases or evictions, he thinks Council should begin to have the discussion on behalf of smaller landlords. Councilmember Herrera Spencer amended the motion to include adoption of the resolution declaring an emergency and recorded a no vote on the item. Councilmember Knox White agreed with the amendment to the motion. On the call for the question, the motion carried by the following roll call vote: Councilmembers Daysog: Aye; Herrera Spencer: Ayes; Knox White: Aye; Vella: Aye; and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye. Ayes: 5. [Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk preceding the paragraph number.] Regular Meeting Alameda City Council November 2, 2021 3 (*21-686) Minutes of the Special and Regular City Council Meetings Held on October 5, 2021. Approved. (*21-687) Ratified bills in the amount of $3,379,752.90. (*21-688) Recommendation to Authorize the City Manager to Execute a First Amendment to the Agreement with Chrisp Company Pavement Marking and Sign Replacement Project, in an Amount Not to Exceed $110,000 for an Aggregate Amount Not to Exceed $712,218.98; and Recommendation to Accept the Work of Chrisp Company f or Fiscal Year 2017-19 Pavement Marking and Sign Replacement Project, No. P.W. 03-19-15. Accepted. (*21-689) Recommendation to Authorize the City Manager to Accept the Work of NBC Construction & Engineering, Inc. for Alameda Point Modular Restroom Building, No. P.W. 09- 20-36. Accepted. (*21-690) Recommendation to Allow the Agreement with Centro Legal De La Raza to Expire and to Authorize the City Attorney’s Office to Provide Housing Education and Mediation Services for Landlords and Tenants on a Pilot Basis Using Contracted Resources. Accepted. (*21-691) Recommendation to Approve Findings to Allow City Meetings to be Conducted via Teleconference. Accepted. (21-692) Resolution No. 15831, “Continuing the Declaration of the Existence of a Local Emergency in Response to the COVID-19 Pandemic, Consistent with Government Code Section 8630(c).” Adopted. Note: Councilmember Herrera Spencer recorded a no vote, so the item carried by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmembers Daysog, Knox White, Vella and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft – 4. Noes: Councilmember Herrera Spencer – 1. CONTINUED AGENDA ITEM (21-693) Recommendation to Authorize the City Manager to Execute a Sixth Amendment to the Agreement with Cultivate, LLC to Increase Compensation by $60,000, for a Total Aggregate Compensation Not to Exceed $354,000 to Continue Providing Technical Planning Support to the City of Alameda General Plan Update through Housing Element Adoption. Councilmember Herrera Spencer inquired whether the technical planning support being provided includes creating a 3-dimensional video; stated that she thinks the support should include such video to show the potential changes; questioned what rezoning all residential districts and changing maximum heights would look like; stated that she has seen other cities utilizing video to help visualize projects; she hopes a video is part of the technical support being provided. The Planning, Building and Transportation Director responded staff is working on the next Housing Element as part of the General Plan; stated there are plans for visual simulations; a video has not yet been considered; staff can look into video options; the Planning Board has also expressed the need for graphics and visual representations of what the areas will look like; the community needs to understand what the changes will look like; staff has three different Regular Meeting Alameda City Council November 2, 2021 4 consultant contracts; the contract being considered presently helps with public outreach, website, and documents; Cultivate is not a graphics firm; staff holds a contract with Urban Design Associates, which provides drawings; staff can request more video and visual simulations; the option to provide the visual graphics Citywide is interesting; there is a Housing Element workshop on November 16th and he can provide a recommendation at the workshop. Councilmember Herrera Spencer stated that she is happy that the Planning Board is also thinking about visual simulations; the visual aids help conceptualize projects as opposed to the drawings; noted many times people lament the difference between actual project outcomes versus the drawings; Council should be doing the most to help be as transparent as possible in showing impacts. Councilmember Herrera Spencer moved approval of the staff recommendation. Councilmember Knox White 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. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS (21-694) Recommendation to Provide Direction on the Provision of Housing for the City’s Unhoused Population, Including Emergency Housing, Transitional Supportive Housing, Permanent Supportive Housing and Prospective Homeless Housing Projects. The Community Development Director gave a brief presentation. Councilmember Daysog inquired whether there is a reason the hotel/motel site is not specified in option number three. The Community Development Director responded staff has not yet identified a location; stated at Council’s request, staff put out a Request for Proposals (RFP) for the Marina Village Inn; no responses were received; a Housing Authority proposal has been received for another property; however, a negotiated, written agreement is not yet pinned down; staff is continuing to investigate options and will return with more concrete options. Expressed concern about placing all of the Project Home Key projects on the West End; urged a more equitable distribution of projects throughout the community; expressed support for choosing Village of Love for the 30 families option, for funding a 90-unit north housing project and for developing the Rodeway Inn or Coral Reef Hotel as a mixed-use, mixed-community, gateway project using Project Home Key funding; urged the City look at other areas for projects: Karen Bey, Alameda. Expressed support for comments provided by Speaker Bey; stated staff continues to view the West End as the area to be developed for homeless projects; urged Council to remember that equity has been brought up and agreed upon by the City Council as a goal; stated the Road Home includes counselors as a device to help the unhoused individuals transition into permanent housing; the solution is permanent housing, which does not exist; urged Council focus on permanent housing going forward; expressed support for the permanent housing not creating a concentration of poverty, and for the North Housing site; urged the City to partner with the Housing Authority: Marilyn Alwan, Alameda. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council November 2, 2021 5 [Did not comment on the agenda item]: Brian Kennedy, Alameda. Councilmember Knox White stated that he appreciates the prioritization of items which provide housing and resources; expressed support for the bottle parcel project concept and the City- owned, available Alameda Point housing; stated that he will support a hotel project which works when found; noted the hotel project will take time; he would like to provide direction for staff not to focus just on the W est End, but more on the East End and Bay Farm to the extent possible; the direction will be difficult due to privately owned businesses; he looks forward to opportunities to discuss resilience centers and other services which would also access funds. Councilmember Daysog stated any one of the three options provides Council with an opportunity to go really big in terms of delivering on the needs of persons and families who are homeless; expressed support for the bottle parcel option and the Big Whites; stated that he supports the hotel/motel site option if it is placed in an area which has community commercial zoning; Council must look at the matter as a realistic project for formerly homeless families and also as part of the beautification for the area; expressed support for the hotel/motel option not being a simple housing conversion project, but also a project that can be made beautiful for the area; the matter is a great opportunity for the City to go big. Councilmember Herrera Spencer inquired whether the projects will apply to homeless people throughout the County or those currently in Alameda. The Community Development Director responded emergency housing will focus on local residents; stated the goal for emergency housing is to provide some opportunities for shelter and beds for those within Alameda in the short-term; emergency housing is not seen as a long- term option and is able to get off the ground fairly quickly; a transitional housing project will be slightly different and needs to go through the County’s Coordinated Care System; the City will have Home Key and County funds involved for transitional housing and will pull from a larger pool of funds; staff would love to house Alameda residents to the extent legally possible; the hotel project is envisioned as permanent supportive housing where the population could potentially be a larger County population. The Economic Development Manager stated staff will try to get Alameda residents in and will work with the County on preference. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft requested clarification for the benefits of coordinated care and entry; stated there is a selection process for those well suited to a particular resource. The Economic Development Manager stated staff tries to register each unhoused person in Alameda in a system; the County and State require staff to go through the system if the City uses Home Key funds; the bottle parcel option utilizes Home Key funding; the system provides individuals confidential details and information, including how long someone has been on the street; many people in the system do not live in Alameda, but are from Alameda and would like to return; many of the unhoused population in Alameda have relational ties in the City; staff hopes the County allows the City to use the system and house Alameda residents; the process is moving quickly; staff needs to negotiate different options; the preference option continues to be negotiated. Councilmember Herrera Spencer inquired whether the scattered sites will be used for single Regular Meeting Alameda City Council November 2, 2021 6 family homes and whether the sites will help families currently unhoused in Alameda. The Community Development Director responded in the affirmative; stated the sites are the best opportunity for an expedient solution; there are three homes in varying states of repair and disrepair; one of the sites could be available fairly quickly; the others will follow in sequence; the goal is to have the sites up and running quickly for the colder months. The Economic Development Manager stated since staff does not have funding from other agencies for the project, the target demographic can be Alameda residents. Councilmember Herrera Spencer stated that she understands the City is limited in targeting Alameda residents; inquired the impacts to staff’s ability to address those who are unhoused within the City. The Community Development Director responded the sites will provide an opportunity to offer housing to individuals on the streets; staff will have to decide on other solutions if someone is not interested in the housing option; the solutions sought will be complicated and will require input from the City Attorney’s off ice, as well as the Alameda Police Department; the preference is to offer a bed and provide the opportunity for housing first. The City Attorney stated the City’s program is targeting volunteer individuals; the program does not intend to compel anyone to be in a location. Councilmember Herrera Spencer requested clarification about the Boise case and how the case impacts the City’s options for unhoused individuals. The City Attorney stated the Boise decision from the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals held that local, federal and State agencies cannot criminalize the act of being homeless when there is not sufficient shelter space; the decision is groundbreaking due to various jurisdictions adopting laws which precluded individuals from being out on the street and sleeping on the street at certain nighttime hours; the Court held that the laws are a violation against the 8th Amendment rights related to cruel and unusual punishment; the decision currently remains good law. Councilmember Herrera Spencer stated that she does support the scattered sites; she is hopeful that the City can continue to look for additional sites to help house Alameda’s homeless; the bottle parcel is next to the College of Alameda; the College of Alameda has many programs which provide services to help people receive education; inquired whether the City is planning to find providers to work with the College of Alameda to help the people housed at the bottle parcel; the location is great, especially if the City can partner with the College of Alameda to provide services. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft requested clarification about the services being sought for the bottle parcel location. The Community Development Director stated the City will offer full , wrap-around services; counselors will be available to assist with educational interests, job needs and driver’s license retention; the direction to have a relationship with the College of Alameda is excellent in offering an educational pipeline to individuals; staff will begin cultivating a relationship for the project. Councilmember Herrera Spencer stated the College of Alameda has many services; the City is Regular Meeting Alameda City Council November 2, 2021 7 fortunate to have the College of Alameda; the relationship will provide a unique opportunity; her least favorite option is the hotel/motel option due to Transient Occupancy Taxes (TOT); staff has recommended the need for hotels for many years due to TOT; she is not interested in giving up a revenue stream; the City would have to make-up the lost revenue in order to provide the services being discussed; the City’s financial forecast predicts exhausting reserves at some point; it is critical to continue supporting revenue streams; expressed support for the City looking at apartments or other buildings instead of losing a TOT revenue stream and for partnering with the Housing Authority; stated the Housing Authority does a good job and are the housing experts; she agrees with the need for equity across the City; she supports opportunities across the Island which the City can purchase through different revenue streams. Vice Mayor Vella stated Council gave many different directions and instructions in the last round; expressed support for the responses received on how to move forward; there is no reason for Council not to act on the matter; she is comfortable providing direction to staff to move forward with the bottle parcel option; she would like to see more exploration into the hotel/motel option; there are opportunities throughout the City; this is the beginning of much larger and longer conversations; expressed support for looking throughout the entire City in ensuring the most is made of parcels; the need exists and continues to grow; Council should move forward; she looks forward to supporting the options, while recognizing the actions are a first step; the proposal received by the Village of Love is worth exploring; expressed support for moving forward with direction to staff to continue pursuing additional opportunities for the City to fund supportive housing. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she has seen the life-changing impacts of transitional and emergency housing; discussed a navigation and residential stair center in Berkeley; stated that she has had an opportunity to see considered providers bring wonderful and innovative projects; expressed support for all options recommended; stated the emergency housing at Alameda Point should be done; currently, Alameda does not have a place that is available 365 days per year for someone to get out of the weather and sleep; a warming center at Chr ist Episcopal Church has been an option for the City; the ability to provide services had been curtailed by the pandemic; the City must do better; there is a silver lining in the American Recuse Plan Act (ARPA) funding availability; she would like to take the opportunity to help level the playing field; expressed support for the bottle parcel; stated the hotel/motel option should continue to be looked at; TOT revenue is lessened during the pandemic; the hotel providers willing to sell or enter into a deal have not done well; the City pays a lot to address homelessness; there is an option to partner with a provider for the hotel/motel option; the Housing Authority would be her last choice; many more current and innovative providers are offering creative and q uick solutions for people to get employed and connected with needed services; expressed support for a provider whose specialty is lifting someone out of homelessness; noted the matter will return to Council at the next meeting. The Community Development Director stated staff will be bringing a full report on Alameda Point emergency housing and transitional housing at the bottle parcel. Councilmember Knox White expressed support for parking options being included in the staff report for the bottle parcel; stated that his preference is more housing for people; there are other places to find parking and car storage. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated parking is needed; there is a lack of understanding of what homelessness means; people can be working yet unable to maintain a roof over their head; Regular Meeting Alameda City Council November 2, 2021 8 parking is an important part of the discussion. Councilmember Herrera Spencer stated many people have been living in their car and develop an emotional attachment; expressed support for not requiring people to give up vehicles being lived in. (21-695) Recommendation to Approve a Commercial Streets Two-Year Work Program to Improve the Park Street and Webster Street Striping Plans; Improve the On-street Parklet Program; Maintain the Alameda Avenue Street Closure; Resume Pre-COVID Parking Management, Fee Collection, and Enforcement Activities; (21-695A) Resolution No. 15832, “Approving Precast Concrete Traffic Control Safety Barricade Standards for Parklets.” Adopted; and (21-695B) Resolution No. 15833, “Amending the Capital Budget by Transferring $630,350 in American Rescue Plan Act Project Funds from Capital Improvement Project (CIP) C90300 to Commercial/Slow Streets CIP (C12100) and Increasing Appropriations for the Commercial/Slow Streets CIP (C12100) by $630,350.” Adopted. In response to Councilmember Daysog’s inquiry related to recusal, the City Attorney stated the Fair Political Practices Commission has loosened the public generally exception in recent years in favor of participation; in the event the City undertakes public safety, street improvement, nuisance abatement or any street work, where either 5% or more than 50 residences are being affected, the public generally exception applies; the Public Works Director indicated more than 50 homes are adjacent to the proposed work; staff has advised Councilmember Daysog that he is not required to recuse himself. The Planning, Building and Transportation Director and the Senior Transportation Coordinator gave a PowerPoint presentation. *** (21-696) Councilmember Knox White moved approval of allowing five minutes for the Downtown Alameda Business Association (DABA) and West Alameda Business Association (WABA) representative comments. Councilmember Herrera Spencer 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. *** Stated the Business Districts previously requested the commercial streets program and hopes the program continues; the street reconfiguration has provided positive benefits to the Business Districts and an opportunity to rethink interactions with public space; the discussion is not solely about parklets, it is about the vitality and vibrancy of the Business Districts; discussed benefits of the commercial streets program; noted the program has helped rebuild a sense of community; expressed support for a long-term parklet program; stated safety is a shared priority; expressed support for the installation of concrete barricades which will add a level of safety and create a unified design; urged Council to reconsider the increased insurance coverage or create a fund to offset the increased insurance costs; stated increased costs for a program designed to help businesses is not the intent; the Business Districts are eager to look Regular Meeting Alameda City Council November 2, 2021 9 at usage and signage to help the City reinstate a parking compliance program: Kathy Weber, DABA. Stated parklets are important to the entire district; the mission is to keep Wester Street safe, clean and inviting; the proposed cement barriers will help with enhanced safety; expressed support for covering insurance costs; stated the insurance costs are doubled to meet the threshold; many businesses are trying to recover from the previous 18 months of shutdown; costs are important: Linda Asbury, WABA. Councilmember Knox White inquired the reason the City is requiring increased insurance after putting in safer concrete barriers. The City Attorney stated staff consulted with the City’s insurance carrier related to appropriate levels of protections for outdoor dining spaces; there is a wide range of uses in the area; outlined the recommendations; noted carriers have polled a number of recent verdicts on sidewalk collisions not related to outdoor dining; verdicts cost between $1 million and $10 million. Councilmember Knox White stated the recommendation to increase premiums is due to the insurance company recommendation. The Interim City Engineer stated concrete barriers are not an insurance policy and do not prevent injury; the concrete barriers are a step-up and provide more protection than water-filled barricades; the goal is to elevate the safety along streets. Councilmember Herrera Spencer stated other jurisdictions have required concrete k -rails; inquired whether the cement barriers connect with each other similar to k-rails and why the City is not using k-rails. The Interim City Engineer responded the barriers are vehicular traffic barricades made for parklets; stated the barricades are decorative; the City could use k-rails similar to what is used on freeways and construction projects; the recommended cement barriers have been used in other jurisdictions and have a more decorative appearance; the cost difference is not huge; the barricades come in four-foot segments which are easier to manipulate into place. The Senior Transportation Coordinator stated the four-foot barricades interlock; the appearance would be a solid barrier. Councilmember Herrera Spencer stated that she would like to ensure the barricades provide similar protection to that of k-rails; the matter is being proposed for safety; she appreciates decoration; however, she would like to know how the recommended barricades compare to k- rails for safety purposes. The Interim City Engineer stated the barricades are made for the purpose of safety; staff has reviewed impacts of the barricades at the low speeds which exist along the street segments; the barricades weigh 1,250 pounds each and are connected with an interlocking cable system; the barriers are secure and staff is comfortable that the barricades are a suitable safety enhancement. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council November 2, 2021 10 Councilmember Herrera Spencer inquired whether there is data which shows the amount of force the barricades can withstand versus k-rails; questioned whether data shows the force able to be withstood is the same. The Interim City Engineer responded that he currently does not have the data to provide; stated data does exist for the systems and has been reviewed by staff. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated the data can be searched for during public comment. Stated six lanes were previously dedicated to the automobile on Park Street before COVID-19; discussed the accessibility for automobiles on Park Street and the design of Park Street; stated the design is relatively hostile to anyone not in an automobile; redesigning parklets and improving the concept of Park Street is a good idea; urged Council to follow the staff recommendations; expressed support for transforming Park Street into a park, for providing more elaborate landscaping, trees, vegetation and fountains, for having first-class protected bike lanes with wider sidewalks and for allowing businesses to expand outdoors onto the street with permanent dining and shopping facilities; expressed support for closing Park Street to private automobiles: James Johnston, Alameda. Stated that she does not care for the current commercial streets; she no longer goes near Park Street due to horrible traffic and narrow lanes; the only benefits of parklets is outdoor dining, which will likely decline during the winter; stated the American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) funds would be better spent on the Alameda Fire Department and Alameda Family Services pilot program: Marilyn Rothman, Alameda. Stated that he is a fan of road diets; the parklets on Webster Street and Park Street are great additions to the City; expressed concern about biking infrastructure; stated there is no place to ride safely in the Webster Street and Park Street areas; discussed shared spaces and converting roads; stated that he is not a fan of the white barriers and is a fan of the k-72 barriers on Otis Drive; questioned whether concrete barriers are needed when behavior modifications can occur to get people to drive slower; expressed support for replacing barr icade sections with other bollards: Zac Bowling, Alameda. Stated that she appreciates the staff report; expressed support for local businesses; expressed concern about the land reduction on Park and Webster Streets affecting residents in the event of an emergency evacuation; questioned whether the City has considered the impact and has a plan to address emergency evacuations; expressed support for the closure of Alameda Avenue; stated more investment should be made into beautifying the area; discussed structures being added for farmers markets: Carmen Reid, Alameda. Stated that she is frustrated with the City’s response to cars; discussed accessibility; stated many people will be driving electric cars due to a State mandate; the environmental emphasis on cars is misplaced; she has not spoken to anyone in favor of the current design on Park and Webster Streets; she no longer visits Park Street; she is surprised local businesses support the recommendation; she understands the use of parklets for restaurants; it is wrong to disrupt the main business corridors: Karen Miller, Alameda. Expressed support for the quick action taken by the City and Business Districts; stated many cities around the area have conducted similar programs; Alameda is now in a position to consider permanent items; his experience walking to Park Street is more pleasant; he Regular Meeting Alameda City Council November 2, 2021 11 appreciates the ability to walk down Park Street and use a parklet; the experience for drivers has changed; he hopes part of making the changes permanent includes work on improving signal timing and signage, which will improve the experience; discussed bikepedinfo.org and nacto.org: Drew Dara-Abrams, Alameda. Stated not all businesses support the commercial streets program; the program picks and chooses winners; some businesses have lost parking spaces and visibility; some businesses have been closed and cannot open doors due to County rules; businesses need delivery and shipments and disabled people need access; urged Council not restrict vehicle use; questioned whether the County will increase tax rates for businesses that are taxed based on square footage of usable space and whether the City will pay for increased County taxes: Jim Strehlow, Alameda. Stated that she would like to see more buildout of Alameda Avenue; expressed support for the removal of cars on Park Street in the future and for a trolley system in the area; discussed pre- pandemic automobile conditions; stated that she would like to see areas more pedestrianized; expressed support for comments from Speaker Bowling related to bike access; stated that she supports keeping the parklets and safety for pedestrians: Jenice Anderson, Alameda. Expressed support for the staff report; stated DABA members are looking to a long-term vision in improving parklets; noted businesses are not required to build a parklet; expressed support for Park Street being slower and for the speed limit lowering to 20 miles per hour; urged Council to support the matter and put parking compliance in place; the parking garage is fantastic and always has space available: Ron Mooney, DABA. Expressed support for the staff recommendation to continue the commercial streets program; stated the original program did not do much for biking and walking, but was needed for businesses to survive; the program provides a chance to reimagine Business Districts; expressed support continuing discussions and analysis of the design; stated planning work takes a lot of time; expressed concern over configuration changes: Denyse Trepanier, Bike Walk Alameda. Councilmember Knox White stated the matter is exciting; there were previous discussions about how to start thinking about Business Districts, the resulting changes brought by the pandemic and rethinking public spaces; approving the matter and moving forward is important; increased insurance premiums are due to jury awards for people jumping curbs, not running into k-rails; the City is likely being exceedingly cautious and risk-adverse; the City should take on the burden of covering the delta between the current and future insurance costs; the City should look at putting cement barriers along the length of all streets to create a permanent space; the incremental cost of building the areas along the full length is likely worth the cost and will lower hurdles to other businesses coming out of the pandemic; questioned whether Council is approving the improvement of the commercial streets program for two years; noted the resolution extends the temporary permits for two years; expressed support; stated that he appreciates the iterative nature of the program design and the opportunity to make changes along the way; Council can make more permanent decisions at the two year mark; he would like staff to come back to Council with the costs of putting uniform barriers the full length of the blocks. Councilmember Daysog stated the parklet program and street configuration has given a fighting chance to businesses on Webster Street especially; there is a liveliness to Webster Street th at Regular Meeting Alameda City Council November 2, 2021 12 has not been seen before; the success of the program speaks for itself; the program has slowed down traffic on Webster Street; he understands the concerns raised by residents about the ability to drive through Webster Street; however, the liveliness on Webster Street far outweighs the downside of slower traffic; people are now much more excited about Webster Street and new business are opening; he likes what he is seeing in terms of commercial streets; expressed support for Park Street’s commercial street program. Vice Mayor Vella stated that she is in support of continuing the program; the program and parklets are one of the few ways more people are out and about in the commercial districts; the program has helped businesses; she would like to see barricades erected in a way that can add parklets or change as-needed; parklets have created a sense of space within Business Districts; the City has made Business Districts much more welcoming for people to experience by a number of different modes; there are a number of parking lots for drivers in both Business Districts; the parking garage near Park Street has a larger capacity; the program has opened up and made streets welcoming for those traveling by foot; the pandemic is not over yet; a focus on recovery and safe practices is important. Councilmember Herrera Spencer stated there seems to be inconsistency related to surveys put out by the City; some surveys have demographic data and some do not; stated a high percentage of respondents identified as living in Alameda; she does not know whether there is a way for the City to ensure respondents actually live within the City and are unique respondents; it is important for the City to come up with a consistent method to survey people; if survey responses are used to impact Council voting, the survey method should be consistent and ensure respondents are Alameda residents; she would like to make sure that she is reading survey responses from actual Alameda residents; traffic gets backed up due to the loss of turning and middle lanes; her first priority is safety; she has concerns about not having k-rails; she would like to ensure the alternative is just as safe as k-rails; expressed support for continuing to offer outdoor spaces; stated it is incumbent upon the City to make the structures as safe as possible; she would like to make sure there is a safe plan for the main roads in the event of an evacuation; questioned where emergency vehicles will go; stated alternate streets are often backed up due to cars avoiding Park and Webster Streets; expressed support for making alternative streets safe as well as Park and Webster Streets; she has seen bicyclists on the sidewalk; she would prefer keeping the current configuration for three to six months to see how to address the issues being raised; expressed concern about the plan being for two years and bicycling not being addressed; expressed support for Alameda Avenue being closed to automobile traffic; stated that she would like to find ways to make Alameda Avenue more usable; expressed support for the City Attorney’s views related to the increased insurance; expressed concern about the increased premiums being paid by businesses; questioned whether ARPA funding would be used for two years; expressed support for using ARPA funding for the additional $40,000 in increased insurance costs; expressed concern about not addressing all the safety issues and whether the barriers will work. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether staff has found the data related to barrier impact force. The Interim City Engineer responded Caltrans has research available on k-rail and temporary concrete traffic controls; stated the Federal Highway Administration has portable concrete transition plans, research and barrier guides; there is a wide range of products; the recommendation is an upgrade from the water filled barricades; a previous collision into a water filled barricade caused the barricade to slide; putting up Caltrans’ freeway style highway barricades does not guarantee bad things will not happening; stated some cities do nothing and Regular Meeting Alameda City Council November 2, 2021 13 some cities require full Caltrans highway k -rails; Alameda is on the spectrum and toward the k- rail end; 20-foot k-rails would be safer than the recommendation; the recommendation is appropriate based on the low speed. Councilmember Herrera Spencer stated that she does not want to compromise the City’s safety; accidents have occurred; expressed support for requiring k-rails. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she is a fan of the reconfigurations; parking times might change; the Civic Center Parking Garage is available near Park Street and typically has space available; she rides her bicycle throughout the Island; parallel streets to both Webster and Park Streets allow people to safely ride bicycles; discussed Oak Street bicycle accessibility; stated Webster Street has rows of bicycle parking; Bike Walk Alameda collaborated on a map of the City which includes bicycle routes; people have different abilities and comfort levels; the goal is to make the downtown districts welcoming for all; her two criteria are: safety first and aesthetics; she does expect parklets to enhance the visibility of streetscapes; she does not want to see parklets that are an eyesore; expressed support for comments provided from retail shops in the Business District; stated some retailers have used parklets for outdoor pop up events and share the space with restaurants for DoorDash and Uber Eats; a farmers market at Alameda Avenue is enticing; however, vendors need space to unload and park; ending the commercial streets program would be shameful; the City has gained insight on the program; she does not mind funding the program for two years; expressed support for a check-in with Council at the one year mark. Councilmember Knox White moved approval of the commercial streets two year work plan with direction to return to Council with the costs for the proposed concrete barriers in all locations, to approve the precast concrete traffic control barricade standards as the standard and hold off on approving the money. In response to Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft’s inquiry, Councilmember Knox White stated Council cannot approve the money due to not having the cost; noted staff will need to return with a capital budget plan for approval. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether Councilmember Knox White would like his motion to be costed out and included in the budget proposal. Councilmember Knox White responded staff has provided a proposal and is recommending a transfer of funds based on the cost; stated that he would like staff to come back with a slightly different plan which uses modified k-rail on all of the striping to ensure each block is fully k -rail and has no spotty broken appearance along the Business Districts. Vice Mayor Vella seconded the motion. Under discussion, Vice Mayor Vella inquired whether staff can bring the matter back as a budget request on the Consent Calendar. The City Manager responded if Council decides to narrow the recommendation, staff can bring back a budget request on the consent calendar. Councilmember Daysog inquired whether there is any question from staff on how the motion is framed, particularly around any costs which are above and beyond the current estimate. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council November 2, 2021 14 The Planning, Building, and Transportation Director responded staff has assumed costs for 30 parklets; stated staff has figured the total amount of barricades needed; noted Councilmember Knox White’s motion is to have a continuous line of barriers; staff will need to come up with a new barrier plan for the blocks; the amount of barriers needed will be an incremental increase; he does not think the cost will double; staff will need to configure gaps between barricades for transit and pathways from parking to sidewalks. Councilmember Daysog stated the motion includes returning to Council; Council will approve the concept; however, the final cost will be approved by Council at a later date. The Interim City Engineer stated the price included in the staff report includes the existing parklets and protection in accordance with the parklet barricade detail; the recommendation does not include unoccupied parklet areas; the staff recommendation differs from the proposed motion made by Councilmember Knox White. The City Manager stated there is an alternate approach; Council can approve the ARPA funding to move forward and provide direction for staff to bring back the alternate approach; staff can return with the alternate approach relatively quickly; Council may appropriate the recommended funding at this time. Councilmember Knox White stated that he is happy to amend his motion. Councilmember Daysog expressed support for the City Manager’s recommendation. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she cannot support the proposed motion at this time; expressed support for working with the current recommendation; stated an increase in cost could be used to underwrite the increased insurance costs to ensure local businesses are not burdened; the process is more complicated than simply placing a long line of barricade down the blocks with parklets; Council may add or make adjustments to the program in the future. Councilmember Herrera Spencer stated if k-rails are not included, the resolution should be clear a lower standard is being used; expressed concern about giving up more parking. Councilmember Knox White amended his motion to approve the current funding [and adoption of related resolutions] and give direction to staff to return with the alternative and any additional funding requests for further consideration. Vice Mayor Vella seconded the amended motion. On the call for the question, the motion carried by the following roll call vote: Councilmembers Daysog: Aye; Herrera Spencer: No; Knox White: Aye; Vella: Aye; and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye. Ayes: 4. Noes: 1 Councilmember Knox White moved approval of the City covering the differential in insurance costs of what is currently being paid by businesses and the new insurance requirement by the City. Councilmember Herrera Spencer seconded the motion. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council November 2, 2021 15 Under discussion, Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether a group insurance rate can be done. Vice Mayor Vella requested clarification for the motion on the table. Councilmember Knox White stated the motion approves the City covering the differential between the current insurance coverage rates and any additional coverage required by the City. Vice Mayor Vella stated that she would like to ensure the motion includes staff being able to look into the recommendation of an umbrella policy, to which Councilmember Knox White responded in the affirmative. On the call for the question, the motion 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. *** Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft called a recess at 9:54 p.m. and reconvened the meeting at 10:16 p.m. *** *** (21-697) Councilmember Herrera Spencer moved approval of hearing the ordinance implementing Senate Bill 1383 [paragraph no. 21-698] next. Councilmember Knox White 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. *** (21-698) Introduction of Ordinance Amending Alameda Municipal Code Chapter 21 (Solid Waste and Recycling) to Comply with Senate Bill 1383, Conform with Franchise Agreement, and Implement Strategy Four of Alameda’s Zero Waste Implementation Plan Update. Introduced. The Program Specialist gave a PowerPoint presentation. Councilmember Herrera Spencer stated the matter is important and must happen sooner rather than later; the community is supportive of the work. Councilmember Herrera Spencer moved introduction of the ordinance. Councilmember Knox White 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. *** (21-699) Councilmember Herrera Spencer moved approval of hearing the Police policy update [paragraph no. 21-702] next. Councilmember Daysog seconded the motion, which failed by the following roll call vote: Councilmembers Daysog: Aye; Herrera Spencer: Aye; Knox White: No; Vella: No; and Mayor Regular Meeting Alameda City Council November 2, 2021 16 Ezzy Ashcraft: No. Ayes: 2. Noes: 3. *** (21-700) Public Hearing to Consider Introduction of an Ordinance Amending Alameda Municipal Code Chapter XXX to Comprehensively Update Citywide Off-Street Parking and Loading Space Regulations and Make Conforming Changes to Other Zoning Code Sections, as Recommended by the Planning Board. Introduced. The Land Use and Transportation Planner gave a PowerPoint presentation. Councilmember Herrera Spencer inquired whether any analysis has been done for the City of Alameda’s housing developments regarding parking and unit size. The Land Use and Transportation Planner responded the City does not have academic studies of existing parking, but the Planning, Building and Transportation Director may have local anecdotes. The Planning, Building and Transportation Director stated a Bay Area group conducted a survey of Bay Area communities’ existing residential projects which observed parking; a couple Alameda projects were included in the study; the results are similar to other cities; newer residential projects were found to not have all parking used; the study indicates the City has been over-parking some residential projects; the Planning Board has been working to figure out the correct amount of parking; the City has not been requiring the total amount of parking listed in the ordinance; the City has regularly been providing parking waivers to try and right-size the parking amounts; the ordinance uses the information as a maximum; the ordinance is not seen as something which will provide a large change in the amount of parking for each project; if a project includes more parking than the maximum listed in the ordinance, the project will need to explain the need; discussed the parking spaces for Park Street; stated a number of properties in Alameda cannot fit a single parking space. Councilmember Herrera Spencer inquired whether the space is commercial or residential, to which the Planning, Building and Transportation Director responded the space is commercial. The Land Use and Transportation Planner stated the space is a small mixed use building with a storefront and residential space. Councilmember Herrera Spencer stated many of the projects are not residential; the residential projects have approved parking spaces; the City has been assigning parking spaces for residential units; inquired whether more than one off-street parking space per unit requires a special permit. The Planning, Building and Transportation Director responded special permission would be needed; the idea is to establish a maximum amount; in order for projects to go above the limit, a discussion is held in order to justify spaces above the maximum. Councilmember Herrera Spencer discussed Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs); stated some of the units have three bedrooms and can be 1,200 square feet. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council November 2, 2021 17 The City Planner stated State ADU prohibits cities from requiring any parking when the unit is within a half mile of transit; every property in Alameda with the exception of Creedon Circle meets the State criteria and cannot require parking for ADUs. *** (21-701) Councilmember Knox White moved approval of hearing as many items as possible up to midnight. Councilmember Daysog seconded the motion, which failed by the following roll call vote: Councilmembers Daysog: Aye; Herrera Spencer: No; Knox White: Aye; Vella: No; and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft: No. Ayes: 2. Noes: 3. Councilmember Herrera Spencer requested clarification that Council Communications would still be heard after the current matter. The City Clerk stated a vote is needed to consider new regular matters after 11:00 p.m.; however, Council can hear the other sections past 11:00 p.m.; Council may vote to establish a hard stop time. Vice Mayor Vella moved approval of only hearing the Police policy update [paragraph no. 21- 702] and Council Communications and ending the meeting by midnight. Councilmember Herrera Spencer 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 Daysog discussed the maximum number of parking spaces for an ADU based on square footage; noted the proposed minimum off-street parking for a 3,000 square foot ADU is three spaces and one parking space per hotel/motel guest room; outlined the current ordinance parking limits. The Planning, Building and Transportation Director stated all hotels approved in Alameda in the past 10 years have had 0.83 parking spaces per room; noted not many people bring more than one car to a hotel per room. Councilmember Daysog stated there is an approach which can be taken to justify a reduction in the number of parking spaces from the minimum. The Planning, Building and Transportation Director stated the new ordinance allows less parking spaces to be used without any process; special permission will be needed in order to provide more parking than allowed by the proposed ordinance. Councilmember Daysog stated that he is concerned about projects not providing enough parking; setting a maximum lower than before implements an easier process to provide a lower amount of spaces. The Planning, Building and Transportation Director stated staff has approved an amount close to the proposed demands from lenders which finance projects; bankers and lenders often require a certain amount of parking for projects in order to be financially feasible; staff does not Regular Meeting Alameda City Council November 2, 2021 18 often require more parking than the project is proposing; many of the minimum parking spaces for projects are too high; outlined recommendations from the Planning Board for less parking spaces for projects. Councilmember Daysog stated a system is already in place which is flexible to accommodate spaces below a lower standard. The Planning, Building and Transportation Director stated the system forces every project to go through the waiver process; staff is trying to avoid the process and streamline for increased efficiency and less cost; the goal is to keep costs down, especially for housing projects. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft expressed support for requiring charging infrastructure for Electric Vehicles (EV); stated the current proposal has been through a number of different Boards and Commissions, however, the Public Utilities Board was not one of them; inquired the implications of expanded EV charging facilities and Alameda Municipal Power (AMP) infrastructure. The Land Use and Transportation Planner responded staff has consulted with AMP staff; the ordinance includes a load management system; parking structures cannot over-build the panel to handle everyone at full power, 24-hours per day; AMP indicates the costs to build are comparable to recent projects; AMP is comfortable with the levels and is eager for customers. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether AMP is comfortable with the existing transmission lines and clean green sources of power and whether AMP is able to adequately accommodate the expanded charging infrastructure. The Land Use and Transportation Planner responded that he cannot answer directly for AMP; however, AMP has not expressed any concerns during discussions. The City Planner stated the EV parking spaces and infrastructure would not happen automatically; the ordinance would apply with new development or new construction of parking spaces which are typically reviewed by AMP. Expressed support for moving away from mandatory minimums and moving towards mandatory maximums without forcing discretionary review on all projects; stated adding parking spaces to a project increases the cost of a project by $80,000 per spot; the costs in relation to housing are especially terrible for affordable housing; it makes sense to require less parking; the City can discourage car use near transit: Zac Bowling, Alameda. Stated that she opposes the proposal for maximum standards for parking; the matter seems to be a workaround which does not adequately address the fact that parking is an issue in many areas of Alameda; new development should sufficiently accommodate parking needs; discussed increased density from the General Plan; stated an increase in parking is reasonable; parking will be an issue with an increase in population; unbundling parking will likely lead to those with less means not purchasing parking, creating an inequitable gap; discussed accessibility: Carmen Reid, Alameda. Expressed support for the matter; urged Council to move forward with the ordinance; stated progress has been made in developing additional transit options; the City is providing more options for those who want to get out of cars; there is a climate emergency; the proposed Regular Meeting Alameda City Council November 2, 2021 19 changes need to be made in order to reach goals for reduction and vehicle miles traveled: Denyse Trepanier, Bike Walk Alameda. Discussed a space with zero on-site parking; stated the site works; not every commercial project should have zero parking spaces; the example shows what can be built when the market has more flexibility; the City will benefit from more direct influences by market forces; the City ha s programmatic means to make parking more available and easier to use; urged Council to adopt the policy and consider other ways to improve access to existing parking; discussed parking equity and accessibility: Drew Dara-Abrams, Alameda. Expressed concern over the presentation; discussed the presentation displaying improvements to residential properties spurring the need to install EV charging; stated the residential requirements are not being provided clearly to the average citizen: Jim Strehlow, Alameda. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft requested clarification for the residential EV requirements. The Planning, Building and Transportation Director stated the information relates to off-street parking; the requirements are triggered when building a parking lot, not when putting an in- home electric circuit; new buildings, new dwelling units, expansions of existing buildings are effected by Section 30-7 provisions; new parking will be required to install EV charging; the average household in Alameda has 1.3 cars; many people use their garage for things other than parking, such as storage; if anyone wishes to provide more than 1.5 parking spaces, questions will be raised; the spaces reflect the data of car ownership among Alameda households. Councilmember Herrera Spencer noted the presentation has a typo in the listed addresses. The Land Use and Transportation Planner stated the presentation should have listed 1820 Park Street as the address. Councilmember Herrera Spencer stated the address corrected in the report; discussed parking for Coffee Cultures; noted businesses can take advantage of other nearby business’ parking during off hours; however, the off-site parking cannot be counted on; many visitors to Coffee Cultures are drivers; expressed concern about the staff recommendation; stated the examples do not take into account the whole area; some residential areas do not currently have sufficient parking; discussed subdivided rentals do having sufficient parking; questioned where people in ADUs will park; expressed concern about not taking into account the whole impact; discussed ridership on AC Transit; stated transit ridership is not back to levels prior to COVID-19; car ridership on the Bay Bridge is at the top 90%; people in the community are driving a car versus public transportation; discussed parking availability at Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) facilities and the availability of finding used cars; stated parking is needed in the City; there has not been an adjustment for the trends resulting from COVID-19; the City must assume people are not going to get back to using public transit; expressed support for EV charging stations; stated that she cannot support the dramatic changes. Councilmember Knox White moved approval of the staff recommendation [introduction of the ordinance]. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft seconded the motion. Under discussion, Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated public transit has not come back to pre-COVID- Regular Meeting Alameda City Council November 2, 2021 20 19 ridership numbers yet; the numbers are starting to bounce back slowly; she does not park at BART due to the ease of taking AC Transit directly to the Fruitvale Station; stated people are good about wearing masks on BART and AC Transit; discussed parking and construction in the area of Coffee Cultures and the assisted living facility across the street. Vice Mayor Vella stated many cases have ample parking lots and parking alternatives; there are many ways to get to and from locations in the Park Street corridor; expressed support for the matter. Councilmember Daysog stated the current ordinance has a system in place which forces developers to come to the City and ask for lower parking standards; the current proposed ordinance would make it easier for developers to reduce parking requirements; the current system is not burdensome on developers; there is no reason to change it; the current system allows for a lessening of parking requirements in an effort to make housing more affordable; many developers of large projects have been accommodated; he does not see a compelling reason to change the current ordinance; the City should not make matters easier for developers. On the call for the question, the motion carried by the following roll call vote: Councilmembers Daysog: No; Herrera Spencer: No; Knox White: Aye; Vella: Aye; and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye. Ayes: 3. Noes: 2. The City Planner stated the work performed by staff is fully supported by the State Senate Bill 2 Planning Grant; the City will seek reimbursement. (21-702) Recommendation to Authorize the Chief of Police to Update Section 310 of the Existing Alameda Police Department Policy Manual to Conform to Existing Best Practices and Statutory Requirements Mandating Notification to the California Department of Justice in Certain Officer Involved Shootings. The Police Captain gave a brief presentation. Stated that he is not a fan of Lexipol; the City should be defining its own police manual; t he drafts show fields at the bottom of the proposal which were not fully replaced: Zac Bowling, Alameda. Stated the policy indicate death whether or not the method was from a shooting: Marilyn Rothman, Alameda. Councilmember Herrera Spencer requested clarification about the policy indicating shootings and deaths; stated that she understands there is an importance in keeping the language as-is. The Police Captain stated the policy is a Department of Justice change and is directly related to officer-involved shootings; the policy is specific to shootings; the policy is not related to any other type of death which may occur. Councilmember Herrera Spencer requested clarification that the policy language will reflect any needed updates. The Police Captain stated the language software includes a mask which allows the City to edit the policy within the program; the fields will automatically repopulate to the proper language. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council November 2, 2021 21 Councilmember Herrera Spencer moved approval of the staff recommendation. Councilmember Knox White seconded the motion, with the stipulation that the “Bureau Bureau Commander” be typo corrected. Councilmember Herrera Spencer agreed to include the amendment in the motion. On the call for the question, the motion 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. (21-703) Recommendation to Reorganize the City’s Parking Management Program and Parking Fund; (21-703A) Adoption of Resolution Amending the Fiscal Year 2021-22 Parking Fund Budget to Restructure the Parking Fund; and (21-703B) Adoption of Resolution Amending the Salary Schedule for the Alameda City Employees Association (ACEA) and the Alameda Police Officers Association, Non-Sworn (PANS) to Move the Two Parking Enforcement Positions from PANS to ACEA and Reassign Two Full-Time Parking Enforcement Position Allocations from the Police Department to Public Works. Not heard. (21-704) Introduction of Ordinance Authorizing the City Manager to Execute a Lease with Rhoads Property Holdings, LLC, a California Limited Liability Company, Substantially in the Form of Exhibit 2, for Thirty-Six Months for Buildings 338, 608, and 608A-C, Located at 50 and 51 West Hornet Avenue, at Alameda Point. Not heard. (21-705) Recommendation that City Council, Boards and Commissions Annually Review Meeting Schedules for Possible Conflicts that Inhibit Maximum Public Participation. Not heard. CITY MANAGER COMMUNICATIONS Not heard. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA Not heard. COUNCIL REFERRALS (21-706) Considering Directing Staff to Provide an Update on License Plate Readers. (Councilmember Herrera Spencer). Not heard. (21-707) Consider Directing Staff to Publicly Share Information on Parking Recreational Vehicles. (Councilmember Herrera Spencer). Not heard. (21-708) Consider Directing Staff to Address Representation for Below Market Rate Homeowners on Homeowner Association (HOA) Boards and with Property Management. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council November 2, 2021 22 (Councilmember Herrera Spencer). Not heard. (21-709) Consider Directing Staff to Support Removal of the US Navy Constraints Limiting Housing Development at Alameda Point. (Councilmember Herrera Spencer and Councilmember Daysog). Not heard. (21-710) Consider Directing Staff to Address Identifying New Areas at Alameda Point to Develop a Number of Housing Units Above the Originally-Agreed Upon Numbers of the 2023- 2031 Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA). (Councilmember Daysog). Not heard. (21-711) Consider Directing Staff to Move Jean Sweeney Park Fencing. (Councilmembers Herrera Spencer and Daysog). Not heard. (21-712) Consider Reviewing and Updating the Previous City Council’s Priorities at a Regular City Council Meeting. (Councilmember Herrera Spencer). Not heard. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS (21-713) Councilmember Herrera Spencer discussed her pin; announced a jewelry sale event hosted by the Friends of the Alameda Animal Shelter. (21-714) Councilmember Daysog discussed the unveiling of two art pieces in Jean Sweeney Park; announced that he attended a the School Board Subcommittee meeting with Councilmember Knox White; stated there is a report which indicates traffic safety measures and should come before Council. (21-715) Councilmember Knox White discussed the School Board Subcommittee meeting; noted the matter related to traffic enforcement [paragraph no. 21-__] which was not heard is part of significant concerns voiced by parents; stated that he would like to see a public workshop to discuss the Shuumi Land Tax. (21-716) Councilmember Daysog stated Council should discuss traffic impacts from the Oakland Athletics stadium. (21-718) Councilmember Herrera Spencer announced that she attended the County Day of Remembrance with Councilmember Daysog. (21-719) Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft announced that she attended an event called Here I Am and a workshop put on by the Water Emergency Transportation Authority (WETA); discussed a Diablo Magazine interview; noted Contra Costa County has recently developed a Countywide transit safety plan; announced a fundraiser at Books Inc. for the Friends of the Alameda Library. (21-720) Vice Mayor Vella announced it is Family Literacy Month; discussed an East Bay Regional Park District Subcommittee meeting and a ribbon cutting for the anniversary of Alley and Vine. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft noted the owners of Alley and Vine are happy to be in Alameda. ADJOURNMENT Regular Meeting Alameda City Council November 2, 2021 23 There being no further business, Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft adjourned the meeting at 11:47 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger City Clerk The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Sunshine Ordinance.