Loading...
2000-01-04 Regular CC MinutesMINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING TUESDAY- - JANUARY 4, 2000- -7:30 P.M. Mayor Appezzato convened the Regular Meeting at 7:34 p.m. Councilmember Johnson led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL - Present: Councilmembers Daysog, DeWitt, Johnson, Kerr and Mayor Appezzato - 5. Absent: None. AGENDA CHANGES None. PROCLAMATIONS, SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY AND ANNOUNCEMENTS (00 -01) Mayor Appezzato announced: 1) the City did not have any Y2K problems; 2) there was a ribbon cutting at Fire Station #1 to recognize upgrades to paramedic service in Alameda; 3) various upcoming successes, e.g., agreement with School District, dredging agreement with Port of Oakland, dog park construction, Naval Air Station conveyance; 4) Senator Feinstein will visit the City of Alameda on January 19, 2000; and 5) Senator Boxer would also like to visit Alameda. CONSENT CALENDAR Councilmember DeWitt moved approval of the Consent Calendar. Councilmember Kerr seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. [Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk preceding the paragraph number.] ( *00 -02) Minutes of the Regular City Council Meeting held on December 21, 1999. Approved. ( *00 -03) Recommendation to authorize the Mayor to send letters of support for Assembly Bill 1674, which would provide limitation periods on rate making decisions for municipally owned electric utilities. Accepted. ( *00 -04) Recommendation to accept the work of Gallagher & Burk, Inc. for Repair and Resurfacing of Certain Streets, Phase 20, No. P.W. 03- 99 -09. Accepted. ( *00 -05) Resolution No. 13162, "Authorizing Application for Bicycle Transportation Account Funds for Bicycle Projects." Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 1 January 4, 2000 Adopted. ( *00 -06) Ratified bills in the amount of $1,018,808.10. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS (00 -07) Resolution No. 13163, "Appointing Eugenie P. Thomson as a Member of the City Planning Board." Adopted. Councilmember Johnson moved adoption of the Resolution. Vice Mayor Daysog seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. The City Clerk administered the Oath of Office and presented Ms. Thomson with a Certificate of Appointment. (00 -08) Resolution No. 13164, "Appointing Karen A. Butter as a Member of the City Library Board." Adopted. Councilmember Johnson moved adoption of the Resolution. Vice Mayor Daysog seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. The City Clerk administered the Oath of Office and presented Ms. Butter with a Certificate of Appointment. (00 -09) Public Hearing to consider an appeal of a Planning Board decision denying the Minor Design Review and Variance, V- 99 -12, for an approximately 74- square foot expansion of a single- family residence which encroaches within 16 -feet, 4- inches from the rear property line, where a minimum 20 -foot rear yard setback is required. The site is located at 630 Sand Hook Isle. Applicant /Appellant: Ronald Stanley; and (00 -09A) Adoption of Resolution Denying the Appeal of Ronald W. Stanley and Upholding the Planning Board's Denial of Minor Design Review and Variance, V -99 -12 for 630 Sand Hook Isle. NOT ADOPTED. (00 -09B) Resolution No. 13165, "Approving the Appeal of Ronald Stanley and Overturning the Planning Board's Denial of Minor Design Review and Variance. V -99 -12 for 630 Sand Hook Isle." Adopted. Mayor Appezzato opened the public portion of the Hearing. Proponents, in favor of Appeal Ron Stanley, Applicant /Appellant. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 2 January 4, 2000 Penny Stanley, Applicant /Appellant. There being no further speakers, Mayor Appezzato closed the Public Hearing. Mayor Appezzato stated Council recently approved an addition to a home in a Harbor Bay Planned Development; that he is inclined to support the appeal. Councilmember Johnson stated the lot is on a lagoon; there are not neighbors in the back; the purpose of setback is to protect neighbors; due to extraordinary circumstances, she can make the findings for a variance. Councilmember Kerr stated that she opposed a previous request for an addition due to small lot size, deprivation of shade, and noise problems; in this case, the location is extraordinary and all neighbors are in support; there are additions all over lagoon; property rights should not be denied; that she can make the findings to support the addition. Mayor Appezzato announced the City Council was provided a Resolution which allows Council to support the appeal. Councilmember DeWitt stated that he is in favor of allowing the variance. Councilmember DeWitt moved approval of the variance. Councilmember Kerr seconded the motion. The City Attorney stated that she presumes the City Council reviewed the Resolution, concurs with its findings and are moving adoption of the Resolution. Councilmember DeWitt clarified the motion is to adopt the Resolution "Approving the Appeal of Ronald Stanley and Overturning the Planning Board's Denial of Minor Design Review and Variance, V- 99-12 for 630 Sand Hook Isle." On the call for the question, the motion carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. (00 -10) Resolution No. 13166, "Opposing Proposition 22 (the Knight Initiative)." Adopted; and (00 -10A) Recommendation from Social Service Human Relations Board recommending the City Council adopt a Resolution Opposing Proposition 22 (the Knight Initiative). Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 3 January 4, 2000 Len Grzanka, Alameda, stated that he has a Point of Order concerning the Resolution; a point of order concerns procedure and has precedence over discussion; the Social Service Human Relations Board (SSHRB) recommends that the City adopt a position concerning a Statewide voter initiative; by law, City resources may not be used to advocate a position for or against a Ballot Measure; using taxpayer- funded resources to influence a vote of the electorate is a serious violation of public policy; the SSHRB's authority is defined in the City Charter and by Ordinance; the Charter and City Ordinances do not give the SSHRB authority to advocate a political position concerning a Measure before Alameda voters, much less a Measure which will be decided by voters Statewide; the City Council has authority to pass a Resolution concerning a Ballot Measure, however, the Resolution must be proposed by a Councilmember, not by a taxpayer- supported City Board, agency or staff; if a Councilmember were to place a Resolution on the agenda, the matter would have to be postponed for a future meeting; requested the Mayor to ask the City Attorney for an opinion concerning the legality of this agenda item; further requested the SSHRB and City Auditor to audit and track the use of resources concerning the City's No on Proposition 22 position to ensure compliance with Fair Political Practices Commission reporting requirements; if the discussion is lengthy this evening, the salaries of the City Attorney, City Manager, Deputy City Manager, City Clerk and Deputy City Clerk must put the measure over the $1000 reporting limit; passing the Resolution will make the City a campaign committee making independent expenditures under the Political Reform Act of 1974 and subject to financial reporting regulations; urged Council not to proceed. Vice Mayor Daysog stated democracy is not an inexpensive proposition; if matters of public policy were reduced to dollars and cents, the cause of action versus inaction would need to be measured; inaction would cause more grief to Alameda residents. Mayor Appezzato inquired whether the City Council could proceed. The City Attorney responded there is clear authority for the City Council to take positions on Ballot Measures; stated Mr. Grzanka is correct there are limitations, however, said limitations do not apply. Ed Dankworth, Social Service Human Relations Board, stated the Board made the suggestion following Council guidance; Proposition 22 will cause a divisive effect on the City. Reverend Michael Yoshi, Buena Vista United Methodist Church, stated Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 4 January 4, 2000 the Proposition stems from misguided religious perspectives on gays and lesbians; the initiative is: 1) wasting taxpayers time and money, 2) causing divisiveness, 3) unnecessary, and 4) a deliberate attempt to discriminate against a group of people based on sexual orientation. Len Grzanka, Alameda, stated that he wonders why the Council acquiesces to every request of Alameda's homosexuals; inquired why Council did not adopt a Resolution supporting the prohibition on slaughtering horses for food or support the ban on certain traps and animal poisons in the last General Election; after all, Alamedans love animals; the City provided a Gay Pride Proclamation and domestic partner benefits, and supported AB222, which mandates teaching public school students that homosexuality is an acceptable lifestyle; opposition to Proposition 22 is up to the voters, not the City Council; inquired why the Council gives homosexuals everything they want even when it might compromise the integrity of an initiative which is really up to the voters to decide. Morten Wellhaven, Alameda, stated that he supports the Resolution Opposing Proposition 22; the Proposition is targeted against the gay and lesbian community; the City Council needs to support people unlike themselves; leadership should facilitate racial, gender, sexual, religious and cultural diversity; religion, color, family - makeup and culture are changing in California; urged Council to oppose Proposition 22 which only functions to attack the dreams and aspirations of one group in the community. Sallyanne Polizzi, Alameda, stated that she and her partner are raising four kids together; urged Council to oppose the Knight Initiative; the initiative promotes discrimination, prejudice and attack family values in America. Reverend Don Taylor, Alameda, stated the initiative is fourteen words: only marriage between a man and a woman is valid and recognized in California; nearly 700,000 registered voters signed petitions to place the initiative on the ballot; there is a difference between respecting a person's right to same sex relationships and endorsing same sex marriages; people have the right to live as they choose, but not to redefine marriage for society; tolerance and respect for people with different beliefs add to California's strength of diversity; support of traditional marriage does not constitute hatred, bigotry, discrimination or extremism, but affirms the role of marriage between men and women; passage of Proposition 22 is important because in 1996 the President signed the Federal Defense of Marriage Act allowing States to define marriage; 31 States have passed measure defining marriage. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 5 January 4, 2000 Lois Workman, Alameda, stated the City of Alameda has organized committees, forums and multi - cultural festivals to learn to appreciate differences, reduce hate and decrease negative, hostile rhetoric; the Knight Initiative will set in motion actions which many have worked hard to eliminate in Alameda; urged Council to oppose the movement towards hatred and divisiveness and continue efforts to make Alameda a Hate -Free City by opposing the Knight Initiative. Lowell Holcomb, Traditional Values Coalition, stated that he knew the SSHRB would approach the Council to oppose the initiative; said strategy was devised by the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force at its Annual Convention last November; said Convention was held in Oakland to plan and energize opposition to Proposition 22 because many States copy California; the planning and marketing of the plan [opposition to proposition 22] was one of the most thorough and professional that he has seen, including past corporate experiences with PG &E and the aerospace industry; the gay agenda has been planned since the 1970's and has steadily and patiently marched on even though 850 of the nation is Christian oriented; the small national group of gay activists, including the Human Rights Campaign and the Gay Lesbian Straight Education Network, now have a major impact on State and national political processes; Alameda's gay activists have been given gay pride proclamations; domestic partner health insurance benefits to homosexual city employees were greatly increased by the Governor signing AB 26; the practice of homosexuality is wrong and promotion of it is wrong; marriage of man and woman has been workable and traditional since the days of Abraham; traditional marriage should not be downgraded; urged Council not to oppose the Knight Initiative. M'Liss Maxham, Alameda, stated the Proposition is inflammatory and restates what exists; marriage has been defined as between a man and woman already; read a quote from Judy Shepard whose son Matthew Shepard, a young gay man, was slain in Wyoming in October 1998: "if we want to stop hate crimes we must stop hate initiatives; initiative is so clearly not about defending marriage or families, it is about discrimination and dehumanizing and devaluing gays and lesbians." Danny Wan, Alameda Democratic Club, read a Democratic Club Resolution for the record: "The City of Alameda Democratic Club, in keeping with its history of uniting the diversity of our community, does hereby acknowledge and affirm that Proposition 22 the Knight Initiative, which will appear on the March 2000 ballot, is in conflict with the Club's goal of togetherness and equity, and specifically discriminates on a basis sexual orientation, serves no Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 6 January 4, 2000 legal purpose -- duplicating marriage restrictions that already are a part of California law, circumvents U.S. and State Constitution protections, and is clearly aimed in anger and hatred toward the gay lesbian bisexual community and therefore, be it resolved, that the Alameda Democratic Club opposes this measure and encourages local and regional elected officials to do the same through the passage of strong resolutions that affirm the community's commitment to fairness and acceptance of all persons without regard to race, ethnicity, gender, disabilities, religious beliefs or sexual orientation "; personally urged Council to oppose the initiative. Kriss Worthington, City of Berkeley Councilmember, stated Proposition 22 has nothing to do with whether or not one supports homosexuals or gays; even if a person believes being gay is immoral, it does not mean the government should legislate the matter; measures similar to Proposition 22 in other States are being used for litigation to deny people hospital visitation rights; people from all points of view should be respected; there are legal implications which would interfere with hospital visitation; a person opposed to discrimination must be against Proposition 22. Lena Gomes, American Friends Service Committee, stated there have been vicious attacks on minority groups, e.g. Proposition 209, Anti - Affirmative Action, and Proposition 184, Anti - Bilingual Education; Proposition 22 attacks a group of minorities to take away rights; supporters of Proposition 22 claim to be protecting marriage, however, no one is threatening marriages; that gays and lesbians want to get married is a myth; gays only want the same protections given to others in long -term committed relationships. Jim Hasak, Alameda, stated the Proposition reads: only marriage between a man and a woman is valid and recognized in the State of California; inquired what part of said statement Council has a problem with; Councilmembers serve at the pleasure of God and will answer to God for actions; asked Council to act in accordance with conscious. Katherine Gesine Lohr, Alameda, urged Council to adopt the Resolution opposing the Knight Initiative; stated defining marriage as between one man and one woman is unnecessary, unfair and divisive; there were many laws prohibiting marriage between a black person and a white person not too long ago; said laws are seen as discriminatory; in the future, people will find proposals, like the Knight Initiative, just as discriminatory as laws banning black /white marriages; marriage has already been redefined by the way people live their lives; there are many ways to have a marriage Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 7 January 4, 2000 and a family; when she worked at a battered women's shelter, she saw traditional marriages which were a dismal failure; the Alameda City Council should take a stand fair to all families. Peggy Moore stated Proposition 22 does not feel good; that she is in favor of the Resolution; everyone should be able to agree to disagree on lifestyles; the matter should not be made into law; urged Council to support Resolution opposing Proposition 22; further stated the Proposition is divisive and intrusive. Bonnie Bone, Alameda, stated Proposition 22 is proposed by the same people who tried to restrict women's reproductive health choices, ban sex education, promote Biblical teaching in schools, and dismantle equal protection for women, people of color, gays and lesbians; propositions like Proposition 22 are all part of a common political agenda of fear and repression; in 1994, Proposition 187 attacked defenseless immigrant families who could not fight back with votes; in 1998, Proposition 227 attacked the same immigrant families struggling to learn the English language; in 1996, Proposition 209 attacked women and people of color who struggle for equality; in 1998, Proposition 226 attacked working families by trying to silence their political voice through their unions; Proposition 22 attacks gay and lesbian couples by publically intruding into private lives, denying civil rights associated with marriage, setting up a legal framework from which to launch future attacks, and furthering a climate of hate which endangers and jeopardizes civil and human rights; the Vermont Supreme Court ruled denying same -sex couples the same rights and responsibilities as heterosexual married couples is discriminatory; the Knight Initiative would enact discrimination which has just been ruled unconstitutional; Proposition 22 seeks to deny Californians the opportunity to digest the Vermont decision and its implications, and establish public policy in an intelligent, informed manner; every component of Proposition 187, the anti - immigrant initiative was struck down as unconstitutional; urged Council to adopt the Resolution. Ken Werner, Alameda, stated Alameda has declared it is a hate -free City; Proposition 22, the Limits of Marriage, is unfair to specific citizens; that he Chairs Alamedans Together Against Hate which is trying to alleviate the environment where hate, intolerance and exclusion occur; if Proposition 22 passes, a climate to openly discriminate and rescind existing rights will begin; Proposition 22 appears simple, but its intention is to ensure that certain California taxpayers and voters are never allowed of the same rights and responsibilities as their neighbors; encouraged Councilmembers to oppose Proposition 22. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 8 January 4, 2000 Les Defacio, Alameda, stated that he and his partner have just been given the ability to get health insurance from each others' employers, visit each other in the hospital and assume each others debts; in 31 other States, Propositions similar to Proposition 22 have taken said rights away; urged Council to oppose Proposition 22. Vice Mayor Daysog stated former Councilmember Karin Lucas promoted legislation on behalf of the gay and lesbian community; in a memo, the Acting Human Resources Director indicates full and affordable health benefits will be extended to domestic partners; said matter was pushed by former Councilmember Lucas and enacted by this Council; it is important for Alameda to take a stand on the issue; residents deserve to live in a community of tolerance and children deserve nurturing environment; that he supports opposing the Knight Initiative. Vice Mayor Daysog moved adoption of the Resolution. Councilmember Johnson seconded the motion. Under discussion, Councilmember Johnson stated many spoke against division and hatred; Alameda is a diverse and tolerant community; the Council is not taking a position telling Alamedans to vote a certain way; Council is taking position to oppose legislation contrary to diversity; promote acceptance of differences. Councilmember DeWitt stated that he is not voting for or against Proposition 22; issues not within the authority of the City Council should not be voted on by the Council; the voters should have the opportunity to decide on moral, religious and legal items; Council votes for the people it represents; if the Council adopts the Resolution, there will be people that are not represented, e.g. Reverend Don Taylor; however, the purpose of the proposition is discriminatory and he will support adoption of the Resolution. Councilmember Kerr stated the matter increases the divisiveness of the community; that she supports the Anti -Hate Resolution, however, the City does not have jurisdiction over marriage; the City of Berkeley adopts Resolutions on social issues and has what some call a foreign policy; if Alameda would like to go that route, there will need to be Council meetings every Tuesday; Alameda should only vote on issues which have jurisdiction. Mayor Appezzato stated the matter effects citizens of Alameda; that he feels obligated to take a position; stated that he wrote the Resolution; it is not the Resolution proposed by the SSHRB; read the Resolution. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 9 January 4, 2000 Mayor Appezzato called for a roll call vote: Vice Mayor Daysog: Aye; Councilmember DeWitt: Aye; Councilmember Johnson: Aye; Councilmember Kerr: Abstain; Mayor Appezzato: Aye. Ayes: 4. Abstentions: 1. Mayor Appezzato called a recess at 9:04 p.m. and reconvened the Regular City Council Meeting at 9:15 p.m. (00 -11) Resolution No. 13167, "Amending Master Fee Resolution No. 12191 by Increasing Various Chuck Corica Golf Complex Rates. Norma Arnerich, President, Alameda Junior Golf Club Board of Directors, thanked the Council, Golf Commission and Golf Manager for keeping the rates for Junior Golfers at a minimum; stated youngsters take advantage of the low rates and hang out in the safe environment [golf complex]; further stated as an individual, she believes the rate increase is not out of line and will enable staff to perform maintenance and make improvements; golf is considered a recreation which can be afforded rather than once in a while luxury; when the Course was built, it was intended for recreation. Joe Williams, Alameda, stated last year there was a proposal to take away junior golf reduced rates on Fridays, weekends and holidays; thanked the Golf Course management and Golf Commission for reconsideration of the matter. Mayor Appezzato inquired whether play on Fridays has decreased. The Golf Complex Manager stated Fridays are slow in the morning and steadily increases; overall, play may be down 10 -150 on Fridays, however, revenue has increased considerably. Mayor Appezzato stated it is reasonable to play and the Courses are in good condition. Councilmember DeWitt inquired whether the rates are increasing to fund capital improvements. The Golf Complex Manager responded in the affirmative; stated capital improvements are pay as you go and are funded by golf course revenues; a surplus of over $600,000 will be used to pay for the Earl Fry irrigation system, which will cost $1 1/4 Million. In response to Councilmember DeWitt's inquiry regarding the Club House, the Golf Complex Manager stated $100,000 has been set aside Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 10 January 4, 2000 for design and the project will cost approximately $2 Million. Councilmember DeWitt moved adoption of the Resolution. Councilmember Johnson seconded the motion. Under discussion, Councilmember Johnson stated the Golf Commission is doing a great job; two junior golfers were in regional finals; there are good programs and the Course is in great shape. Councilmember Kerr stated the Earl Fry irrigation system is supplemented by staff watering the course. On the call for the question, the motion carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. (00 -12) Resolution No. 13168, "Establishing Years 2000, 2001 and 2002 Garbage Rates." Adopted. Al Wright, Alameda, stated the trash cans on Park Street are serviced by Waste Management; requested City to address three complaints concerning Waste Management: doors are not closed by garbage collectors, garbage dropped on sidewalks by collectors is not picked up after cans are emptied, and cans are not emptied on schedule. Mayor Appezzato requested the City Manager to review said concerns with Waste Management. Councilmember DeWitt moved adoption of the Resolution. Councilmember Johnson inquired whether public can pickups are handled by Waste Management throughout the City, to which the City Manager responded in the affirmative. Councilmember Johnson seconded the motion. Councilmember DeWitt stated a 3.16% increase is proposed; there are landfill penalties; handling waste in the future will be more expensive; the City has to pay for its share of filling up the Altamont Landfill. On the call for the question, the motion carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. (00 -13) Ordinance No. 2822, "Approving and Authorizing the Execution of First Amendment to Lease Agreement between Mariner Square & Associates, as Lessee, and the City of Alameda, as Lessor, to Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 1 1 January 4, 2000 Include an Additional Parcel of 3,072 Square Feet." Finally passed. Councilmember Johnson moved final passage of the Ordinance. Councilmember Kerr seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON- AGENDA None. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS (00 -14) Councilmember Kerr stated the Association of Bay Area Governments (A.B.A.G.) has assigned a large portion of housing to Alameda; according to Mr. Amorosa of A.B.A.G., the [housing] numbers are mythical and no one pays attention to them; however, goals have become requirements and the City has been sued based on said numbers; Senator Perata is discussing withholding transit money for cities that do not live up to [A.B.A.G's housing] goals; the City of Alameda is revising its General Plan; the housing issue will be reviewed by the Planning Board prior to the A.B.A.G. deadline; [funding] restrictions Senator Perata is discussing make the matter no longer academic. (00 -15) Vice Mayor Daysog stated eighteen people from all over Alameda participated in a beach clean up on New Years Day. (00 -16) Councilmember Johnson stated a landlord who had deplorable living conditions for tenants was charged an $8,000 fine; Council should consider raising the penalty for misdemeanor landlord violations. (00 -17) Councilmember Johnson announced that she received a letter complimenting the Park and Recreation Department for its programs. (00 -18) Councilmember DeWitt requested the City Manager and City Attorney to draft a Resolution which would limit issues presented to the City Council on morals, religion, or legal matters which Council does not have authority over; moral issues the Council cannot decide, e.g. abortion, are divisive; Resolution would keep Council from having to debate and divide the City on moral, religious or legal matters not under Council jurisdiction. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business before the City Council, Mayor Appezzato adjourned the Regular Meeting at 9:40 p.m. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 12 January 4, 2000 Respectfully submitted, Diane B. Felsch, CMC City Clerk The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 13 January 4, 2000