Title
Minutes of the Special Council, Joint Council/Successor Agency to the Community Improvement Commission, and Regular City Council Meetings Held on November 18, 2025. (City Clerk)
Body
UNAPPROVED
MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING
TUESDAY- -NOVEMBER 18, 2025- -5:00 P.M.
Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft convened the meeting at 5:01 p.m.
Roll Call - Present: Councilmembers Daysog, Boller, Jensen, Pryor and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft - 5.
Absent: None.
Consent Calendar
(25- ) Recommendation to Approve Jennifer Ott, City Manager; Abigail Thorne Lyman, Director of Base Reuse and Economic Development; Dwayne Dalman, Economic Development Division Manager; Annie Cox, Administrative Management Analyst; and Len Aslanian, Assistant City Attorney, as Real Property Negotiators for a Portion of Building 22, Located at 2501 Monarch Street at Alameda Point (Faction Brewing Company, LLC). Not heard.
The meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider:
(25- ) Public Employee Appointment/Hiring Pursuant to Government Code § 54957; Title/Description of Positions to be Filled: City Manager/Interim City Manager
(25- ) Conference with Labor Negotiators (Pursuant to (Government Code Section 54957.6); City Negotiators: Jennifer Ott, City Manager, Noelle White, Human Resources Director, Jack Hughes, Liebert Cassidy Whitmore, and Doug McManaway, Assistant City Attorney; Employee Organizations: International Association of Firefighters, Local 689 (IAFF) and Alameda Fire Chiefs Association (AFCA); Under Negotiation: Salaries, Employee Benefits and Terms of Employment
(25- ) Conference with Real Property Negotiators (Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8); Property: Bay 200, a portion of Building 22, located at 2501 Monarch Street at Alameda Point, Alameda CA 94501; City Negotiators: City Manager Jennifer Ott, Base Reuse and Economic Development Director Abigail Thorne-Lyman, Economic Development Division Manager Dwayne Dalman, Administrative Management Analyst Annie Cox, Assistant City Attorney Len Aslanian; Negotiating Parties: City of Alameda and Faction Brewing Company, LLC; Under Negotiation: Price and terms of lease. Not heard.
(25- ) Conference with Legal Counsel - Potential Litigation; Potential Initiation of Litigation Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9, Subsection (d)(4); Number of Cases: One (As Plaintiff - City Initiating Legal Action)
***
Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft called a recess at 7:16 p.m. and reconvened the meeting at 11:03 p.m.
***
Following the Closed Session, the meeting was reconvened and the City Clerk announced that regarding Public Employee Appointment/Hiring, the City Council conducted interviews for the Interim City Manager position and provided direction to the City Attorney, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5; regarding Labor, staff provided information and Council provided information, which carried by two separate votes; Vote 1 carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Councilmembers Boller, Jensen, Pryor, and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft - 4, Noes: Councilmember Daysog - 1 and Vote 2 carried by unanimous voice vote - 5; regarding Potential Litigation, staff provided information and Council provided direction, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.
Adjournment
There being no further business, Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft adjourned the meeting at 12:00 a.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Lara Weisiger, City Clerk
The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Sunshine Ordinance.
****************************************************************************************************
MINUTES OF THE JOINT MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION (SACIC)
TUESDAY- - NOVEMBER 18, 2025- -6:59 P.M.
Mayor/Chair Ezzy Ashcraft convened the meeting at 7:22 p.m. Vice Mayor/ Commissioner Pryor led the Pledge of Allegiance.
ROLL CALL - Present: Councilmembers/Commissioners Boller, Daysog, Jensen, Pryor and Mayor/Chair Ezzy Ashcraft - 5.
Absent: None.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Councilmember/Commissioner Boller moved approval of the Consent Calendar.
Vice Mayor/Commissioner Pryor seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. [Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk preceding the paragraph number.]
(*25- SACIC) Minutes of the Special Joint City Council and SACIC Meeting Held on September 16, 2025. Approved.
(*25- CC/25- SACIC) Recommendation to Accept the Investment Transactions Report for the Quarter Ending September 30, 2025. Accepted.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, Mayor/Chair Ezzy Ashcraft adjourned the meeting at 7:24 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Lara Weisiger, City Clerk and Secretary, SACIC
The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Sunshine Ordinance.
****************************************************************************************************
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
TUESDAY- -NOVEMBER 18, 2025- -7:00 P.M.
Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft convened the meeting at 7:24 p.m.
ROLL CALL - Present: Councilmembers Boller, Daysog, Jensen, Pryor, and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft - 5.
Absent: None.
AGENDA CHANGES
None.
PROCLAMATIONS, SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY AND ANNOUNCEMENTS
(25- ) Nakita Sinha, Institute for Local Government, gave a brief presentation on the City receiving a 2025 Beacon Award.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA
(25- ) Jay Ingram, Alameda, submitted comments; expressed concern about the lack of proper noticing for the change-of-use of the Little John Park basketball court; stated notice was posted on A-frames at the park and on the website; neighbors within 300 to 500 feet were not informed; if he had known about the change, he would have expressed concerns earlier; explained the history of the previous two half-courts facing Buena Vista; stated at that time, neighbors were concerns about noise, profanities and occasional fights; suggested one backboard be moved back down to 8 feet and keep the other at 10 feet, to match the Franklin Park court to provide greater flexibility and enjoyment for players and skill levels.
(25- ) Gordon Williams, Alameda, discussed a traffic issue on Clement Avenue and Park Street; stated the street lights are confusing; suggested better signage so that accidents do not happen at the intersection.
(25- ) Jim Strehlow, Alameda, expressed concern about the traffic signal at Atlantic Avenue and Constitution Way; stated the signals are confusing, including a red right turn arrow halting turns onto southbound Constitution Way with green bicycle and pedestrian lights; after the bicycle green turns red, the red right turn arrow stays red for 20 seconds after there are no bicycles or pedestrians; discussed artificial intelligence solutions in software applications which uses a vision system that integrates video and radar sensors to handle unexpected traffic surges and resolves environmental concerns from air pollution caused by idling vehicles; it also helps reduce traffic jams so that emergency vehicles can maneuver better through traffic; encouraged the City to look into companies such as NoTraffic.com to better handle troublesome street intersection programming.
(25- ) Barack Obama Shaw, Alameda, announced that he is running for California Governor; thanked staff for assisting with his Mayoral run in Alameda in 2022; acknowledged staff for the Beacon Award and various achievements; gave his website information.
(25- ) Joshua Altieri, Housing Authority, provided Housing Authority updates, including the grand opening of the North Housing on September 25; stated Lynette Corner has 64 units of affordable housing for seniors, of which 16 units are for previously military veterans, disabled, and previously unhoused; Estuary 1, the second building, is 100% leased; further announced the Housing Authority received the National Award of Merit from the National Association of Housing and Redevelopment Officials (NAHRO) for the Restore Rebuild Project at Independence Plaza, the nation's first-ever restore rebuild transaction focused on acquisition and preservation of existing housing instead of new construction; discussed the status of the Poplar property.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Councilmember Jensen inquired whether the contract for a study on the Pedestrian Bicycle Bridge Project [paragraph no. 25- ] approved by the Transportation Commission and the Council was the result of several past discussions, to which the Planning, Building and Transportation Director responded in the affirmative; stated the waterways study is a technical study; his department previously completed a project initiation document to narrow the feasible options; the technical study is to work with users of the waterway to understand the technical feasibility of the bridge, specifically the span of the bridge, how it operate, etc.; the study is the next step in the process.
Councilmember Jensen inquired whether the three bridge anchors are the final anchors in Alameda or will there be continued discussions regarding the anchor locations in Alameda and Oakland as well.
The Planning, Building and Transportation Director responded the three anchors came out of the project initiation document and phase; stated understanding bridge operations and waterway users could reveal a need to look at other anchors.
Councilmember Jensen inquired how much input was provided from Bay 37 residents on the discussions regarding the anchors.
The Planning, Building and Transportation Director responded during the project initiation phase in 2024 and earlier, the project manager met with the Bay 37 neighbors on multiple occasions; the project reached a phase without a lot of public interfacing work so the perception was there was not a lot of public communication; work will start after contract approval, including stakeholder engagement again.
Councilmember Jensen stated a lot of people are looking forward to the culmination of the exciting work and to a pedestrian bicycle bridge; she supports the project.
Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she is really pleased to see the project moving forward, especially the Oakland-Alameda Access project and being able to accommodate emergency vehicles during Tube closures.
Vice Mayor Pryor inquired the number of people predicted to use the bridge each day.
The City Manager responded the staff report estimates are 8,000 to 9,500 bridge crossings every weekday.
Vice Mayor Pryor inquired how long the study will take, to which the Planning, Building and Transportation Director responded the study is anticipated to take 18 to 20 months; the City has a Caltrans grant until June of 2027; the timeline is tight; the City is planning to ask for another Caltrans grant very soon for the Wooden Bridge; it would be great to show the City is meeting all timelines.
In response to Vice Mayor Pryor’s inquiry, the Planning, Building and Transportation Director stated the waterway study is the identified next step; completing the study would then provide an opportunity to find a project owner and begin environmental review.
Councilmember Jensen moved approval of the Consent Calendar.
Vice Mayor Pryor seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. [Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk preceding the paragraph number.]
(*25- ) Minutes of the Special and Regular City Council Meetings Held on October 21, 2025. Approved.
(*25- ) Ratified bills in the amount of $5,036,879.21.
(*25- ) Recommendation to Approve the Budget Policy. Accepted.
(*25- ) Recommendation to Authorize the City Manager to Execute an Agreement with Moffatt & Nichol for a Waterway Study for the Oakland-Alameda Estuary Bridge Project in an Amount Not-to-Exceed $524,000. Accepted.
(*25- ) Recommendation to Authorize the City Manager to Execute an Agreement with Bay Area Lightworks, Inc., for the Lincoln Park Lighting Project, No. P.W. 04-25-08, in an Amount Not-To-Exceed $353,100, including Contingency. Accepted.
(*25- ) Recommendation to Authorize the City Manager to Purchase Emergency Vehicle Preemption Kits for Fire Department Response Vehicles from AM Signal, LLC in an Amount Not-to-Exceed $102,535.25. Accepted.
(*25- ) Recommendation to Accept the Work of McKim Corporation for the Grand Street Safety Improvements and Pavement Rehabilitation Project (P.W. No. 04-24-13). Accepted.
(*25- ) Resolution No. 16340, “Authorizing the City Manager to Execute a Grant of Easement to Ginja Central Alameda LLC Across City-Owned Property; and to Execute Any and All Ancillary Documents and Direct the Recording of the Grant of Easement at 2310 Central Avenue.” Adopted.
(*25- ) Resolution No. 16341, “Authorizing the City Manager to Execute a Grant Agreement Between the State of California Department of Parks and Recreation, Division of Boating and Waterways and the City of Alameda by and through the Alameda Police Department.” Adopted; and
(*25- A) Resolution No. 16342, “Amending the Fiscal Year 2025-26 Police Grants Fund Estimated Revenue and Expenditures Budget in the Amount of $34,750 each for the Surrendered and Abandoned Vessel Exchange Grant.” Adopted.
CONTINUED AGENDA ITEMS
None.
REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS
(25- ) Resolution No. 16343, “Appointing Nick Ksiazek as Trustee of the Alameda County Mosquito Abatement District Board.” Adopted.
Councilmember Boller moved adoption of the resolution.
Councilmember Jensen seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.
The City Clerk administered the Oath of Office and Mr. Ksiazek made brief comments.
(25- ) Recommendation to Approve Quick-Build Traffic Calming in the Neighborhood Around Gibbons Drive Followed by Long-Term Data Collection and Planning for the Fernside Boulevard Traffic Calming and Bikeways Project; and
(25- A) Resolution No. 16344, “Amending the Fiscal Year 2025-26 Budget to Increase Authorized Expenditures in the Capital Improvement Project Fund C61000 by $200,000, Appropriated from the General Fund.” Adopted.
***
(25- ) Vice Mayor Pryor moved approval of allowing 15 minutes for the presentation.
Councilmember Jensen seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.
***
The Transportation Planning Manager and David Parisi, Parametrix, gave a Power Point presentation.
Councilmember Boller inquired whether data from the traffic calming studies would go to the Transportation Commission and then City Council before any pilot is implemented.
The Transportation Planning Manager responded in the affirmative; stated the Transportation Commission recommended staff come back with updated data after the traffic calming is in place and before starting the turn restriction pilot; after the turn restriction pilot is done and fully analyzed, staff would come back to the City Council to get a recommendation for next steps for the intersection.
In response to Councilmember Boller’s inquiry, the City Manager stated it would be possible for staff to go directly to the City Council instead of going to the Transportation Commission.
In response to Councilmember Boller’s inquiry, the Transportation Planning Manager stated the pilot was contemplated at 6 months based on the consultant’s previous experiences.
Councilmember Boller requested clarification on the alternative recommendation in the staff report.
The Transportation Planning Manager stated the alternative is not recommended; staff recommends approving the near-term, quick-build improvements without tying the project to longer-term planning for the Fernside Boulevard traffic calming and bikeways project; there are traffic calming requests from all over the City; staff is asking for $200,000 to implement the project in a quick manner rather than including it in the mix with all of the traffic calming requests across the City.
In response to Councilmember Boller’s inquiry regarding traffic calming, the City Engineer stated traffic calming in the neighborhood should reduce speeds; a future turn restriction would result in less traffic; outcomes are not known for certain until the traffic calming measures are actually put in; then, data can be collected doing a function pilot study; all three are tied together; if not be tied to the pilot, the project would need to be stepped back and staff would not be asking for $200,000 to fast-track implementation of the quick-build traffic calming improvements in the neighborhood, instead changes would be reviewed in context with all the other recommendations throughout the City.
Councilmember Jensen inquired whether it is possible that the data collection might not support the pilot.
The City Engineer responded that he does not see how data collection would not support the pilot; stated the purpose of the pilot project is to understand what a turn restriction would do in terms of diverting traffic to the surrounding streets at the intersection of Fernside Boulevard, High Street and Gibbons Avenue; residents are concerned about potential increases in traffic on narrow neighborhood streets, but there is no way to know exactly how much traffic diversion is taking place unless the pilot is done.
Councilmember Jensen inquired whether the three options might possibly be different after the traffic calming and data collection, and whether elimination of the particular turn option might change.
The City Engineer responded it is possible; stated staff has adjusted the recommendation brought forward last after listening to the public comment; last year, the thought was to go forward with building the improvements without a traffic study; public feedback included concerns about diversion within the neighborhoods; in the study, staff was fairly aggressive in pushing a lot of the traffic through the neighborhood streets, which traffic calming would help mitigate; staff is not asking to go with Option A tonight; a pilot study can be done relatively easy with some K-rails and very inexpensive materials to simulate what eliminate the movement would be like over a six-month period; the study will help determine whether Option A is viable in the long term.
Councilmember Jensen inquired whether the recommendation for a pilot would change pedestrians’ ability to cross and make it much safer for pedestrians who do not have a signal light at the intersection.
Mr. Parisi responded movements for pedestrians would still be retained; stated the left turn coming out of Gibbons Drive will be barricaded; pedestrians using the crosswalk at the end of Gibbons Drive would not have a light or any way to know if traffic is coming off the bridge into that crosswalk; there would be some traffic calming on the corner to reduce speeds; the barricade would be to the west of the other crosswalk; there will be some safety enhancements for crossing the first, second, and middle crosswalk, which would be barricaded off; the third crosswalk would be just like it is today.
In response to Councilmember Jensen’s inquiry about timed pedestrian lights for the crosswalks, Mr. Parisi stated there would not be a traffic light or a signaled pedestrian light; there would be some enhancements for pedestrians crossing the first crosswalk, including some quick build paint to reduce the radius to slow down speed; the second crosswalk would have a barricade in front of it with no cars coming out of that location; there would be no changes to the third part of the crossing of Gibbons Drive, which is a stop-controlled right turn.
In response to Councilmember Jensen’s inquiry regarding loss of parking spaces, the Transportation Planning Manager stated State law has requirements for no parking approaching intersections; it applies whether the curb or crosswalk is marked; effectively, parking spaces are already lost; the project would mark red curbs to help people out.
Councilmember Jensen inquired how many actual parking spaces would be lost if the roundabouts were built, to which the Transportation Planning Manager responded three spaces would be lost at Southwood, Bayo Vista, and Fairview, and five spaces would be lost at Gibbons, Northwood, and Southwood.
In response to Vice Mayor Pryor’s inquiry, the Transportation Planning Manager stated the lost spaces are in addition to those lost to daylighting.
In response to Councilmember Daysog’s inquiry regarding drive-time calculations, the City Engineer stated drive time will increase from Santa Clara Avenue and Gibbons Drive all the way to High Street and Gibbons Drive if traffic calming is implemented.
Councilmember Daysog outlined another drive-time calculation; inquired how much faster someone might drive in order to achieve the scenario.
The City Engineer responded traffic calming implicitly and directly slows down traffic so time cannot be held constant; drive time will always increase; the intention and hope is that people might look at alternate routes.
In response to Councilmember Daysog’s inquiry regarding analysis of miles per hour and travel rates, the City Engineer stated staff has not gone to that granular level of detail; the resident’s main concern is the diversion of traffic to Cornell Drive, Bayo Vista Avenue, and others because those roads are very narrow, increasing the risk of collisions with more cars; there is a lot of conjecture about the traffic; nothing will be known for certain until a thorough study is done before and after a pilot project.
Councilmember Boller stated the City's crash data shows none of the recorded collisions at the intersection would have been prevented by closing off the Gibbons Drive left turn going to High Street.
The Transportation Planning Manager noted staff has reviewed the crash data and determined that simplifying the intersection, lowering the speed, and making the intersection smaller, would have prevented some of the collisions from occurring, regardless of whether or not the drivers involved were coming from Gibbons Drive specifically.
Stated that she is strongly against closing Gibbons Drive; it will make the neighborhood less safe; she is against the roundabouts on Bayo Vista Avenue, Fairview Avenue, and Southwood Drive intersections, which will make large trucks have a very hard time making turns; suggested a stop sign instead: Jenny Sui, Alameda.
Stated that she appreciates bike safety and supports speed bumps on Gibbons Drive; she does not support the pilot closure; the depiction of the high-crash intersection is exaggerated; expressed concern about the increase in traffic and data being skewed and distorted to support a long-term plan to permanently close the street: Vickie Teng, Alameda.
Stated that she agrees with the previous speaker; expressed strong opposition to any closure, pilot or temporary; stated the extreme measure should not be considered until every reasonable alternative has been explored, including better signage: Cindy Mills, Alameda.
Stated that she is vehemently opposed to any closure of Gibbons Drive, which is ill-advised and dangerous; traffic will flow onto smaller streets during the commute hour when kids walk to school; encouraged Council to continue the pursuit and study of the other solutions to calm traffic: Serena Hom, Alameda.
Expressed opposition to the closure of Gibbons Drive; stated none of the 22 accidents point to Gibbons Drive being a problem; she is opposed to the pilot project: Lorre Zuppan, Alameda.
Stated closing a main thoroughfare like Gibbons Drive will not work; he has over three decades in transportation; urged Council to take a second look at the project: Nick Psiol, Alameda.
Stated that he is greatly opposed to any closure or pilot project; taking away a protected left turn makes no sense; creating four unprotected turns creates other safety issues; Alternative A ignores other safety issues: John Puccini, Alameda.
Stated that he strongly opposes any closure of Gibbons Drive, pilot or not; the City's own data shows there have been zero recorded accidents caused by a driver turning left from Gibbons Drive onto the High Street Bridge; closing Gibbons Drive will substantially decrease safety; urged Council to reject any closure of Gibbons Drive, including the proposed pilot closure and save those dollars for other parts of Alameda that actually have significant safety risks: Matt Bartlett, Alameda.
Expressed opposition to the proposed closure of Gibbons Drive; stated neighbors who attended the March 18 City Council meeting strongly encouraged that a traffic study be implemented before any action is taken; data about traffic increases came out of the study; urged Council to reject any closure of Gibbons Drive, including a pilot closure; stated any version of the plan will make the neighborhood less safe: Glenn Yajko, Alameda.
Stated the Keep Gibbons Open Coalition submitted a petition with over 400 signatures opposing the closure; the core fundamental argument is congestion; outlined the drive-time increases and impacts on smaller streets: Gordon Williams, Alameda.
Stated that she supports staff's recommendation for a pilot that includes the left turn restriction on Gibbons Drive; she is frustrated by the speeding and reckless driving on Gibbons; the intersection is complex; the proposal is a reasonable attempt to simplify and reduce driver error; if it is not working, the pilot can be ended: Maria Piper, Alameda.
Urged Council to support the staff recommendation, especially the turn prohibition pilot; stated that she understands the concerns raised by neighbors, but the issues have been carefully studied and thoughtfully addressed; the pilot is important for progress; safer, more efficient intersection operations is the core purpose of the project and essential for the long-term success of the Fernside corridor redesign, which includes a critical bikeway: Cyndy Johnsen, BikeWalk Alameda.
Expressed concern about the agenda language; stated the resolution asks for funding, not approval of the project; the plans are still in development and not adequately finalized; suggested Council approve the quick build first: Jay Garfinkle, Alameda.
Stated that she is a strong proponent of bikeable, walkable streets; urged the Council to reject any closure of Gibbons Drive, including a pilot closure; stated any closure will force drivers to take unprotected left turns onto local streets such as Bayo Vista, Fairview, and Thompson, putting families who walk and bike these streets in danger; the studies fail to look at safety impacts and cost-benefit analysis of major changes to the neighborhood as a whole, rather than at just one intersection or street; urged Council to do due diligence before such a major closure: Caroline Teng, Alameda.
Stated staff has done extensive outreach and created a well-considered plan for traffic calming measures; it can be difficult to move forward when residents who care deeply about traffic safety differ so sharply in how to achieve it; kids and grown-ups walk and bike on all the neighborhood streets; calming traffic on the most central and problematic street makes the whole neighborhood safer; urged Council to support and commit to the recommended safety improvements: Andy Wang, Alameda.
Stated that she is strongly opposed to closing the critical connector and is concerned about the safety issues it raises; other areas need attention; urged Council to follow the normal evaluation process and not fast track the project: Christine Huddleson, Alameda.
Stated that she lives on Fairview Avenue and is greatly opposed to the closure, including the pilot program; the project does not need to be fast-tracked; other parts of the City need the money; the funding could be used in such a better way: Kelly Becker, Alameda.
Expressed concern about what some of the implementation plans would do to the community; stated there are neighbors against neighbors; roundabouts and loss of parking spaces will cause issues; if someone loses house-front parking, they park in front of a neighbor’s house, making the situation worse; urged Council to reject the proposed recommendation: Ruben Ramirez, Alameda.
Stated that she strongly opposes closing Gibbons Drive left turn and all the quick builds; her neighborhood is not unique in terms of traffic problems; the $200,000 could be used in parts of the City that need it more than her neighborhood: Beverly Ramirez, Alameda.
Stated that she opposes the street closure; it is not about one street or one house against another; anything done to a part of the neighborhood affects everyone; urged Council to reconsider the plan and not close Gibbons Drive: Marilyn Bowa, Alameda.
Stated that he opposes any closing of Gibbons Drive; he is in favor of traffic calming, starting with speedbumps; he is willing to live with roundabouts in front of his house, but not closure of Gibbons Drive: Walt Grady, Alameda.
Stated that he is completely against any plan that would close the left turn from Gibbons Drive onto High Street; it is not warranted and would drive traffic off of a wide arterial street that has been used to connect to the High Street Bridge for decades; speed calming measures would be good; encouraged the City to think about San Francisco’s use of speed cameras with license plate reading: David Foote, Alameda.
Discussed the history of neighborhood traffic mitigations; suggested holding a safety workshop; urged Council to bifurcate the Gibbons Drive intersection because the data is incomplete: Jim Strehlow, Keep Gibbons Open.
Stated taking away the route from Gibbons Drive out of town is less safe; having more options is nice, but no one wants the roundabouts; urged Council to spend the funds on parks and kids and not create safety problems: Adam Garfinkle, Alameda.
Stated that she does not support the closing of Gibbons Drive, even for a pilot study; it would divert traffic to neighborhood streets that are two-thirds the width of Gibbons Drive; traffic would increase on the narrow streets by 400%, which is beyond unreasonable, it is unsafe and unnecessary; urged Council to keep Gibbons Drive open for the safety of the neighborhood: Anna Williams, Alameda.
Stated the Gibbons, High, Fernside intersection is a bad one, especially for biking; he fully supports a turn restriction to make the intersection safer; staff’s recommendation solves several problems and fairly addresses impacts; urged Council to support it: Michael Sullivan, Alameda.
Stated that he is opposed to any closure of Gibbons Drive; it would be a significant change, even if it is a pilot, and could potentially be an irreversible one; he does support traffic calming, including speed humps; urged Council to reject the closure of Gibbons Drive and prioritize thoughtful, incremental solutions; stated large, expensive, structural changes that may not actually fix the issue should be avoided: John Sweeney, Alameda.
Stated that he supports the staff recommendation to implement traffic calming measures and to pilot the effects of modifying the Gibbons Drive and High Street intersection in the interest of pedestrian safety; if the intersection changes are found to be more negative than positive, he supports leaving the intersection in its current configuration; if the change is net benefit, staff should follow the data and proceed with the changes: Travis Morgan, Alameda.
Urged the Council not to close Gibbons Drive, even as a pilot; stated it is unnecessary and risky; Gibbons Drive is a clear connector, with a protected left turn, crosswalks, and four-way stops; pedestrians, both young and old, understand and can navigate the intersection accordingly; he embraces change and applauds the Fernside Corridor redesign and bikeway, but not at the risk of younger, inexperienced pedestrians and cyclists who are still learning the ways of the road; urged Council to reject the closure of Gibbons Drive and seek other solutions for addressing the complex problems: Frank Teng, Alameda.
Stated that he supports the quick build traffic calming measure for Gibbons; closure of Gibbons Drive is not what is actually happening; the only thing happening is paint, posts, temporary build-outs, a roundabout, and safer crossings; all directions basically stay open except for one left turn; he is in favor of the fast measures to improve pedestrian and bike safety and safety all around: Zac Bowling, Alameda.
Stated that he is concerned; the proposal to prevent people from going onto High Street from Gibbons Drive seems like a big jump in the wrong direction; he is opposed to any measure that closes Gibbons Drive, which would make surrounding areas more dangerous; traffic calming measures, including stop signs, roundabouts, and speed bumps are reasonable: Jason Fang, Alameda.
Stated that he is against any closure of Gibbons Drive; the closure does not enhance safety in any way; he is also not a fan of traffic circles; the money would be better spent elsewhere: Justin Fox, Alameda.
Urged Council to support the staff recommendation; stated that he frequently walks, bikes and runs through the Fernside neighborhood with his nine year old daughter; the safety improvements are important to him and are important for the City's future plans for streets and traffic calming: Doug Letterman, Alameda.
Stated the single most effective way to create a safer and more pleasant Gibbons/High/Fernside Gateway is to implement the facilities Council already adopted in the Active Transportation Plan; the Plan makes clear, comfortable, low-stress neighborhood greenways, improves walking safety and calms traffic via comprehensive treatments that achieve and maintain low vehicle volume and speeds; whether the proposed changes would facilitate or hinder implementation of the Gibbons Neighborhood Greenway is a question that has not yet been addressed; urged Council to use the $200,000 to craft an evidence-based build-out of a plan that has already been adopted: Charles Varner, Alameda.
Stated that he is opposed to the closure of Gibbons Drive, even on a temporary basis; the closure of Gibbons is about mitigating congestion as part of another project; making data-based decisions is important; other measures including slowing down the cars, yield signs, stop signs, and speed humps will actually increase safety; urged everyone to slow it down: Elliott Blake, Alameda.
***
Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft called a recess at 9:41 and reconvened the meeting at 10:01 p.m.
***
***
(25- ) Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft discussed moving the remaining Regular Agenda Items.
The City Clerk outlined the options to continue the items.
Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft suggested moving the Workshop [paragraph no. 25- ] to the Continued section of the December 2, 2025, agenda; noted the mylar balloon item [paragraph no. 25- ] can be added as a Regular Item.
The City Clerk stated a motion is only needed to continue the Workshop to the Continued section of the December 2, 2025, agenda.
Vice Mayor Pryor moved approval of continuing the Workshop to December 2, 2025.
Councilmember Jensen seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.
***
In response to Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft’s inquiry regarding the assertion that the item was not properly noticed, the Assistant City Attorney stated the staff report’s abbreviated title references Council actions and the overall project; the item was adequately noticed under the Brown Act.
In response to Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft’s inquiry regarding roundabouts, the City Engineer stated there are different sizes and types of roundabouts; a traffic circle is for a very tight intersection, like the one most recently installed on Pacific Avenue, and is intended to slow and mitigate traffic; Gibbons, Bayo Vista, Northwood and Southwood are very large intersections and can handle a full-size roundabout; an almost equivalent sized roundabout is being constructed on Central Avenue and 3rd Street; roundabouts are designed to slow down vehicles coming around the corner and are built to accommodate larger trucks.
Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether a Fire truck would have to go around or be able to drive over; to which the City Engineer responded the Fire trucks have the ability to drive up and over the roundabout; staff worked with the Fire Department to establish primary and secondary response routes; Gibbons Drive is not a primary response route; Fire trucks only come to Gibbons Drive to respond to a call on the street; otherwise, they take alternate routes.
In response to Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft’s inquiry as to why San Francisco is allowed to do red light speed cameras, the City Attorney stated special State legislation authorized San Francisco to do so; the legislation does not apply to the City of Alameda.
Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated a few cities are part of a pilot program; Alameda was not chosen; the League of California Cities has been strenuously lobbying; the pilot program has to be completed first; outlined what she would like Council to contemplate; stated that she is prepared to follow the staff recommendation; she organized a field trip to the intersection; she and staff learned a lot from attending the Mayor's Institute on Pedestrian Safety virtual sessions; Alameda’s streets need to be made safe for all users; she would love to see Council at least approve the speed bumps on Gibbons and the traffic calming proposed for the two big intersections.
The City Manager stated the community expressed concerned about neighborhood calming and does not want to rush intersection safety changes, which is why staff proposed the phased approach; the two-way bike long-term concept on Fernside depends on something happening at the intersection; all options require the right turn only; if the pilot does not move forward, the two-way bike concept may have to be revisited; doing something, like the neighborhood calming, incrementally would make things safer.
Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she very much supports the Fernside bikeway; it is part of how the City is going to address climate change and get people out of cars; the intersection crossing Fernside is risky for pedestrians; there is lots of work to do.
Vice Mayor Pryor stated the traffic calming is not rushed; everything has been very thoughtful and everyone has been taken into consideration; a third party provided evidence-based information, which Council should use to make a decision; she supports the staff recommendation; it makes sense to do go slower and it is not permanent; she trusts that staff and Council will make evidence-based decisions.
Councilmember Daysog stated that he will not support the staff recommendation; the consultants and staff have provided enough data and evidence on which to make a decision; clearly, the problem is speeding traffic along Gibbons Drive; he hears the overlapping consensus to put traffic calming measures on Gibbons Drive; he supports traffic circles or speed humps rather than closing Gibbons Drive; discussed traffic on narrower streets and school crossings.
In response to Councilmember Boller’s inquiry regarding smart adaptive traffic control technologies, the City Engineer stated new AI for traffic signals have the opportunity to make traffic signal flow much more efficient, which reduces delay; Alameda currently does not have any of that technology; there are a lot of AI vendors; the City would definitely consider implementing AI in the future.
Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the AI traffic technology would do anything to improve traffic and pedestrian safety if an intersection is larger than normal.
The City Engineer responded it would not by itself; stated the technology does not shrink the intersection; it could potential reduce delay at the intersection, but would not make safety improvements like a reconfigured intersection; AI moves cars more efficiently and some look at pedestrian movements as well; it is harder for AI to track pedestrians than large vehicles.
Councilmember Boller stated that he is not in support of the staff recommendation; encouraged Council to look at Phase 1, with the exception of the quick build roundabouts, and Phase 2, with the addition of adding City Council action after the Transportation Commission before making any decision about a temporary pilot; he could support the proposal with those changes.
In response to Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft’s inquiry regarding whether Councilmember Boller would support the quick build roundabouts and the speed humps, Councilmember Boller responded in the negative; stated because of equity concerns, some public comments, and the data, doing just the speed humps and the new bulb out would suffice without the roundabouts.
The Transportation Planning Manager stated the proposal is a good way to address the neighborhood comprehensively; in terms of equity for the two roundabouts, there is the additional factor of the Americans with Disabilities (ADA) Transition Plan; the intersections do not have curb ramps or crosswalks.
Councilmember Boller inquired whether ADA improvements in those intersections could be done without doing the roundabouts.
The City Engineer responded accessibility needs to be addressed in two intersections in particular: Northwood/Southwood/Gibbons, and Bayo Vista; there is no obvious place to put a crosswalk as with a standard right-angled intersection; the most logical place is actually behind the stop bar, which is a very awkward position; functionally, it turns out to be a mid-block crosswalk about 30 feet behind the intersection; one of the drawbacks of roundabouts is pedestrian crossings are pushed further away from a normal intersection; however, for these particular intersections, it actually is a benefit as it pushes the crosswalk further away from the center intersection to a narrower throat, which is a shorter, safer crossing; the roundabouts serve a dual purpose in the sense that it is traffic calming, but it also addresses a known accessibility shortcoming of the intersections.
In response to Councilmember Boller’s inquiry regarding the cost for the two roundabouts, the City Engineer stated a lot if the cost will depend on the exact materials; it is about $150,000 for the roundabouts, which are more expensive than speed humps.
In response to Councilmember Jensen’s inquiry for more information about the speed hump on Cambridge Drive, the City Engineer stated one of the concepts of traffic calming is to try to have some measure every 350 to 500 feet along a corridor; there have been a lot of complaints about people speeding up Gibbons Drive and on Cambridge Drive as well, which is the Safe Routes to School crossing to Edison; a speed hump just past the intersection is being proposed; the proposed speed humps are on Gibbons, Cambridge, and Southwood.
Councilmember Jensen inquired whether the Gibbons Drive roundabout would be considered part of Safe Routes to School as well, to which the Transportation Planning Manager responded in the affirmative; stated the Alameda County Safe Routes to School program did a school safety assessment for Edison School; putting a roundabout at the location was one of the recommendations.
Councilmember Jensen stated the approved Fernside Boulevard Traffic Calming and Bikeway Project is not funded; the project will not be started until after 2030; suggested continuing with Phase 1; then, proceed immediately to Phase 2, rather than collecting data after traffic calming; after Phase 2 data is collected, come back to Council to do a temporary pilot between 2028 and 2030 providing sufficient time to install the roundabouts and speed humps; given all the work that has been done, and the concerns from neighbors, this might be the best approach.
The City Manager stated because the traffic calming would be done as part of the Phase 1 recommendation, the Transportation Commission asked staff to go back to return to the Commission with the data afterwards; the City Council could be included in the decision of whether or not to continue with the pilot.
Councilmember Jensen stated her suggestion is to take the staff recommendation from the first point of Phase 2, collect data after traffic calming, and then come back with data; there is nothing in the recommendation that defines what the Transportation Commission may do with the data; it would be ideal for the City Council to see the data and be presented with options for a temporary pilot if necessary.
Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the collected data could just come to Council instead of going back to the Transportation Commission, to which the City Manager responded the decision is absolutely at Council’s discretion.
Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she is thinking about expediency and how long things take to come before a body; inquired whether Councilmember Jensen is prepared to support the Phase 1 recommendations.
Councilmember Jensen responded in the affirmative; stated that she definitely supports the Phase 1 recommendations; the option does not change the schedule and completed the necessary improvements; when the data becomes available, Council could make a recommendation about the temporary pilot, or perhaps there may be information that would suggest a permanent pilot.
Councilmember Jensen moved approval of accepting the staff recommendations for Gibbons Drive Traffic Calming Phase 1 quick build traffic calming and neighborhood improvements, and Phase 2 collection of data after traffic calming, with direction for staff to return to the City Council with data and present options for future traffic calming measures, which may include making the roundabouts permanent, eliminating the left turn from Gibbons Drive to High Street, or other options based on the data.
Vice Mayor Pryor seconded the motion.
Under discussion, Councilmember Boller inquired the quick builds are essentially temporary and changing it would not be a big deal if something is not working, to which the Transportation Planning Manager responded in the affirmative.
Councilmember Daysog inquired whether Phase 2 Item C, precluding a left turn, would not be included, to which Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft responded in the affirmative; stated it is not being done at this time.
In response to Councilmember Boller’s inquiry regarding ADA accessibility with upgrading roundabouts, the City Engineer stated the desire is get the roundabouts installed relatively inexpensively, hence the quick-build materials; there are very few, if any, curb ramps which is a challenge; there will need to be interim, temporary curb ramps; if after a year or so, they are working and everyone accepts the roundabouts, the City would make an upgrade to make more permanent curb ramps for ADA accessibility, including potential further upgrades in terms of the materials used on the actual roundabouts to improve durability.
The City Manager noted the roundabouts push the crosswalks farther down; the ADA curb ramps, without the roundabout, cannot be put in permanently.
The City Engineer stated the temporary accessibility measure would be temporary curb ramps; if the roundabout is successful, the move would be towards a more permanent curb.
Councilmember Boller stated flexibility with staff being able to adjust is a good thing; inquired whether doing the upgrade means it would be permanent, to which the City Manager responded in the affirmative.
In response to Councilmember Daysog’s inquiry regarding funding, the City Manager stated staff is seeking funding for the long-term Fernside project; the concept plan was approved by the Council; if Council approves $200,000 tonight, funding would be allocated for 1A, B and C, and 2A; 2B would require funding; implementing permanent accessibility might be able to fit in through some of the existing funding.
***
(25- ) Vice Mayor Pryor moved approval of giving three more minutes of time to Councilmembers who have run out of time for comments.
Councilmember Boller seconded the motion which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.
***
Councilmember Jensen restated the motion.
Councilmember Daysog stated the possibility of eliminating the left turn where Gibbons Drive meets High Street is still on the table; for that reason, he does not support the motion; he prefers Phase 1 A, B, C, and D, and Phase 2 A, and B.
On the call for the question, the motion which carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Councilmembers Boller, Jensen, Pryor, and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft - 4. Noes: Councilmember Daysog - 1.
(25- ) Workshop to Discuss Updates to the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance. Continued to December 2, 2025.
(25- ) Recommendation to Provide Direction on an Ordinance to Ban the Sale and Distribution of Mylar Balloons in Alameda. Not heard.
CITY MANAGER COMMUNICATIONS
(25- ) The City Manager announced that the City is launching Twelve Days of Alameda shop local campaign November 29 through December 10; on December 12, the City will announce 12 winners of 12 giveaway baskets, each filled with more than $200 of goodies from Alameda businesses; on December 6, the City will host its annual Winter Lights Celebration to light up the holiday tree in front of City Hall and enjoy performances by a number of community groups; sandbags are available to pick up at the Alameda Point self-serve sandbag station on Lexington Avenue and West Ranger.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA
None.
COUNCIL REFERRALS
(25- ) Consider Directing Staff to Temporarily Lease a Private Parking Lot Bounded by the Former US Bank on the North and the Crolls Building on the South for Public Free Parking for the Month of December, 2025. (Councilmember Daysog) Withdrawn.
Councilmember Daysog stated outlined the concerns and hardships expressed by Webster Street businesses about the lack of parking and new no parking signage; withdrew his referral since the property owner indicated it would not lease the lot.
COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS
(25- ) Mayor’s Nominations for Appointment to the Golf Commission, Historical Advisory Board, Public Art Commission, and Social Service Human Relations Board.
Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft announced that she is nominating Chantel Carter for appointment to the Social Service Human Relations Board.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft adjourned the meeting at 11:01 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Lara Weisiger, City Clerk
The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Sunshine Ordinance.